| COURSEWORK QUESTION PAPER: (1st sit) | Autumn 2023 Semester-long |
| Module Code: | EC6054NI |
| Module Title: | International Finance and Trade |
| Module Leader: | Rupak Aryal (Islington College) |
| Coursework Type: | CourseworkIndividual Report: 2000 ± 5% of word is recommended. (Minimum 1900 and maximum 2100) |
Coursework Weight: | This coursework accounts for 30% of your total module grades. |
Submission Date: | TBA |
When Coursework is given out: | TBA |
Submission Instructions: | Submit the following at the MST platform on a single PDF format. The following naming convention should be followed while submitting 1 x Final Submission PDFFile name example: 12312324 Darshan Gyawali |
Warning: | London Metropolitan University and Islington College take Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with sternly. |
Section A: Learning outcomes of the assessments
Learning Outcomes addressed by this assessment:
LO 1: Demonstrate a broad knowledge and a systematic understanding of international economics, covering theory, policy, and application;
LO 2: Apply a range of specialist skills to the analysis of international economic relations, including the application of analytical or quantitative techniques;
LO 3: Marshal evidence and assimilate, structure, analyse and evaluate qualitative and quantitative data to understand and critically evaluate policy issues in the subject;
LO 4: Demonstrate planning, communication, self-management, time-management, and self-presentation skills.
Section B: Introduction
The coursework will require students to write answers to questions addressing the underlying principles or issues of the subject matter. It will also test students’ ability to apply a range of specialist skills to the analysis of international economic relations, including the application of analytical or quantitative techniques.
Section C: Assessment Strategy
This is the first component of the summative assessment in this module comprising overall marks of 30 and taking the form of a Coursework- 2000 words.
Students are required to reflect on classroom discussions, case studies, and examples from the industry to get a better score.
This assessment includes two tasks-
Task 1: (77% Essay- 1500 Words)
Students are required to write an essay of 1500 words on the following topic:
“The Heckscher-Ohlin model has been attacked on empirical grounds in Leontief’s Paradox. What is your opinion on the H-O factor proportion theory? Does it have any implication today? Yes. No. Why?”
OR,
“A critical analysis on the resurgence of mercantilism in modern trade policies.”
Task 2: (23% Short Answer- 500 Words)
Evaluate the following statements:
- Currency manipulation in international trade: unfair advantage or legitimate policy? (Maximum 250 words) [10 Marks]
- Trade liberalisation and income inequality: bridging the gap or widening disparities? (Maximum 250 words) [13 Marks]
Section D: Assessment submission
Assessment will be handed over to students before 4 weeks of the submission date. RTE will finalise the submission date, and you are required to submit before the deadline. Submissions should be made at the MST platform. Please note all the submissions must be converted to PDF format. Any submission in other formats will not be accepted.
Section E: Marking Criteria: How you will be evaluated?
The paper will be evaluated on the following major criteria.
- Evidence of an understanding of the selected question
- Evidence of an understanding of relevant concepts
- Critical application of theory
- Demonstration of analytical independent thinking
- Evidence of research (In the classroom and external)
- Use relevant examples to support the argument
- Collection and sound use of relevant information
- A coherently structured argument
- Well-supported conclusions
- A sound professional quality presentation
- Citation and Referencing
Section F: Recommended Table of contents
You must develop an individual report per the structure and instructions provided below.
| Task | SN | Section | Weight |
| 1 | Cover Page | 1 | |
| 2 | Table of content | 1 | |
| 1 | Task 001 | ||
| 3 | -Abstract | 7 | |
| 4 | -Introduction | 13 | |
| 5 | -Analysis | 35 | |
| 6 | -Conclusion | 10 | |
| 7 | -References | 10 | |
| 8 | -Appendix | ||
| 2 | 9 | Task 002- QN A | 10 |
| 10 | Task 002- QN B | 13 |
Section G: Recommended Reading for references
Books
- Pugel, T. (2019). International Economics, 17th ed., McGraw-Hill.
- Salvatore D. (2016). International Economics, 12th Ed., Wiley & Sons.
- Krugman, P. Obstfeld, M. and Melitz.M (2018). International Economics: Theory and Policy, Global Edition, Pearson.
Journals
- European Research on Management and Business Economics.
- Harvard Business Review.
- International Journal of Management and Economics.
Websites
- www.bankofengland.co.uk
- www.bbc.co.uk
- www.ft.com
- www.theguardian.com/uk/business
- www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news
- www.stats.gov.uk
- www.studyingeconomics.ac.uk
- www.uk.reuters.com/business
Section H: Assessment Grade Description
GSBL UNDERGRADUATE GENERAL GRADE DESCRIPTORS
| Level 3/4 | Level 5 | Level 6 | |
| General | Acquisition of broad knowledgeEvaluate informationUse the information to plan, develop and problem solve | Generate ideas through analysing conceptsDemonstrate command of specialised skillsFormulate responses to well-defined and abstractAnalyse and evaluate information | Critically review, consolidate and extend a body of knowledge using specialised skillsCritically evaluate concepts and evidence from a range of sourcesTransfer and apply skills and exercise significant judgement in a range of situations |
| 70-100 (A) | Very goodDemonstration of a very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communicate very clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, and appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in the reference list or citations. | ExcellentAdvanced scholarshipGoes beyond the material providedExcellent link to researchExcellent analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalExcellent evidence of preparationComprehensive and critical understanding of the topicExcellent ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyExcellent organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, and appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in the reference list or citations. | Excellent – Outstanding (for use at the far end of range)Outstanding understanding, exploration and insightStrong evidence of originality and development of own ideasDevelop a highly complex argumentOutstanding ability to communicate topics clearly and conciselyAdvanced organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, and appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in the reference list or citations.References well utilised and critiqued |
| 60-69 (B) | Very goodDemonstration of a very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluationUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communicate clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). Minimal or no errors in reference list or citations. | Very goodDemonstration of a very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluationUse of a wide variety of appropriate sourcesTransformation of knowledgeIndependent thinking and development of ideasAbility to communicate clearly and effectivelyVery good evidence of preparationVery good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errorsGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). Minimal or no errors in reference list or citations. | Very GoodAdvanced scholarshipGoes beyond the material providedVery good link to researchVery good analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalVery good evidence of preparationComprehensive and critical understanding of the topicVery good ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyVery good organisation, structure and presentation of workGood references, appropriate sources (quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations. |
| 50-59 (C) | Adequate – SatisfactorySome analysis but limitedSome insight and exploration of ideasSound conclusionsNo significant inaccuracies or omissionsSome analysis, evaluation or synthesis of informationLacking clarity at timesSome evidence of preparationReferencing is sound. Mostly appropriate sources. Numerous errors or inconsistencies | Adequate – SatisfactorySome evidence of thinking independently to develop own ideasEvaluation of relevant theories or literatureReasonable ability to communicate clearly and effectivelyReport information in a structured wayUse of an appropriate formatQuite comprehensive knowledgeSatisfactory evidence of preparationSatisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.Numerous but minor errors in references | Adequate- SatisfactoryEvidence of thinking independently to develop own ideasEvaluation of relevant theories or literatureAbility to communicate clearly and effectivelyReport information in a structured wayUse of an appropriate formatReasonably Accurate, quite comprehensive knowledgeSatisfactory evidence of preparationCoherent and well presented – minor errorsSatisfactory referencing, appropriate sources.Minor errors in references |
| 40-49 (D) | All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)It May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Insufficient analysis, evaluation or synthesisLimited application of theories/knowledgeAwareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with a weak standard of presentationNumerous aberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources | All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)It May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Weak or no analysis, evaluation or synthesisSome application of theories/knowledgeAwareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with weak standard of presentationAberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources | All learning outcomes metCompetent (practical)It May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions)Weak or no analysis, evaluation or synthesisSome application of theories/knowledgeAwareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniquesIrrelevance to the task at timesDisorganised work with a weak standard of presentationAberrations from the requirements of the taskReferencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources |
| Condoned Pass 30-39 (R2/F1) | Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with errors | Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with errors | Learning outcomes not metLittle relevant knowledgeLacking structureNumerous errors in structure and formLimited understanding of concepts/theoriesNo appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesisSignificant inaccuracies/omissionsNot competentLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with errors |
| Under 30 (R2/F2) | Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with many significant errors | Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with many significant errors | Little engagement with the taskNo basic understanding of the subject matterPoor communication (written or verbal)Lacking or no structureSignificant errors in structure and formMany significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correctLittle or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with many significant errors |
| (0%) | No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted | No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted | No submissionNothing of relevance in the work submitted |
End of the document
