Assignment 1 Guidelines and Marking Criteria

Title:        Assignment 1 – Literature Review
Marks:     30 (which is 30% of the unit grade)
Task:    Undertake a Literature Review (max 1500 words) on ‘the Dimensions and Antecedents of Organisational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB)’. The review is to focus solely on refereed academic publications (i.e. journal articles).
Purpose:     As students of Organisational Behaviour it is important that you are able to effectively identify, collate and disseminate credible information on a range of issues that have strong theoretical and/or practical relevance to the field. Such information will often provide the basis for effective planning and decision-making.
Format:     The single document submitted for this assignment is to contain the following components and formatting features:
a)    Content; i.e. your Literature Review (maximum of 1500 words).
i.    The main heading will be ‘Literature Review’ and thereafter you can include any subheadings that might help to effectively structure the discussion. No Table of Contents is required.
ii.    Both in-text and reference list skills must be demonstrated (use the Harvard Referencing style).
iii.    The report is to include a minimum of six distinct references from academic journals. You may cite your textbook and sources identified in it but they do not contribute towards the reference count. Quoting is not permitted. Paraphrase the information you obtain from your various sources.
b)    Reference List.
Adopt the following formatting features for the paper:
o    Apply page numbers. Page 1 comes after your coverpage.
o    Font style: Times New Roman, 12pt, justified, 1½ line spacing.
o    Margins – top and bottom to be 2.54cm. Left and right to be 2.54cm. No page boarders.
o    Spelling – if using a Microsoft package, specify Australian English language/grammar when running your spell-check.
o    Writing and grammar must conform to the standards of a professional report.

Submitting:     All assignments are to be submitted through ‘Turn-it-in,’ which can be accessed from the ‘Assignment 1’ folder on Blackboard. The link will be activated in week 1 and you can submit the assignment any time up to the due date.
The file you submit should be labelled in the following manner:
Surname, initial, student code, MNG82001, asmt 1
For example – Gillett, P, 012345, MNG82001, asmt 1

Feedback:     Students who submit their report by the due date will receive feedback within 2 weeks. This feedback will be in the form of a marking rubric and a copy of your report with electronic comments from the marker.
Marking Criteria:
A.    Written communication
(weight = 25% of marks)

1)    Unsatisfactory. The writing is ineffective due to numerous spelling and/or grammatical errors.
2)    Pass. Proof-read the final document to identify and correct minor errors in spelling and grammar. Plan for and undertake additional drafts as this will help to improve the quality of your written work.
3)    Credit. A good standard of writing is provided (no spelling errors), however there is room for improvement in terms of higher-order writing skills (e.g. vocabulary and sentence structure). Work on developing the logic within your discussion.
4)    Distinction. Higher-order writing skills are evident in parts. Greater consistency will improve the overall quality of your work.
5)    HD. The quality of writing in the report is exceptional. Well done.
B.    Content
(weight = 25% of marks)
1)    Unsatisfactory. The description of OCB and its features are largely incorrect.
2)    Pass. The review reflects a basic understanding of OCB. Extending the scope of the review would help to demonstrate a deeper level of knowledge.
3)    Credit. The review scope is sufficiently broad and a good understanding of OCB is evident in most parts. However there is at least one inaccuracy or one area of uncertainty which needs to be re-examined.
4)    Distinction. The review reflects an accurate understanding of OCB, its dimensions and antecedents. Questions which might be considered in future OCB studies are not clearly presented or justified.
5)    HD. The review reflects an extremely strong understanding OCB, its dimensions and antecedents. The discussion also clearly identifies key questions for future OCB researchers to address.
C.    Use of academic Sources
(weight = 25% of marks)
1)    Unsatisfactory. Information attributed to academic sources makes no meaningful contribution to the discussion.
2)    Pass. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too often it is presented as isolated/individual statements. Work on providing a fuller discussion of the source information and/or using multiple sources to support a particular point of view.
3)    Credit. Information from academic sources is relevant to the review however too much of it is simply replicated from the original source. Work on developing your paraphrasing skills by contextualising the information; i.e. explicitly link it to the focus of your discussion.
4)    Distinction. Information from academic sources are effectively weaved into the discussion, thereby helping to clearly describe OCB, it dimensions and attributes.
5)    HD. In addition to the Distinction qualities, a strong effort has also been made to cite empirical research findings that support and complement the discussion.
D.    Referencing
(weight = 12.5% of marks)
1)    Unsatisfactory. The required number and type of sources are not provided or there is no effort to correctly reference those that are.
2)    Pass. Some effort has been made to acknowledge the sources of information but the required referencing style has not been adopted.
3)    Credits. There are several notable errors with the referencing style
4)    Distinction. There are several minor errors with the referencing style.
5)    HD. Correct referencing style is demonstrated throughout the report.
E.    Features and Formatting
(weight = 12.5% of marks)

1)    Unsatisfactory. The assignment document is unprofessionally presented (refer to the assignment guidelines).
2)    Pass. A number of formatting style features are missing which should have been picked up in the final proof-read.
3)    Credit. Two formatting style features are missing.
4)    Distinction. One formatting style feature is missing.
5)    HD. The assignment document adopts all the required formatting features and is professionally presented.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂