Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

Regulation in Society 6QQMN379 / Coursework (essay)

6QQMN379 – Regulation in Society

Assessment 2 – Individual coursework (essay)

(80% of total module grade)

Lead Instructor:

Hanan Haber

Instructor’s email:

[email protected]

Submission Deadline:

via KEATS by 10:00 on 3rd  of January     2024.

Submission checklist

1.    Coversheet

2.    Filename should include

module code and candidate number, saved as:

[6qqmn379_CandidateNumber] 3.    Word count (2,000 words)

4.   File format for submission can be .pdfor .docx

The Task

Write an essay (2000 words, excluding bibliography but including any in-text comments) including the elements below:

1.    Choose a topic we covered in one of the weeks of the module.

2.    Identify and describe a key question we discussed relating to this topic.

3.    Discuss the different answers given to this question (in the lectures, reading material, etc)

4.    Which of these answers seems most convincing to you and why? Under what general conditions would you expect this answer to be more or less convincing?

5.    In your answer, use at least one example, and demonstrate how it relates to the question and answers discussed above.

Important:

1. You may use the example you developed for the first coursework assignment, but do not assume the reader is familiar with any previous work.

2. The assignment should be written as an essay, not as a list of answers.

3. The list of weeks and topics is available in thecourse guideon Keats.

Additional information:

Below, you will find additional information related to this assignment, including the learning outcomes assessed, advice on writing your essay, marking criteria and related technical issues.

Module Learning Outcomes Assessed

For information, the essay questions above can be related to the module’s following learning outcomes. There is no need to address these directly in your coursework essay.

Apply theoretical knowledge of regulation to real world examples.

Depending on how you address the question, you may find your answer is related to one or more of the following objectives:

1.     Define regulation and explain its importance in society, government and business

2.     Explain how and why regulation develops, and contrast different explanations for the development of regulation

3.     Compare different regulatory tools and strategies and evaluate their relative strengths and weaknesses

4.     Compare different approaches to enforcement and evaluate their relative strengths and weaknesses

Assignment Details and Structure

Your submission should include the following:

1.    A coversheet

2.    A copy of your assignment

General Submission Requirements

Assessment submission instructions:

1.    Include the KBS Coversheet

2.    Filename should include module code and candidate number, saved as:

[6QQMN379_CandidateNumber]

3.    Word count: 2000 word limit, including footnotes and in text citations, but excluding the bibliography

4.    File format for submission can be .pdfor .docx

Assessment Support Information

As part of the lectures and the tutorials, the main topics and questions regarding each topic are discussed. There is a revision lecture and tutorial at the end of term to provide additional support for this assignment. The first assignment and the feedback you receive on it may also be useful for preparing this second assignment.

Marking Criteria

In planning and writing your answer to the essay question, consider the following questions. The formal marking criteria can be found in the table below.

1.    Clear answer: Is there a clear answer to the question asked? Are all aspects of the question

addressed? Readers should be able to understand early in the essay what your answer to the essay question is, and how you plan to elaborate your answer in the essay. Note that Clear does not mean simplistic, however, as good answers demonstrate an understanding of the complexity and nuance of the issues being discussed.

2.    Structure: is the structure of the answer clear and well planned? Do the points being made relate to and/or build on one another? The structure should support the answer you are giving to the question. A good answer would include introduction and conclusions paragraphs. The introduction clearly stating what your answer will be and how the essay will proceed. The conclusion paragraph clearly restates what the essay has argued (without introducing new ideas).

3.    Research literature: You answer should reflect your knowledge and understanding of the module materials, including not just the lectures and the tutorials but crucially the relevant reading materials, as can be found in the module reading list. Additionally, you may want to better substantiate your theoretical and empirical claims through your own search for and reading of research on the topic you are discussing (e.g. research articles in peer reviewed journals).

4.    Use of relevant examples: Examples area good way to demonstrate your understanding of the

different theoretical views on the question you are answering. When choosing an example think of what it demonstrates, and how it strengthens the answer you are giving or point you are trying to   convey. At the sametime, consider the limitations of the example(s) in making your point, of the extent to which it is (or is not) representative of the wider issue you are discussing, etc.

Aspects (equal

weighting)

F (0-39)

D (40-49)

C (50-59)

B (60-69)

A (70+)

Is there a clear

and convincing

answer to the

question

discussed?

Answer is unclear, partial or incoherent

Superficial answer, lack of understanding of some

key issues, lack of focus

Clear answer, showing

understanding of some key issues

Clear and complete answer,

showing good understanding of key issues.

Clear, nuanced, complete and convincing answer. Showing   in-depth, authoritative

understanding of key issues

with evidence of originality and critical thinking

Knowledge of

Research

literature and

theory

Key theoretical issues

misunderstood or not

addressed. Limited or no use   of relevant sources to support  work.  No evidence of a critical approach to key issues or

ability to evaluate arguments

Key theoretical issues not always understood or

addressed, gaps in the use of relevant sources used to

support work. Limited

evidence of a critical approach to key issues and ability to

evaluate arguments

Some key theoretical issues addressed.

Relevant sources used to

support argument/discussion Some evidence of critical

approach to key issues and   ability to evaluate arguments

Key theoretical issues

analysed. Relevant

sources used effectively to

support argument/discussion. Clear evidence of critical

approach to key issues and

some ability to evaluate

arguments. Some evidence of independent reading and

research

Complex work and key issues analysed. Wide range of

sources used selectively to

support argument/discussion Strong evidence of critical

approach to key issues and    ability to evaluate arguments. Evidence of independent

reading and research

Use of evidence and examples

None or very little use of

evidence or examples, and/or use of irrelevant examples.

Little or no detail of sources used.

Limited use of examples,

rationale for choice of

examples under-developed, source of evidence and

examples not fully clear

Some use of examples and  evidence with connection to answer. Efforts to explain

choices and/or document

sources

Clear and logical use of

examples and evidence in

support of answer. Rationale clearly explained. Sources

clearly shown.

Example(s) well chosen,

support the answer in a

coherent way, evidence of  originality and independent

work, as well as understanding of the limitations of the choices made.

Structure

Work is confused and

incoherent

Weaknesses in

structure, fluency

and/or coherence

Competent work in

places but lacks

fluency/coherence

Coherent work

logically

presented

Coherent and compelling work logically presented

Adapted from: KCLTaught Postgraduate Generic Marking Criteria