Important information:
　　If you are unable to complete your open assessment by the submission date indicated above because of Mitigating Circumstances you should apply for an extension by contacting the programme leader.
　　If you submit your open assessment but feel that your performance has been affected by Mitigating Circumstances you should contact the module leader to discuss the pursuit of a mitigating circumstances claim.
　　Please take proper precautions to safeguard your work and remember to make back-up copies of your data. The University provides all its students with storage space on the University server and you should save and back up any work in progress on this server on a regular basis. Computer failure and theft of your equipment or storage media are not considered mitigating circumstances and extensions cannot be granted for work lost for these reasons.
　　Critical Essay代写
　　How does your understanding of critical perspectives on knowledge inform your views of HRM in practice?
　　You will be required to reflect on the case critically and use your knowledge of existing theory and literature to explore your essay question, along with a discussion of a real life contemporary HR issue.
　　Undergraduate Grade Descriptors:
　　Your submission will be marked against the following criteria. Please take the time to read these descriptions to ensure you have the best opportunity for fulfilling your potential.
　　Modules are marked on a range of 0-100%. Mark descriptors are given in the table below. A mark below 40% indicates a Fail grade (the shaded boxes).

Mark Range	Criteria
90-100%	Indicates that no fault can be found with the work other than very minor errors, for example typographical, or perhaps failure to satisfy the most challenging and exacting demands of the assessment.
80-89%	Indicates a very high level of understanding evidenced by an ability to engage critically and analytically with source material.  Likely to exhibit independent lines of argument. Only minor errors or omissions.
70-79%	Judged to be very good, yet not outstanding. May contain minor errors or omissions. A well developed response showing clear knowledge and the ability to interpret and/or apply that knowledge.
60-69%	Indicates a sound understanding of basic points and principles but with some failure to express or to apply them properly. Hence the answer is essentially correct, has some errors or omissions, and is not seriously flawed.
50-59%	Indicates a more limited understanding of basic points and principles, with significant errors and omissions.  These errors and omissions, however, do not cast doubt on the basic level of understanding.
40-49%	Indicates questionable understanding of basic points and principles yet sufficient to show that learning outcomes have been achieved at a rudimentary level.
30-39%	Indicates an answer that shows only weakly developed elements of understanding.  The learning outcomes have been insufficiently realised.
20-29%	Very little knowledge has been demonstrated and the presentation shows little coherence of material or argument.
0-19%	Only isolated or no knowledge displayed.

　　Generic Assessment Marking Criteria
　　You will be marked according to five criteria:
　　· Quality of Presentation
　　· Understanding and use of Theory
　　· Quality of Analysis
　　· Structure and Argument
　　· Conclusions
　　The examiners will be looking for the following elements for each of these criteria.
　　Presentation
　　· All material is thoroughly and correctly referenced.
　　· Citations are given in the Harvard format, unless specifically specified otherwise in the assignment brief.
　　· Direct quotations from sources are referenced with page numbers.
　　· Appropriate use has been made of tables, diagrams, graphs and pictures.
　　· The use of formatting (line spacing, font, justified margins etc) is consistent throughout.
　　· The text is clear and readable, without typographic errors and spelling mistakes.
　　· The assignment is within the maximum word length suggested.
　　· The bibliography contains only the works cited in the assignment, is presented in author alphabetical order and is complete, accurate, and consistently formatted.
　　Theory
　　· Evidence of wider reading i.e. not relying on a textbook or single text source, but engaging with specialist texts, journal articles and reports.
　　· A demonstration of an understanding and awareness of a range of theoretical positions or technical options.
　　· The ability to place a particular text’s argument within a range of positions evident in the literature and to recognise its strengths and limitations as an explanatory framework.
　　· Direct quotes, paraphrasing or other evidence of active engagement with theory and/or technique is apparent throughout the assignment.
　　Analysis
　　· The assignment demonstrates an ability to understand different perspectives i.e. the student can evaluate different options, engage critically with theory and practice and can justify their analysis above other available solutions or viewpoints.
　　· The analysis results from the use of judgement and discernment in selecting theory and applying it to the situation or problem.
　　· The selection of techniques and viewpoints are justified by the problem or issue outlined.
　　· Reflection and observation are integrated in the analysis in an appropriate way i.e. a supported argument illustrated with observation rather than a statement of opinion.
　　Structure and Argument
　　· An essay assignment will normally include an introduction, several sub-titled sections in the main body, a conclusion and a bibliography. Alternative formats may be specified by the assignment brief and, if so, have been used.
　　· A coherent argument is evident, which clearly links the different elements of the assignment together and leads the reader through to a justifiable conclusion.
　　· The argument is logically constructed with each section building on the insights of preceding sections i.e. different perspectives are not simply thrown together without an understanding of how they contribute to the overall argument presented.
　　· Theory is integrated into the analytical and/or practical elements of the assignment where appropriate
　　· Meaning is not obscured by poor grammar, paragraph or sentence construction.
　　Conclusions
　　· The conclusion summarises the whole of the assignment and not just the analysis i.e. conclusions relate questions posed, adequacy of the theory, empirical issues explored and reflect on the student’s approach to the work.
　　· The conclusions refer to the argument presented to that point and do not introduce new ideas or arguments “at the last moment”.
　　· The conclusion demonstrates the ability of the student to justify their theoretical and analytical approach.
　　· Conclusions have been drawn and follow, and are justified by, the analysis in the main body of the assignment. Where required, practical recommendations are feasible and follow on from the conclusions, addressing the issues identified.