Unit Code: 5X6Z0017 Unit Name: Research Project – Department of Marketing, International Business and Tourism

Unit Code: 5X6Z0017

Unit Name: Research Project

Unit Leaders: Dr Amanda Miller and Dr Maarja Kaaristo

For contact information please see Moodle.

Submission Date: See date on Moodle

Feedback Return Date: See date on Moodle

Digital Submission Instructions: Please submit via the Moodle submission point for the unit

Feedback Return Information: Please see Moodle for the return date for feedback and marks

Key task and word count (or equivalent):

For this assignment, you need to undertake an independent research project on a topic of your choice. You will be supported by an allocated academic supervisor.

Word Count: no more than 9,000. The absolute maximum word count of the Research Project is 9,000 words. Please note indicative word counts are given for each section and going substantially below the word count will negatively impact your mark.

Unit Learning Outcomes:

1. Identify a relevant research focus and provide research objectives to explore the key issues
2. Formulate and justify appropriate research or consultancy methods to address these objectives
3. Critically evaluate models, theories, trends and key issues which relate to the research focus
4. Apply data generation and analysis techniques appropriate to the research and critically engage with theory to understand the implications
5. Critically reflect upon the learning undertaken in terms of personal and employability skills

This assessment will contribute to the achievement of the following Programme Learning Outcomes:

1.1.1 Identify and interrogate relevant data and literature sources using methods appropriate to level of study and to discipline

1.1.2a Apply theory to discussion and analysis

3.1.1 Recognise, explore and reflect on key ethical issues as they affect own and others’ practice

Assignment Details and Instructions

Submission

There are two submission points for this unit (two different dates). You will submit in the following order (please see Moodle for the specific dates of submission):

First Submission: Research Project plan (to include final research instrument, supervisor approved Ethos and an updated timeframe (10%)

Second Submission: Research Project (90%)

1. Research Project Plan (10%)

Using feedback from your Level 5 Research Proposal and feedforward from your supervisor this year, submit a 1–2-page Research Project Plan. The plan will have the following elements:

• Title of the Research Project
• Finalised aim and objectives (one aim and 4-5 objectives)
• Final and supervisor approved research instrument
• Supervisor approved ETHos
• Updated timeline

(If you wish to change your topic from your level 5 research proposal, you can do.)

1. Research Project (90%) 

Your Research Project provides you with an opportunity to research a particular topic that is of interest to you and within your programme of study.

The word count is an absolute maximum of 9,000 words. The word count starts with Chapter 1 Introduction and ends with the ending of Chapter 5 Conclusion. The following are excluded from the word count: title page, table of contents, acknowledgements, abstract, any tables and graphs in the text, Chapter 6 Critical reflection, reference list, all appendices.

The structure of the Research Project

A typical Research Project will have the following components:

Title page: a template is provided for you to use

Abstract: a concise 250 – 300-word overview of the research project 

Acknowledgements: you can give thanks here to those people who have supported and helped you in your project and studies

Table of Contents: a guide and reference section including main chapter headings and principle sub-sections, together with page numbers

Table of Figures and Tables: a list of all figures and tables included in the Research Project along with their corresponding page numbers

Chapter 1 Introduction:  sets the scene and argument, and importance of your topic and motivation behind your research. State the aim and objectives and give an overview of the Research Project structure

Chapter 2 Literature Review:  provides the conceptual base and critically reviews a broad range of academic literature

Chapter 3 Research Methods:  explains and justifies the methods used for data collection and analysis

Chapter 4 Analysis and evaluation of data:  you present your findings and analyse the data in relation to the literature critiqued in chapter 2  

Chapter 5 Conclusions:  you need to show how your aim and objectives have been achieved, give recommendations and reflect on the chosen method and limitations of your study and give recommendations for future studies.

Chapter 6 Critical reflection of the learning undertaken in terms of personal and employability skills: you need to reflect on your research journey and skills learned.

References

Appendices 

NB. Please note that the word count starts at the beginning of Chapter 1 (Introduction) and ends at the end of Chapter 5 (Conclusion).

Assessment support  

Your independent study is supported and monitored by a research project supervisor. The role of the supervisor is to guide you through the research project process, but their role is not to provide literature applicable to your research project topic area, edit or proofread your work. 

• Support from your supervisor: It is important that you use your contact time with your supervisor wisely, and make the most of opportunities to receive feedback on your progress and advice on improving your work. 
• The Research Project Moodle area provides various library and study skills support links which can be used for this assignment. To improve your project, you can also book in with the study skills team for one-to-one feedback session on a part of your draft or attend general sessions they offer.  

Key points of engagement: 

Semester 1

Welcome week to week 6:

• Study the assessment brief, research project handbook, and research project Moodle page. 
• Review and reflect upon your assessed level 5 research proposal (from the unit Researching Marketing, Researching Advertising and Brand Communications or Researching Tourism). Consider the feedback provided and how it can inform your Research Project Plan that you will need to submit to your individual supervisor.

Action: complete the online form to indicate your topic and research method by end of Week 7 (17 November)

Week 7 to week 10:

• Attend all the timetabled sessions. They will provide important information about your Research Project.
• Create a plan (with a time schedule) to complete your project throughout the year incrementally by working on each part of your research project – you will submit this Research Project Plan to your individual supervisor and then revisit it for the first submission (as detailed above).
• You will be allocated a research project supervisor. It is your responsibility to keep in regular contact with your supervisor through group and one to one meetings, and to engage in the various milestones, to ensure that you maximise your opportunity to do well in this unit.
• Start writing your literature review draft.

Action: meet your supervisor and confirm your title, and aim and objectives to your supervisor by 15 December 2023.

Semester 2

• Attend all the timetabled sessions. They will provide important information about your Research Project.
• Continue writing your chapter drafts.
• Based on your literature review, create the data collection instrument (interview questions, questionnaire, or secondary data collection template). Your supervisor will give you written feedback on this.
• You must ensure you engage with ETHos for approval to collect data and your supervisor signs off the ETHos application – if you do not, your project will be submitted for academic misconduct investigation.

Action:

Send your literature review draft to your supervisor by 16 February 2024. You will receive verbal feedback on the chapter.

Send one chapter (chosen by you) to your supervisor for written feedback by 26 April 2024.

Formal submission points on Moodle:

First Submission: Submit final research instrument, supervisor approved Ethos and an updated timeframe on Moodle (10%)

Second Submission: Submit full Research Project (90%)

Resources to use

Relevant academic journal articles, various discipline-based core texts and research handbooks will be your literature sources. Lectures, Moodle area and the core textbook will give info on how to plan and write the project (for more info and detailed structure of the research project please see the Research Project handbook on Moodle).

Core textbook:

Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2019). Research methods for business students. Boston: Pearson.

Referencing: 

From 1^st August 2023, all ManMet students required to use an author-date referencing style are expected to use Cite Them Right Harvard. This version of the author-date referencing style is supported by Bloomsbury’s Cite Them Right website and accompanying ebook.

The Cite Them Right website:

• Advises on how to cite and reference a broad range of source types in the Cite Them Right Harvard style.
• Encourages you to identify and correct any referencing mistakes via the ‘You try’ function.
• Provides guidance on How to use Cite Them Right
• Offers an online tutorial and video guidance.
• Cite Them Right content is regularly updated and new source formats are added, e.g. Generative AI.

If you have any queries about Cite Them Right Harvard, please email [email protected]

Academic Integrity, Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism

Academic Integrity is about engaging in good academic practice. It means being honest and transparent, and demonstrating rigour and accuracy in your work. This can include the proper citation and referencing of the sources of your ideas and information, ensuring that you are using appropriate research methods, or checking that your work is free of errors.

Additional information, video tutorials and guides to support good academic practice and maintain Academic Integrity in your assignments can be found on the Academic Integrity area of the Academic and Study Skills page on Moodle. 

Academic Misconduct is any action that could give you an unfair advantage in coursework, exams, or any other assessed work, which could lead to undermining the academic standards of the University. This includes practices such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating or falsification of data. Full details of the Manchester Metropolitan University guidelines for Academic Misconduct and definitions of terms can be found here

Academic Integrity and Generative AI

Generative AI describes tools that can create online content. If you choose to use generative AI to help with an assessment, for example to create initial ideas, help with a high-level essay plan or to inspire further research, you should be open in acknowledging this and explaining how you used it. It is critical that you never try to pass off material produced with the help of generative AI as your own. This will be classed as academic misconduct and you may be expelled from your course.

If unsure if it is appropriate to use generative AI for your academic work, discuss it with your tutor before submitting. Unless you are advised it is acceptable, do not use it.  It is also important to understand the limitations of generative AI. Please see further guidance and information here.

University Stepped Marking Guidelines

Please note stepped marking is applied as below:

Assessment Marking Rubric

This assessment has two submission points.

First Submission: Final research instrument, supervisor approved Ethos and an up-to-date timeframe (10%)

For this submission you will be allocated marks for the successful submission of these three elements: final approved research instrument (5%); supervisor approved ETHos (4%) and updated timeline (1%). You will submit this as one document.

Second Submission: Research Project (90%)

In marking this element of the assessment, the marking rubric below will be applied, and all aspects of the unit learning outcomes and professional skills (PLOs) will be evident.

FAIL

0– 19%

FAIL

20-29%

FAIL

30-39%

PASS

40 – 49%

GOOD

50 – 59%

VERY GOOD

60 – 69%

EXCELLENT

70-85%

OUTSTANDING

86-100%

LO1: Identify a relevant research focus and provide research objectives to explore the key issues

No or partial attempt to identify a relevant research focus.

No or inappropriate evidence to support arguments made.

Objectives absent or inappropriate.

Extremely weak attempt to identify relevant research focus.

Very limited evidence to support arguments.

Objectives unclear.

Weak attempt to identify relevant research focus.

Limited evidence to support arguments made.

Objectives too broad.

Relevant research focus identified but explanation and justification may lack detail, clarity, and evidence, and demonstrate some misunderstandings. Objectives still loose in expression.

Relevant research focus identified and justified.

Demonstrates reasonable understanding of the main issues. May still be weak on evidence.

Objectives achievable, appropriate and clearly articulated.

Relevant research focus clearly identified, explained, and justified with appropriate evidence.

Objectives achievable, appropriate and precisely articulated.

Relevant research focus unambiguously identified, explained and convincingly justified with comprehensive consideration of appropriate evidence.

Objectives achievable, appropriate and precisely articulated.

In addition to lower grade band, work shows elements of creative and innovative thought, insight and expression.

LO2: Formulate and justify appropriate research or consultancy methods to address these objectives (PLO 1.1.1)

No or weak connection between methods and objectives. No attempt to justify data, methods and sources, or weak attempt without use of theory.

Unclear explanation of approach.

No evidence of ethical conduct or consideration of ethical issues.

Weak connection between methods and objectives. Extremely limited attempt to justify data, methods and sources. Any use of theory either too generic or demonstrates fundamental misunderstandings.

Explanation lacks detail and clarity to enable replication.

Extremely limited consideration of generic ethical issues. Unclear if conducted ethically.

Weak connection between methods and objectives. Limited attempt to justify data, methods and sources. Use of theory may be too generic and/or demonstrate little understanding.

Insufficient detail and clarity in explanation of approach to enable replication.

Some ethical conduct and consideration of generic ethical issues.

Some connection between methods and objectives.

Basic attempt to justify data, methods and sources. Some descriptive use of relevant theory.

Sufficient detail and clarity to enable some replication of approach.

Evidence of ethical conduct, but report still weak on rationale for this.

Logical connection between methods and objectives.

Some attempt to evaluate alternative approaches and justify data, methods and sources using research objectives, literature review, and research methods theory. Sufficient detail and clarity to replicate most of the approach. Includes audit trail in appendices.

Good attempt to consider and apply relevant ethical standards.

Clearly explains logical connection between methods and objectives.

Good evaluation of alternative approaches to justify data, methods and sources using conceptual framework from literature review and a range of research methods theory.

Attention to detail to enable replication of approach. Includes audit trail in appendices. Very good consideration and application of relevant ethical standards.

Excellent explanation and justification of logical connection between methods and objectives. Critically evaluates alternative approaches to justify data, methods and sources using conceptual framework from literature review and a range of research methods theory.

Thorough explanation of approach to inform replication supported by comprehensive audit trail in appendices.

Excellent consideration and application of relevant ethical standards. Shows understanding of fit with broader ethical debates.

In addition to the elements found in lower grade band, the work shows clear creativity or ingenuity in work and expression and demonstrates a clear understanding of different philosophical perspectives in the context of the research.

LO3: Critically evaluate models, theories, trends and key issues which relate to the research focus (PLO 1.1.2a)

Extremely limited or inappropriate sources.

Little or no attempt to organise themes. Descriptive, unclear or inaccurate. Weak or no connection to practice or own research objectives. Unable to apply Harvard referencing standard.

Very limited or inappropriate sources.

Very poor organisation of themes. Descriptive and unclear. Limited understanding of theory or its connection to practice or own research objectives. Some recognisable elements of Harvard referencing standard.

Limited or inappropriate sources.

Weak organisation of themes. Descriptive. Weak understanding of theory or its connection to practice or own research objectives. Weak application of Harvard referencing standard.

Some engagement with appropriate material, but limited breadth. Adequate organisation of themes. Largely descriptive and lacking depth. May demonstrate some misunderstandings. Some understanding of connection to practice or own research objectives. Inconsistent execution of Harvard referencing standard.

Core relevant academic theory identified, but may lack breadth and/or

contemporaneity of sources. Logical organisation of themes. Largely descriptive, but with satisfactory attempt to evaluate connection to practice or own research objectives. Adequate application of Harvard referencing standard with some inconsistency or inaccuracy.

Wide range of relevant and appropriate literature identified. Competent organisation of themes and sub themes. Clear and competent explanation of theory and evaluation of how it is related to practice and own research objectives. Good application of Harvard referencing standard, only minor inconsistencies or inaccuracy.

Extensive range of relevant and appropriate literature identified. Competent organisation of themes and sub themes. Demonstrates depth and thoroughness in explanation of theory and evaluation of how it is related to practice and own research objectives.

Consistently accurate application of Harvard referencing standard.

In addition to elements found in lower grade band:-

May make new and creative connections between theory and practice and will be able to justify these with a clear and logical argument, making competent use of academic terminology and contemporary sources.

LO4: Apply data generation and analysis techniques appropriate to the research and critically engage with theory to understand the implications

(PLO 1.1.1)

Data largely in raw state. Any analysis may shows fundamental misunderstanding(s) of technique(s) and only partially addresses research objectives.

No discussion in relation to the literature.

Little or no attempt to provide conclusions or recommendations. No consideration of how findings influenced by conduct of research.

Presentation unclear/poorly organised. Analysis may show misunderstanding(s) of technique(s) and only partially addresses research objectives.

Minimal discussion in relation to the literature review.

Little attempt to provide conclusions or recommendations, or unsupported by the data or its analysis. No consideration of how findings influenced by conduct of research.

Data descriptively presented. Analysis may show misunderstanding(s) of technique(s) with weak connection to research objectives.

Superficial discussion in relation to the literature review.

Some attempt to provide conclusions and recommendations, although unconvincing and/ or not appropriately strategic. Very limited consideration of how findings influenced by conduct of research.

Adequate presentation and discussion of the findings in relation to the research objectives, but may still be poorly related to the literature review. Shows broad understanding of data analysis techniques, with possibly some errors in execution.

Some conclusions and basic consideration of strategic implications, supported by the data and its analysis.

Explains problems faced and how these were overcome, but lacks critical thinking.

Clear and logical presentation of findings, credibly addressing research objectives and literature. Satisfactory application of analysis techniques, perhaps some missed opportunities for analysis/interpretation of data.

Good attempt to reach conclusions and consider strategic implications, but arguments may not be clear or logical. Some critical thinking demonstrating some understanding of how quality of findings related to how research conducted.

Competent presentation of findings, convincingly addressing research objectives and critically relating to the literature. Competent application of techniques, and effective integration where more than one data set. Convincing conclusion supported by the data and its analysis. Very good consideration of strategic implications. Clear discussion of the credibility/validity of findings based on critical and reflective thinking about the conduct of the research.

Logical and thorough presentation, integration and interpretation of data. Accomplished application of techniques,

clearly addressing research objectives.

Critical discussion in relation to the literature review.

Clear, relevant and logical conclusion, strongly supported by the data and analysis.

Excellent consideration of strategic implications, change and innovation. Thorough discussion of the credibility/validity of findings based on critical and reflective thinking about the conduct of the research.

In addition to the lower grade band the work shows clear creativity or ingenuity in execution and expression.

Makes additional commentary in relation to contribution to theory and practice.

LO5: Critically reflect upon the learning undertaken in terms of personal and employability skills

Very limited/no evidence of critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by:

-No/very limited engagement with milestones and supervisory relationship, planning and review process.

– Written project reflects poor communication, presentation, organisation.

-Missing written personal critical reflection

Very limited evidence of critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by:

-Very limited engagement with milestones and supervisory relationship, planning and review process.

– Written project reflects poor communication, presentation, organisation.

-Minimal and descriptive personal critical reflection, possibly unsupported by other elements.

Limited evidence of critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by:

-Limited engagement with milestones and supervisory relationship, planning and review process.

– Written project reflects weak communication, presentation, organisation.

-Some limited descriptive personal critical reflection, possibly unsupported by other elements.

Adequate evidence of critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by

-Some engagement with milestones and supervisory relationship, planning and review process.

May be some unexplained absences, with over reliance on tutor to lead process.

– Written project reflects adequate communication, presentation, organisation.

-Adequate descriptive personal critical reflection consistent with other elements.

Satisfactory critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by

– Satisfactory engagement with milestones and supervisory relationship, planning and review process, with some reliance on tutor to lead.

– Written project reflects satisfactory but less than competent communication, presentation, organisation.

– Descriptive personal critical reflection consistent with other elements. Some appropriate forward planning.

Good critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by

-Timely completion of all milestones.

-Taking responsibility in the supervisory relationship and managing the planning and review process.

– Written project reflects competent communication, presentation, organisation.

-Personal critical reflection demonstrates critical self-awareness of professional development and learning from unit. Good forward planning.

Excellent critical reflection on learning, demonstrated by

– Timely completion of all milestones.

– High degree of self-direction and management and professional interaction with tutor.

– Written project reflects rigorous standard of communication, presentation, organisation.

-Personal critical reflection demonstrates critical analysis of professional development and learning from unit. Excellent forward planning.

In addition to elements found in lower grade band, -significant initiative and self-management in preparing milestones and participating in supervisory relationship.

–Written report of professional standard.

LO6 

Recognise, explore and reflect on key ethical issues as they affect own and other’s practice  (PLO 3.1.1)

No recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. No proof of ETHos approval in the appendices.  

Some recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. No proof of ETHos approval in the appendices. 

Limited recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. No proof of ETHos approval in the appendices 

Adequate recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. Proof of ETHos approval in the appendices.

Satisfactory recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. Proof of ETHos approval in the appendices.

Good recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. Proof of ETHos approval in the appendices. 

Excellent recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. Proof of ETHos approval in the appendices. 

Exemplary recognition, exploring and reflection of ethics. Proof of ETHos approval in the appendices.   

LO7  

Research Project is well structured, logical and organised  

Unstructured, illogical flow, Disorganised. 

Exceeds word count.

Poor structure disrupted flow. Limited logical flow. Exceeds word count.   

Some structure and logical flow, but still too jumbled. Exceeds word count.

Adequate structure and flow, acceptable organisation. Within word count.  

Good structure and organisation Coherent and logical flow.  Within word count.

Very good structure and organisation. Critical flow and connectivity between elements. Within word count.

Excellent structure and organisation. Fluent and precise connectivity between elements. Within word count.

Superior structure and organisation. Fluent and precise connectivity between elements. Within word count.   

LO8 

Appropriate academic language, spelling, grammar and syntax 

Inappropriate language and syntax. Unacceptable grammar and spelling 

Very poor usage of language, syntax and spelling, extremely poor grammar 

Poor use of academic languages too many spelling errors, bad grammar 

Acceptable language, grammar and syntax. Still needs to e more academic 

Satisfactory use of academic language, Appropriate syntax, few spelling or grammatical errors 

Good use of academic language, Precise syntax. No grammatical or spelling errors  

Excellent use of academic language, Sophisticated syntax. Excellent spelling and grammar  

Exemplary use of academic language, sophisticated syntax. Excellent spelling and gramma 

LO9 

Consistent and appropriate referencing and in text citation (Harvard referencing style)  

No referencing apparent.  

Very few references, Inappropriate sources, poor in text citation. Poor use of Harvard style   

Some references and in text citations. Not in the Harvard style or inconsistently applied  

Adequate Harvard referencing but still some inconsistences, some inappropriate sources, Adequate in text citations.

Satisfactory Harvard referencing. Sufficient in text citations, more needed.  

Thorough and sufficient referencing. Precise intext citations.

Sophisticated referencing and in text citations  

Complex referencing and in text citations