Detection of change in vegetation cover in the city and surrounding of Erbil Iraq using MODIS data Research Paper Help

Detection of change in vegetation cover in the city and surrounding of Erbil Iraq using MODIS data Research Paper Help

Cardiff Metropolitan University MODULE TITLE: Research Methodologies PROGRAMME: MBA SEMESTER: 3 TERM: February 2016 May 2016 LECTURER SETTING ASSESSMENT: Roger Telfer DATE ASSESSMENT TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTTED: 21/04/2016 – Assessment Type: Assignment (100% of the weighting for the module) Task 1 (50%) Research Design Proposal Task 2 (50%) Literature/Evidence Review Indicative Assessment Requirements for the Module: Maximum Word Limit and wordage for each aspect within the assignment: The overall limit for the assignment is 4,000 words, with the Research Design Proposal limited to 2000 words and the Literature/Evidence Review also limited to 2000 words. A generic marking scheme and the assessment form are included later in this document. Description of Assessment Requirements You are required to create a proposal for a research project aimed at solving a business related problem or opportunity. This will necessarily include both a research design and a literature review and evidence review, fully referenced, on your research proposal. The work is to be handed in as ONE entity via Turnitin. Guidelines for undertaking the Assignment The assignment consists of ONE piece of coursework made up of two tasks. Task 1 The Research Design Proposal (50%) The research proposal must include a background which describes the basic situation underlying your project. It must include a statement of the problem or opportunity that is the aim of your project. It must describe the rationale for your project, why you wish to carry out this research and the benefits that will accrue from its successful conclusion. You must create research objectives that, when you successfully complete them, will have the information that enables you to solve the problem or capitalise on the opportunity that is the aim of your research. You must evaluate and fully describe the research methods that will be necessary to successfully complete the research. Data collection methods must be selected and described which are consistent with the research philosophy necessary for its completion: these will include secondary and primary data sources. The methods by which the data you collect will be analyzed need to be justified. Finally, ethical, validity and reliability issues relevant to the research must be discussed and a time plan for its completion must be calculated and displayed as a Gantt chart (or another suitable format). Task 2 The Literature/Evidence Review (50%) The research proposal must also include a Literature/Evidence review which evaluates the context for your research and sources academic research and models that are relevant to the project. It should include a critical evaluation of relevant theoretical and practical references and include breadth of understanding and depth of critical evaluation. Reviews will require analysis and evaluation of evidence and sources and be informed by theory and appropriate practice. NOTE A Case Study, Business Development Plan or Dissertation topics can be used if desired but it is not mandatory Discussion and debate on the above mentioned topics should be seen. There must be sufficient linkage between theory and practice. Harvard style of referencing should be used Guidance to the contents and recommended structure of the Proposal is shown below: (Note that Ref: applies to the Assessment Form included in this document.) Part 1: Introduction and Background (400 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 1, Section1 Is the overall context for the research well established? Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective? Is there a statement of the problem? Is there a rationale for the topic? Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched? Do the boundaries of the research make sense? Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research? Are research objectives included and are they specific? Are the research questions well-conceived? Are the research objectives matched to the research questions? Part 2: Literature Review (2000 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2 Section 1 The LR Introduction (200 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2, Section 1 Is the domain explained? Is there an identification of the main sources to be used? Is there a pointer to the upcoming structure? Section 2 The Main Body of the LR (1550 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2, Section 2 Is there a clear structure? Does the review have a logical progression? Does the review convey the critical thinking of the writer? Is there good use of secondary sources, citation, references, synthesis, critique, chronology, seminal works, models? Is the current position conveyed? Section 3 Conclusion (250 words) Ref: Assessment Form Task 2, Section 3 Is there a clear concluding statement? Is there a clear implication for further research? Are research questions specified? Are there emergent themes? Is a conceptual framework established? Has the research gap been confirmed? Part 3: Research Methodology (1100 words) Ref: Assessment Form, Task 1, Section 2 Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal? Is the underlying philosophical approach adequately explained? Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task? Have the data types been defined and classified? Have target populations and samples been defined and justified? Part 4: Data Analysis (500 words) Ref: Assessment Form, Task 1, Section 3 Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the literature and the research questions? Have analysis methods been specified? Are ethical issues considered? Are validity and reliability issues discussed? Is there an adequate time plan for the research? Have academic protocols for referencing been met? Note that the suggested number of words should only be an approximate guide. The quality of the work, not the quantity is the factor which needs to guide the writing of the proposal. Learning Outcomes: Upon successful completion of this module students will be able to: Formulate research questions and describe and critically evaluate differing research methods, including the formation of hypotheses, or other research models, or paradigms and justify the selection and use of specific research methodologies; Integrate and plan key research activities and schedules including the setting of timetables and research objectives, and the acceptance of accountability for all aspects of the conduct of a research project Understand the importance of, and be able to effectively demonstrate skills in, the conventions which are required for the carrying out of a major research project including the design of experimental and non-experimental research projects; the preparation of an integrated research proposal and effectively manage the design and delivery of this. Comprehend and critically evaluate the differentiation between qualitative and quantitative methods as they are used in research design and evaluate the appropriateness of their application, use, and value in differing aspects of business functions and requirements. Critically appraise the importance of, and the definitions and nature of, primary and secondary data, and be able to plan for (a) the selection, collection, or creation of data for interpretation and data analysis; and (b) critically analyse, interpret and manipulate data, and (c) synthesis results and interpretation of data and form conclusions. Assimilate and review an appropriate range of literature sources and other appropriate sources/evidential materials. Identify the underlying principles of various analytical methods commonly applied in business and management research; Select appropriate analytical techniques according to the nature of the research; Compute descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS; Be able to communicate effectively in, numeric, verbal and literary form to a variety of audiences using appropriate business language, terminology, and concepts including Construct questionnaires, evaluate their reliability, and analyse and evaluate the data produced (quantitative/qualitative or other) GENERIC MARKING CRITERIA MARK 29 or less 30 39 40 49 50 59 60 69 70 + CONTENT: Has the question been answered? Vague, random, unrelated material Some mention of the issue, but a collection of disparate points Barely answers the question just reproduces what knows about the topic Some looseness/ digressions Well focused Highly focused TOPIC KNOWLEDGE Is there evidence of having read widely and use of appropriate and up to date material to make a case? No evidence of reading. No use of theory not even hinted at implicitly. No evidence of reading. An implicit hint at some knowledge of theory, etc. No evidence of reading. Very basic theories mentioned but not developed or well used. Some reading evident, but confined to core texts. Good reading. Good range of theories included. Excellent reading. Well chosen theories. UNDERSTANDING & SYNTHESIS Are ideas summarized rather than being reproduced, and are they inter-related with other ideas? No theory included. Vague assertions/ Poor explanations. Long winded descriptions of theory. Some long winded sections. Some quotations, but stand alone. Some inter- connections. Good summary of theory. Good use of quotations that flow with narrative. Good inter-connections. Succinct, effective summaries of theory. Excellent choice and threading of quotations into argument. Good counterpoising of a range of perspectives. APPLICATION Does it show appropriate use of theory in a practical situation? No examples No/limited/ inappropriate examples Few examples Uneven examples Good examples Excellent range of examples. ANALYSIS Does it identify the key issues, etc in a given scenario, proposal or argument? Vague assertions about issues. Largely descriptive with no identification and analysis of central issues. Limited insight into issues. Some good observations. Good, detailed analysis. Comprehensive range of issues identified and discussed fully. EVALUATION & RECS. Does it critically assess material? Are there workable and imaginative solutions? No evaluation. Uncritical acceptance of material. Some evaluation but weak. Little insight. Good interpretation. Some but limited sophistication in argument. Good critical assessment. Independent thought displayed. Full critical assessment and substantial individual insight. REFERENCING Thorough and accurate citation and referencing No referencing No referencing Limited/poor referencing Some inconsistencies in referencing Appropriate referencing Appropriate referencing PRESENTATION Logical and coherent structure to argument and effective presentation No structure apparent. Poor presentation. Poor structure. Poor presentation. Acceptable, but uneven structure. Reasonable presentation. Reasonable structure. Good presentation. Good argument. Well presented material. Excellent argument. Very effective presentation format. RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES ASSESSMENT Assessment Form Student Name: Student id: Task/Topic Task 1 Research Design Proposal Marks Comments Task 1 Section 1 Introduction and Background Is the overall context for the research well established? Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective? Is there a statement of the problem? Is there a rationale for the topic? Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched? Do the boundaries of the research make sense? Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research? Are research objectives included and are they specific? Are the research questions well-conceived? Are the research objectives matched to the research questions? /12 Task 1 Section 2 The Research Design Proposal Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal? Is the underlying philosophical approach adequately explained? Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task? Have the data types been defined and classified? Have target populations and samples been defined and justified?/25 Task 1 Section 3 Plan of analysis, etc. Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the literature and the research questions? Have analysis methods been specified? Are ethical issues considered? Are validity and reliability issues discussed? Is there an adequate time plan for the research? Have academic protocols for referencing been met? Are the intended outcomes for the research made known, so there is a clear understanding of the value added? /13 Topic Task 2 Literature/Evidence Review Task 2 Section 1 The LR IntroductionIntroduction Is the domain explained? Is there an identification of the main sources to be used? Is there a pointer to the upcoming structure? /7 Task 2 Section 2 The Main Body of the Literature Review Is there a clear structure? Does the review have a logical progression? Does the review convey the critical thinking of the writer? Is there good use of secondary sources, citation, references, synthesis, critique, chronology, seminal works, and models? Is the current position conveyed? /35 Task 2 Section 3 The LR Conclusion Is there a clear concluding statement? Is there a clear implication for further research? Are research questions specified? Are there emergent themes? Is a conceptual framework established? Has the research gap been identified and confirmed? /8TOTAL /100 General comments + strengths/weaknesses/areas for improvement: 1st Marker: Date:


Comments are closed.