Trimester 1, 2021 Assessment Task 1 – Written reflection – Individual Assignment

DUE DATE AND TIME:                          Part 1 (first two entries): Thursday 1 April 2021, by 8:00 pm

(Melbourne time)

Part 2 (A & B) (final four entries): Thursday 13 May 2021, by 8:00 pm (Melbourne time)

PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE:         50 % (see next page for split across reflection entries) WORD COUNT:  3000 words (6 entries x 500 words each)

Description

Purpose

You are required to submit Reflective Analysis entries on different topics covered in the unit and include one professional identity self-reflection, as specified below.

The purpose of reflection entries is to consider the issues examined in class and in the weekly reading for the topics studied, and use this understanding to write a reflective summary. A reflective analysis is not simply a summary of the reading. Reflective thinking requires you to consider the key points and issues, and to critically evaluate and apply them.

Part 1: Requirements – Reflective Analysis Entries 1 and 2:

• Weighting: 20%
• Word count: 1000 words (500 words maximum for each entry), plus a reference list (not included in word count).
• Choose any two (2) topics from Topics 1, 2, and 3:

   Topic 1: Introduction to the Field of Organisational Behaviour

   Topic 2: Individual Behaviour, Personality, Values and Perceptions    Topic 3: Workplace Emotions, Attitudes and Stress

Part 2A: Requirements – Reflective Analysis Entries 3, 4, and 5:

• Weighting: 24%
• Word count: 1500 words (500 words for each entry), plus a reference list.
• Choose any three (3) topics from Topics 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8:

   Topic 4: Employee Motivation and Applied Performance Practices    Topic 5: Decision Making and Creativity

   Topic 6: Team Dynamics and Communicating in Teams

   Topic 7: Power and Influence; Conflict and Negotiation in the Workplace    Topic 8: Leadership in Organisational Settings

• Each Reflective Analysis Entry must be clearly organised under the three headings below and should include the following contents and address the following questions:

1.       Learning

What have I learnt (i.e., what was new/different for me)? Reflective analysis on learning from lectures, seminars and assigned reading(s) for the topic you choose.

2.       Critique

How relevant is the topic of study? This should include a discussion of strengths and weaknesses of the key theories/ideas/concepts for the topic.

3.       Reflection

• To what extent do the concepts/ideas and theories reflect what happens in my work place? (If you are not currently working, then reflect upon a previous place of employment or an organisation with which you are familiar such as a sport club).
  • How can I make use of this learning in a future situation? For this section, you may choose to focus on one or two aspects of the topic.
• You are required to cite the prescribed textbook and at least one of the assigned/prescribed journal article readings for the topic you choose in either Learning or Critique sections or cite prescribed readings in both Learning and Critique sections.

Useful information on reflective writing

Part 2B: Professional identity self-reflection

• Weighting: 6%
• Word count: 500 words maximum.

Scenario: Assume that you are applying for a ‘management’ job or internship with a medium to large organisation, and have been asked to submit a written statement before the interview. In this written statement, you must present a professional identity of yourself as a team leader, using relevant knowledge you have learned from this unit (MMM240).

Submit together with the entries 3, 4 and 5.

You might consider using Topics 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 to develop the written statement. Please refer to the assessment rubric at the end of this document for the assessment criteria and required performance levels.

Note that this entry does not require you to follow the contents, headings and structure as entries 1 to 5. You are suggested to select a couple of key aspects in relevant topics that you have learned in MMM240 to:

1. demonstrate your ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences, and/or extra-curricular activities (e.g., experiences working in a group assignment or part-time jobs, sport teams) to support your claim, and
2. show awareness of your own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote yourselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers.

Specific Requirements

The required Reflective Analysis entries should adhere to the following:

• A template (including cover page) has been provided to you for Part 1 and Part 2 (A and B) of the assessment. We strongly recommend that you use the template, which can be accessed in the Assessment Resources section of the CloudDeakin unit site. If you choose to create your own document rather than using the template, then please pay attention to the following formatting requirements:
  • Clearly indicate the topic covered for Entries 1 to 5.
  • Clearly use the topic number and name as the heading for each entry (e.g., ‘Topic 5: Decision-Making and Creativity’) at the top, and the three sub-headings as mentioned above (i.e., Learning, Critique and Reflection) for Entries 1 to 5.
  • State the word count on the cover page.
• Reference List: For the Entries 1 to 5, you are required to cite the textbook and the assigned journal article(s) for your chosen Topic. The assigned readings for each Topic are available on CloudDeakin. You must correctly use the Harvard style of referencing. Useful information and guidance on referencing can be found on the Academic Skills website.
• You might not need to cite any references for a professional identity self-refection (Entry 6).
• Please note that each entry should be as close as possible to the word limit (i.e., maximum of 500 words for each entry). Too much longer or shorter than the word limit will affect your marks. Any words over the word limit will not be marked. The reference list is excluded from the word count, but any in-text citations are included in the word count.
• Ensure that you have the Turnitin index under 25% (please check UniStart                                                                                                           Deakin’s

digital tools on how to use Turnitin to detect collusion and/or plagiarism).

• As all entries are reflective analysis exercises, you may write in the first person (e.g., use of “I” is acceptable; for example, “I believe that …”). The reflective analysis entry should be set out in paragraph writing (i.e., avoid using dot points).
• Submit as a single Word document (i.e., one Word document for Part 1, and one Word document for Part 2).

Learning Outcomes

This task allows you to demonstrate achievement towards the unit learning outcomes. The ULOs are aligned with specific graduate learning outcomes – that is, the skills and knowledge graduates are expected to have upon completion of their studies – and this assessment task is an important tool in determining achievement of those outcomes.

If you do not demonstrate achievement of the unit learning outcomes, you will not be successful in this unit.

It is good practice to familiarise yourself with the ULOs and GLOs as they provide guidance on the

knowledge, understanding and skills you’re expected to demonstrate upon completion of the unit. In this way they can be used to guide your study.

Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO)	Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLO)
ULO 1: Demonstrate an understanding and knowledge of the key concepts and theories of organisational behaviour.	GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities GLO2: Communication
ULO 2: Illustrate the importance and impact of individual, group and organisational behaviour in the workplace.	GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities
ULO 3: Critically assess organisational behaviour issues as they relate to the effective management of workplaces.	GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities GLO2: Communication GLO4: Critical thinking
ULO 4: Apply learning from theories and concepts to case studies and practical events and professional development.	GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities GLO2: Communication GLO6: Self-management

Submission

You are to submit your assignment in the individual Assignment Dropbox in the MMM240 CloudDeakin unit site on or before the due date. A single Word document attachment with the required content should be submitted.

When uploading your assignment, name your document using the following syntax: your surname_your first name_your Deakin student ID number_[unitcode]_AT[assessment task number].doc (or ‘.docx’). For

example, ‘Jones_Barry_123456789_MMM240_AT1Part1.doc’.

Submitting a hard copy of this assignment is not required.

You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until the marked assignment has been returned to you. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy.

Any work you submit may be checked by electronic or other means for the purposes of detecting collusion and/or plagiarism.

When you submit an assignment through your CloudDeakin unit site, you will receive an email to your Deakin email address confirming that it has been submitted. You should check that you can see your assignment in the Submissions view of the Assignment Dropbox folder after upload, and check for, and keep, the email receipt for the submission.

Marking and feedback

The marking rubric for this task is below and also available in the MMM240 CloudDeakin unit site – in the Assessment folder (under Assessment Resources).

It is always a useful exercise to familiarise yourself with the criteria before completing any assessment task. Criteria act as a boundary around the task and help identify what assessors are looking for specifically in your submission. The criteria are drawn from the unit’s learning outcomes ensuring they align with appropriate graduate attribute/s.

Identifying the standard you aim to achieve is also a useful strategy for success and to that end, familiarising yourself with the descriptor for that standard is highly recommended.

Students who submit their work by the due date will receive their marks and feedback on CloudDeakin 15 working days after the submission date.

Extensions

Extensions will only be granted for exceptional and/or unavoidable circumstances outside the student’s control.

Students seeking an extension for an assignment prior to the due date should apply directly to the Unit Chair by completing the Assignment and Online Test Extension Application Form. Requests for extensions will not be considered after 12 noon, 30 March 2021 (for Part 1) and 12 noon, 11 May 2021 (for Part 2). Applications for special consideration after the due date must be submitted via StudentConnect.

Late submission

The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked and will receive 0% for the task.

‘Day’ means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after the due date.

Calculation of the late penalty is as follows: this is based on the assignment being due on a Thursday at 8:00pm

• 1 day late: submitted after Thursday 11:59pm and before Friday 11:59pm– 5% penalty.
• 2 days late: submitted after Friday 11:59pm and before Saturday 11:59pm – 10% penalty.
• 3 days late: submitted after Saturday 11:59pm and before Sunday 11:59pm – 15% penalty.
• 4 days late: submitted after Sunday 11:59pm and before Monday 11:59pm – 20% penalty.
• 5 days late: submitted after Monday 11:59pm and before Tuesday 11:59pm – 25% penalty.

Dropbox closes the Tuesday after 11:59pm AEST time.

Support

The Division of Student Life (see link below) provides all students with editing assistance. Students who wish to take advantage of this service must be organized and plan ahead and contact the Division of Student Life in order to schedule a booking, well in advance of the due date of this assignment. http://www.deakin.edu.au/about-deakin/administrative-divisions/student-life

Referencing

Any material used in this assignment that is not your original work must be acknowledged as such and appropriately referenced. You can find information about plagiarism and other study support resources at the following website: http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study-support

Academic misconduct

For information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the document Your rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unit in the first folder next to the Unit Guide in the Resources area of the CloudDeakin unit site.

MMM240 Assessment 1, Part 1 – Rubric – Reflective Analysis Entries 1 and 2 (20%)

Performance Levels/Criteria	N (0-29)	N (30-49)	P (50-59)	C (60-69)	D (70-79)	HD (80-100)
Criterion 1, ULO1, ULO2, & GLO1 (2.5 marks)   Learning Reflection on learning from lecture, seminar and assigned/ prescribed reading for the topic.	0.7 marks Does not demonstrate understanding of topic content; never reviews personal learning; no reference to topic learning materials.     (0.4 – 0.7 marks)	1.2 marks Demonstrates limited understanding of topic content, and rarely reviews personal learning; little reference to topic learning materials.     (0.8 – 1.2 marks)	1.4 marks Demonstrates acceptable understanding of topic content, reviewing personal learning, with satisfactory reference to topic learning materials.     (1.3 – 1.4 marks)	1.7marks Demonstrates good understanding of topic content, clearly reviewing personal learning, with good reference to topic learning materials where applicable.     (1.5 – 1.7marks)	1.9 marks Demonstrates very good understanding of topic content, reviewing personal learning, with very good reference to topic learning materials where applicable.     (1.8 – 1.9 marks)	2.5 marks Demonstrates exemplary understanding of topic content, reviewing and analysing personal learning, with comprehensive reference to topic learning materials where applicable. (2 – 2.5 marks)
Criterion 2, ULO1, ULO2, ULO3 & GLO4 (2.5 marks)   Critique Discussion of relevance of topic, plus strengths and weaknesses of the key theories/ ideas/concepts.Refers to assigned/ prescribed reading for the topic.	0.7 marks Evaluation of topic is superficial lacking any consideration of the strengths or weaknesses; no link made to the assigned reading for the topic.       (0.4 – 0.7 marks)	1.2 marks Evaluation of topic is partial lacking consideration of the strengths or weaknesses; no link made to the assigned reading for the topic.       (0.8 – 1.2 marks)	1.4 marks Evaluation of topic is satisfactory, including consideration of the strengths and weaknesses, with acceptable reference to the assigned reading for the topic.   (1.3 – 1.4 marks)	1.7marks Evaluation of topic is clear, including consideration of the strengths or weaknesses, with good reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.     (1.5 – 1.7marks)	1.9 marks Evaluation of topic is proficient, including consideration of the strengths or weaknesses, with very good reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.     (1.8 – 1.9 marks)	2.5 marks Evaluation of topic is comprehensive, incorporating consideration of the strengths and weaknesses, with excellent reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.   (2 – 2.5 marks)

Criterion 3, ULO1, ULO4, GLO1, & GLO6 (2.5 marks) Reflection Reflection on how the concepts/ ideas/theories are seen in current/ previous org., plus ways to use learning in a future situation.	0.7 marks Does not relate acquired knowledge to practical experience in past or future work environments.       (0.4 – 0.7 marks)	1.2 marks Limited discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and/or future work environments.     (0.8 – 1.2 marks)	1.4 marks Some discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and/or future work environments.   (1.3 – 1.4 marks)	1.7marks Good discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (1.5 – 1.7marks)	1.9 marks Very good discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (1.8 – 1.9 marks)	2.5 marks Excellent discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (2 – 2.5 marks)
Criterion 4, ULO1, ULO2, ULO3, ULO4, & GLO2, GLO6 (2.5 marks)   Communication Clarity of written presentation including attention to the written presentation requirements of the assignment task.	0.7 marks Conflicting and/or no use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; no attention to the requirements of Harvard style of referencing.     (0.4 – 0.7 marks)	1.2 marks Inconsistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; limited attention to the requirements of Harvard style of referencing.     (0.8 – 1.2 marks)	1.4 marks Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; mostly correctly applies Harvard style of referencing.   (1.3 – 1.4 marks)	1.7marks Demonstrates good use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, although there may be occasional errors.   (1.5 – 1.7marks)	1.9 marks Demonstrates very good execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, and is almost error-free.         (1.8 – 1.9 marks)	2.5 marks Demonstrates excell ent execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, and is virtually error-free.   (2 – 2.5 marks)
Overall 100	N 0 or above	N 30 or above	P 50 or above	C 60 or above	D 70 or above	HD 80 or above

MMM240 Assessment 1, Part 2A – Rubric – Reflective Analysis Entries 3, 4 and 5 (24%)

Performance Levels/Criteria	N (0-29)	N (30-49)	P (50-59)	C (60-69)	D (70-79)	HD (80-100)
Criterion 1, ULO1, ULO2, & GLO1 (2 marks)   Learning Reflection on learning from lecture, seminar and assigned reading for the topic.	0.5 marks Does not demonstrate understanding of topic content; never reviews personal learning; no reference to topic learning materials.     (0 – 0.5 marks)	0.9 marks Demonstrates limited understanding of topic content, and rarely reviews personal learning; little reference to topic learning materials.     (0.6 – 0.9 marks)	1.1 marks Demonstrates acceptable understanding of topic content, reviewing personal learning, with satisfactory reference to topic learning materials.     (1 – 1.1 marks)	1.3 marks Demonstrates good understanding of topic content, clearly reviewing personal learning, with good reference to topic learning materials where applicable.     (1.2 – 1.3marks)	1.5 marks Demonstrates very good understanding of topic content, reviewing personal learning, with very good reference to topic learning materials where applicable.     (1.4 – 1.5 marks)	2 marks Demonstrates exemplary understanding of topic content, reviewing and analysing personal learning, with comprehensive reference to topic learning materials where applicable. (1.6 – 2 marks)
Criterion 2, ULO1, ULO2, ULO3 & GLO4 (2 marks) Critique Discussion of relevance of topic, plus strengths and weaknesses of the key theories/ ideas/concepts.Refers to assigned/ prescribed reading for the topic.	0.5 marks Evaluation of topic is superficial lacking any consideration of the strengths or weaknesses; no link made to the assigned reading for the topic.       (0 – 0.5 marks)	0.9 marks Evaluation of topic is partial lacking consideration of the strengths or weaknesses; no link made to the assigned reading for the topic.       (0.6 – 0.9 marks)	1.1 marks Evaluation of topic is satisfactory, including consideration of the strengths and weaknesses, with acceptable reference to the assigned reading for the topic.   (1 – 1.1 marks)	1.3 marks Evaluation of topic is clear, including consideration of the strengths or weaknesses, with good reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.     (1.2 – 1.3 marks)	1.5 marks Evaluation of topic is proficient, including consideration of the strengths or weaknesses, with very good reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.     (1.4 – 1.5 marks)	2 marks Evaluation of topic is comprehensive, incorporating consideration of the strengths and weaknesses, with excellent reference to the assigned reading for the topic where applicable.   (1.6 – 2 marks)

Criterion 3, ULO1, ULO4, GLO1, & GLO6 (2 marks) Reflection Reflection on how the concepts/ ideas/theories are seen in current/ previous org., plus ways to use learning in a future situation.	0.5 marks Does not relate acquired knowledge to practical experience in past or future work environments.       (0 – 0.5 marks)	0.9 marks Limited discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and/or future work environments.     (0.6 – 0.9 marks)	1.1 marks Some discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and/or future work environments.   (1 – 1.1 marks)	1.3marks Good discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (1.2 – 1.3marks)	1.5 marks Very good discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (1.4 – 1.5 marks)	2 marks Excellent discussion of how acquired knowledge relates to practical experience in past and future work environments.       (1.6 – 2 marks)
Criterion 4, ULO1, ULO2, ULO3, ULO4, & GLO2, GLO6 (2 marks)   Communication Clarity of written presentation including attention to the written presentation requirements of the assignment task.	0.5 marks Conflicting and/or no use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; no attention to the requirements of Harvard style of referencing.     (0 – 0.5 marks)	0.9 marks Inconsistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; limited attention to the requirements of Harvard style of referencing.     (0.6 – 0.9 marks)	1.1 marks Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; mostly correctly applies Harvard style of referencing.   (1 – 1.1 marks)	1.3 marks Demonstrates good use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, although there may be occasional errors.   (1.2 – 1.3marks)	1.5 marks Demonstrates very good execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, and is almost error-free.         (1.4 – 1.5 marks)	2 marks Demonstrates excell ent execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices; correctly applies Harvard style of referencing, and is virtually error-free.   (1.6 – 2 marks)
Overall 100	N 0 or above	N 30 or above	P 50 or above	C 60 or above	D 70 or above	HD 80 or above

MMM240 Assessment 1, Part 2B – Rubric – Professional identity self-reflection Entry 6 (6%)

Performance Levels/Criteria	N (0-29)	N (30-49)	P (50-59)	C (60-69)	D (70-79)	HD (80-100)
Criterion 1, ULO1 & GLO1 (2.5 marks)   Articulating evidence	0.7 marks   Shows no ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities   (0 – 0.7 marks)	1.2 marks   Shows little ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities.   (0.8 – 1.2 marks)	1.4 marks   Shows satisfactory ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities. (1.3 – 1.4 marks)	1.7 marks   Shows good ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities.   (1.5 – 1.7 marks)	1.9 marks   Shows very good ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities.   (1.8 – 1.9 marks)	2.5 marks   Shows excellent ability to evidence skills and experience, using a range of relevant examples from both formal course experiences and extra- curricular activities.   (2 – 2.5 marks)
Criterion 2, ULO4 & GLO6 (2 marks)   Professional identity	0.5 points   Shows no awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers.     (0 – 0.5 marks)	0.8 point   Shows poor awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers.     (0.6 – 0.9 marks)	1.1 mark   Shows satisfactory awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers. (1 – 1.1 marks)	1.3 marks   Shows good awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers.   (1.2 – 1.3 marks)	1.5 marks   Shows very good awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers     (1.4 – 1.5 marks)	2 marks   Shows excellent awareness of own learning, skills and experience; and how this can be used to promote themselves concisely and persuasively to potential employers     (1.6 – 2 marks)
Criterion 3, ULO1, ULO4, & GLO2 (1.5 marks)   Communication   Clarity of written presentation	0.4 point   Conflicting and/or no use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.   0.2 – 0.4 marks	0.6 marks   Inconsistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.   (0.5 – 0.7 marks)	0.8 marks   Satisfactorily demonstr ates consistent use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices. (0.8 marks)	1 marks   Demonstrates good use of important conventions particular to the discipline or task, including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.   (1 marks)	1.1 marks   Demonstrates very good execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.   (1.1 marks)	1.5 marks   Demonstrates excellent execution of a wide range of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organisation, content, presentation, and stylistic choices.   (1.2 – 1.5 marks)

Get expert help for MMM240 – Organisational Behaviour and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!