Assessment 1: Research report (40%)
Overview
A positive attitude is often mentioned as an important factor in leadership and the achievement of career success, but the definition of a positive attitude is quite vague. Having the ‘right’ or positive attitude may relate to people who have a proactive personality, a sense of career self-efficacy or how one approaches their work goals. In relation to approaching work goals, Vandewalle (1997) proposes that people can approach goals with either learning or an approach/avoid mechanism. He also adds that ‘some people approach setbacks or difficulties by either seeing them as a challenge or as a threat.’ This, therefore, brings the nature of one’s resilience into the mix of variables that impact leadership and career success.
For this assessment, you will be analysing a set of data that was collected from university students at Western Sydney University. This data was collected via a survey of students which asked them to respond to a series of questions about their career aspirations and personality. You will be required to develop a research report that addresses the following research question.
Research Question:
Examine the relationship between leadership and achievement career aspirations?
You will be required to analyse the data from the survey and establish if they support the hypotheses you develop for your report. Students will need to prepare a report plan (report plan template will be given to students in week 2) and you will submit a hard copy of this plan in week 5 for feedback from your tutors. Extra help will be provided to students in tutorials and online.
Please note that for this assessment, there is no need to collect data as the data will be given to you in week 3.
i Note: For your research, you must use and cite the following journal articles that are marked ‘Mandatory References’. Also the references for the scales (questionnaires used to collect data) that were used to measure the different variables are included and must be cited in the methods section of your report. These will also be needed for your references section.
Title
REPORT GUIDELINE
Please ensure that the title is descriptive of the study.
Abstract
Please ensure that this section adequately summarises the purpose of the study, method, results and implication of the results.
Introduction
Have you described the need for the study? What information from such a study can be gained to help organisations?
Describe the theoretical underpinnings (theories and models used in previous studies). Have you described this well enough (read enough)?
Method
Please ensure that this section adequately describes the:
Participants.
Materials (where the measure came from and brief description, how many items including what the Likert scale stands for e.g. 1= not at all).
Procedure (how was the research undertaken).
Results
Ensure that you have included the tables with appropriate headings.
Give a brief description of whether the results supported or did not support your hypotheses.
Give a description of any other significant findings.
Discussion
This section should include the following:
Were your hypotheses supported? Give explanation on possible (well-researched) reasons why they were or were not.
What were some other significant findings? Give explanation on possible (well-researched) reasons why they were significant.
How do the results reflect theory (or possible changes to theory)?
Possible limitations of our study – relate more to methodology (what else could have we done to get a clearer understanding). How could that relate to theory?
Conclusion.
References
Please check for proper in-text citation as well as proper referencing in the Harvard style in this section
Research report rationale
The research report assignment has been carefully designed to help you develop skills in both evaluating research that you might need to undertake as a manager and to also help you evaluate research in an area in which you or your organisation may be interested.
The research report requires you to undertake a study on a specific subject matter, using questionnaires as a tool for data collection. Why has this been included as part of the assessments? Many of you will need to undertake some kind of evaluation in your future employment. These evaluations might relate to:
Customer preferences or customer satisfaction of services/goods.
Compliance with safety processes and regulation.
Training and development needs of employees.
Effects of a new database management system among others.
Although the research report will differ in content, the assessment will help you in understanding what will be required in evaluations such as those described above. The processes will be similar. You will start off with:
What is already known (the “what” and “why”)?
What has been implemented, and how?
What were the effects of that implementation?
What did the results show and is there anything else that you might need to consider?
Resources on vUWS
Audio PowerPoint presentations that will help you in writing the report, as well as giving you a basic understanding on how to interpret the statistics that we will be using.
Marking criteria and standards
CRITERIA
FAIL
PASS
CREDIT
DISTINCTION
HIGH DISTINCTION
Abstract:
How could your research be summarised?
(5%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
The summary given was briefly described but did not accurately portray a summary of two of the important elements of the total report.
The summary given was briefly described but did not accurately portray a summary of one of the important elements of the total report.
As previous, with clear indication of summary of all the important elements of the report.
As previous and within 150 words.
0-2
2.5
3-3.5
4-4.5
5
Introduction:
Context – what was the purpose of the study?
(5%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to present a proper context for the research or have plagiarised.
The purpose of the study was briefly described but was not related to most of the variables in the study.
The purpose of the study was briefly described but has some unclear information about the purpose of the study and possible organisational benefits.
As previous but a clear explanation of relationship of variables in the study and possible organisational implications.
As previous, with the addition of how the study differed from previous research and with additional synthesis of broader issues of the theme of the research.
0-2
2.5
3-3.5
4-4.5
5
Introduction:
What theories/ models and findings from past studies underpin the research?
(20%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
The material was not reviewed in enough detail to adequately ensure the reader has an understanding of the research’s relevant theoretical and empirical background.
The material gave an adequate explanation of the relevant theories and findings from past studies that related to the variables being measured.
As previous but with the addition of contrasting information regarding theory and findings from past studies.
As previous, but with an excellent analysis of theoretical underpinnings, findings from past studies and arguments given for why the present research needs to be undertaken.
0-9.5
10-12
12.5-14
14.5-16
16.5-20
Introduction:
How well did you introduce your study and, when applicable, what were the hypotheses?
(5%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or have plagiarised.
The hypotheses were described but did not adequately follow from the literature presented.
The hypotheses were described and followed the content of the literature but the direction of the hypotheses was not fully supported.
The hypotheses were described and followed the content of the literature but the direction of the hypotheses was fully supported.
Directional hypotheses clearly stated, based on info from the literature review as well as being very clear on who and will be measured.
0-2
2.5
3-3.5
4-4.5
5
Method:
From whom, and what data was collected and how was it collected?
(10%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
Information on each of the three sections was given but not well enough to enable others to repeat the study. Materials are not fully described.
Most information in each section was adequately described, as well as the Materials section giving a clear indication of number of items in each of the scales used and a description of the scale, e.g. Likert scale dimensions, referencing etc.
Information in all sections was very clearly described, enabling others to repeat your study.
0-4.5
5-6
6.5-8
8-10
Results:
What did the results reveal?
(10%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
All Tables were presented with a brief and mostly accurate description of main findings.
All Tables were presented with a brief and accurate description of main findings.
All Tables were presented, with accurate description of main findings as they relate to the hypotheses.
All Tables were presented, with accurate description of main findings as they relate to the hypotheses, as well as other findings that have relevance to the topic, re: theory.
0-4.5
5
6.5-7
7.5-8
8.5-10
Discussion:
What did your research conclude?
(10%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
Description of the results could be clearer (only some but accurate results explained).
Description of the results could be clearer (only some but accurate results explained) as they relate to the hypothesis.
As previous but the analysis of their meaning is weak, e.g. conclusions go beyond what is found in the data results.
Clear restatement of findings are given as well as patterns that may be seen in the findings that could result in a broader explanation (or debate) of the topic.
0-4.5
5
6.5-7
7.5-8
8.5-10
Discussion:
What implications did the findings have regarding the topic (theory/ model)?
(20%)
Missing/ absent or have presented irrelevant material or failed to address the requirements or have plagiarised.
Brief description whether research supported or did not support theory/model and past findings.
As previous, with possible limitations (theoretical or methodological) being described but these need to have better grounding.
As previous, with possible limitations (theoretical or methodological) being described with sound grounding.
As previous, with the addition of suggesting appropriate future research (why and how).
0-9.5
10-12
12.5-14
14.5-16
16.5-20
General:
Identified and referenced sources accurately.
(5%)
Very little or no referencing; incorrect referencing, both within text and reference list.
Not consistently referenced or too many secondary sources (and quotes).
Identified valid references but still some missing. (Valid relates to depth of reading as well as the number of references used).
Identified all valid references.
As previous.
0-2
2.5-3
3.5-4
4.5-5
Overall presentation, grammar and flow of information
5%
Unintelligible expression; unacceptable number of spelling errors and poor “flow” of ideas.
Satisfactory expression; some spelling errors and reasonable “flow” of ideas.
Relatively good grammar and spelling, but occasional errors. Has good “flow” of ideas.
Generally good grammar and spelling, as well as “flow” of ideas.
Excellent writing style with excellent “flow” of ideas as well as faultless grammar and spelling.
0-2
2.5
3-3.5
4-4.5
5
General:
Structure – did the report have the required headings?
(5%)
Most headings were incorrect or missing.
Most headings were included.
Most headings were included and most of the information in headings matched.
All headings were included and all of the information in headings matched.
As previous.
0-2
2.5
3-3.5
4-4.5
5
Our Service Charter
-
Excellent Quality / 100% Plagiarism-Free
We employ a number of measures to ensure top quality essays. The papers go through a system of quality control prior to delivery. We run plagiarism checks on each paper to ensure that they will be 100% plagiarism-free. So, only clean copies hit customers’ emails. We also never resell the papers completed by our writers. So, once it is checked using a plagiarism checker, the paper will be unique. Speaking of the academic writing standards, we will stick to the assignment brief given by the customer and assign the perfect writer. By saying “the perfect writer” we mean the one having an academic degree in the customer’s study field and positive feedback from other customers. -
Free Revisions
We keep the quality bar of all papers high. But in case you need some extra brilliance to the paper, here’s what to do. First of all, you can choose a top writer. It means that we will assign an expert with a degree in your subject. And secondly, you can rely on our editing services. Our editors will revise your papers, checking whether or not they comply with high standards of academic writing. In addition, editing entails adjusting content if it’s off the topic, adding more sources, refining the language style, and making sure the referencing style is followed. -
Confidentiality / 100% No Disclosure
We make sure that clients’ personal data remains confidential and is not exploited for any purposes beyond those related to our services. We only ask you to provide us with the information that is required to produce the paper according to your writing needs. Please note that the payment info is protected as well. Feel free to refer to the support team for more information about our payment methods. The fact that you used our service is kept secret due to the advanced security standards. So, you can be sure that no one will find out that you got a paper from our writing service. -
Money Back Guarantee
If the writer doesn’t address all the questions on your assignment brief or the delivered paper appears to be off the topic, you can ask for a refund. Or, if it is applicable, you can opt in for free revision within 14-30 days, depending on your paper’s length. The revision or refund request should be sent within 14 days after delivery. The customer gets 100% money-back in case they haven't downloaded the paper. All approved refunds will be returned to the customer’s credit card or Bonus Balance in a form of store credit. Take a note that we will send an extra compensation if the customers goes with a store credit. -
24/7 Customer Support
We have a support team working 24/7 ready to give your issue concerning the order their immediate attention. If you have any questions about the ordering process, communication with the writer, payment options, feel free to join live chat. Be sure to get a fast response. They can also give you the exact price quote, taking into account the timing, desired academic level of the paper, and the number of pages.