20 April, 2024
0 Comments
1 category
| Assessment Two: INDIVDUAL CASE STUDY REPORT The benefits of free trade – with a focus on tariffs. The background is that tariff rates have fallen globally since the end of World War II. But they are rising again. In this case study, the focus will be on the US, EU, Japan, and China. High-income countries generally have very low rates, with some exceptions. The exceptions tend to be in sensitive industries where they have lost their comparative advantage. Agriculture, textiles, and apparel are commonly protected. Generally, tariff rates are higher in middle-income countries and highest in low-income countries. In this case study: Describe the differences in tariffs across economic sectors and over time. 2. Cite at least three reasons economists favour opening trade rather than closing it. You can give reasons why some argue against 3. Evaluate why the costs to consumers of a tariff or quota are greater than the net welfare costs to a nation. 4. Analyse the economic validity of common justifications for protectionism. 5. Define each form of legal protection granted by e.g., the U.S. government. In this case study, you will be using these aspects of what we have covered so far: 1) Balance of payment determination theories 2) International trade patterns and linkages 3) How economic growth is determined and who benefits 4) Importance of global institutions Please ensure the following: The inclusion of a cover/title page, executive summary, introduction, main body and conclusion.The total word count is 3,000 words (excluding referencing and executive summary)Submission date: 3 May 2024, 12 pm. |
| 2. Assessment Weighting |
| A case study report: 60% |
| 3. Assessed Learning Outcomes |
| The following learning outcomes are assessed in both assessments: Explain in detail the drivers of international trade.Critically assess the impact of government policies and regulations on international trade and finance from an ethical perspective.Independently estimate expected exchange rates by using a variety of exchange rate models. Analyse the impact of fixed and floating rate exchange rate systems on trade and finance for just and fair decision making.Demonstrate how foreign exchange markets can be used responsibly for international transactions. Produce a professional and detailed report on economics and international finance practices.Critically and independently evaluate contemporary business and finance practices from a morally sound perspective through detailed case study analysis. |
| 4. Knowledge, Attributes and Skills You Will Develop While Completing this Assessment |
| Enhanced understanding the complexities of international economics and finance in the global economy, writing, referencing, reflection, critical thinking and problem-solving. |
| 5. Presentation and Submission Deadlines |
| Submission of presentation on Turnitin: Presentation: Submission of case study on Turnitin |
| 6. Submission Method |
| The presentation slides and case study reports should be submitted to Turnitin link on Moodle. The presentation sessions will be held on campus. |
| 7. Feedback Deadline |
| Please note that comments on your work together with an overall grade will be provided to you within 3 working weeks from the submission deadline. However, factors outside of our control may not always make this possible (i.e., academic misconduct). |
| 9. Format and Structure Guidelines |
| Suitable areas to research include legal documents and course textbooks and academic sources. Apply as far as possible the conceptual/theoretical material taught in the lectures. The total word count should be close to but not in excess of 3,000 words. The report should be written in Word document. Do not use various font sizes and colours; Black ink, Arial, size 11, 1.5 lines spaced is recommended. Use DIN A4 format and page margins of 2.5 cm or 1 inch. Proposed structure: Executive summary: An overall outline of the report Introduction: The scope and focus of the report (approx. 250 words) Main body: The critical evaluation (approx. 2,500 words) Conclusion: An overall conclusion based on the reflection from the report (approx. 250 words) References – Harvard Referencing |
| 10. Marking Criteria |
| Marking is in accordance with the level 7 generic marking criteria and is assessed according to the following five categories. Each category has equal weighting. Knowledge and understanding – 20%Intellectual skills – 30%Scholarly practice – 15%Enquiry and research skills – 20%Professional and life skills – 15% More detailed guidance about what is expected in each of the five categories above will be provided within Lectures and the corresponding presentation slides. A mark of 50% is required to pass the module. |
| 11. Additional Information |
| If you need advice or guidance on how to proceed with the assignments then please contact the module convenor Sendem Badam and seminar lecturer, Dr Gherardo Girardi. Individual authorship This report must be written and produced by the submitting student, without help from other students outside their group. Please refer to the heading below titled ‘Academic misconduct’ for a list of academic regulations infringements, including infringements associated with giving help to other students or accepting help from other students. Although you must plan and author this Report yourself, you can, and should, draw from the reflections and ideas that you develop while working with your seminar group during the semester. You just need to make sure that your Report presents your own ideas and interpretations, and is written in your own words. Make sure that you follow these two rules of thumb: 1. Do not participate in the planning, writing or creation of another student’s Report 2. Do not show your written work to other students, nor look at those of another student Academic misconduct St Mary’s University defines academic misconduct as an act whereby a candidate seeks to obtain an unfair advantage for himself/herself, or for another candidate. St Mary’s University has a firm policy on academic misconduct and it is not uncommon for students to be terminated as a result of infringements. A list of possible infringements that could apply in the context of this module is presented below. Low level infringements • Use of sources without quotation marks but referenced in the bibliography. • Copying from sources without referencing appropriately. • Submission of the student’s own previously or simultaneously assessed work for another assessment, whether previously/simultaneously submitted to the University or another institution (i.e., self-plagiarism). • Collusion i.e., two or more students having worked together inappropriately on an assessment to jointly produce work that is intended as an independent submission according to the requirements of the assessment. • Obtaining an unfair advantage for another student by allowing them to copy one’s own work and present it as their own. Medium level infringements • Contracting another source to produce work which is presented as the student’s own. • Use of another person’s copyrighted materials, intellectual property or ideas presented inappropriately as the student’s own. High level infringements • Knowingly allowing another person to impersonate oneself in a formal timed assessment, submission of coursework, or other aspect of the programme of study. • Impersonating another student in a formal timed assessment, submission of coursework, or other aspect of the programme of study. • Bribing or attempting to bribe a person thought to have an influence on an assessment outcome. Sections 29 and 30 of the University’s academic regulations include information regarding academic misconduct and the penalties applied where there is a finding of academic misconduct. The use of Artificial Intelligence tools This assessment is to measure your ability to conduct research and construct arguments without the use of content produced by other writers, essay mill websites or Artificial Intelligence tools (Catgut, QuillBot, and others). Use of AI generated content for this assessment is prohibited and may be referred to an academic misconduct panel.Use of AI to paraphrase, summarise or translate content from a foreign language is prohibited and may be referred to an academic misconduct panel. By submitting the assignment via Turnitin, you affirm that the submission is your own original work and that it meets the standards of academic honesty by signing the below Academic Integrity pledge: “I hereby declare that the work I am submitting for assessment is my own work and not that produced by anyone else. I have not drawn on essay mills, contract cheating services, or the work of other students past or present. I have not drawn on material generated by artificial intelligence (AI) platforms (e.g., ChatGPT). I can confirm that this submission contains no text whatsoever that has simply been cut and pasted or included with only minor adaptations/amendments from other sources. Sections of text drawn directly and verbatim from other sources have always been placed in quotation marks to show that they are quotations. I have retained earlier drafts of this submission, and any rough notes produced during the process of drafting it, so that I can provide evidence of the originality of this submission if requested to do so” As stated on St Marys University website ‘All members of the University’s community have a responsibility to be alert to the potential for academic misconduct, to adopt and promote good academic practice and to safeguard the integrity of the University’s degrees and other awards.’ It includes you – the students, and this is why we are asking you to: Make yourself familiar with the Academic Regulations Sections 29-30 Complete the Academic Integrity modules on Moodle More information on academic integrity can be accessed here: https://www.stmarys.ac.uk/policies/student-guidance-academic-regulations.aspx |
| 12. Suggested checklists |
| Checklist for Q1 (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Cover a wide range of factors, including economic policies, international trade agreements, political considerations and the changing dynamics global commerce over time.Cite relevant literature both in-text and in reference list. Checklist for Q2 (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Critically evaluate the three reasons that are well researched and justified.Cite relevant literature both in-text and in reference list. Checklist for Q3 (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Evaluate how the costs may contribute to economic distortions and inefficiencies.Discuss critically the potential benefits of net welfare costs.Collaborate these points from a real nation’s perspective.Cite relevant literature both in-text and in reference list. Checklist for Q4 (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Present well justified and analysed economic arguments.Cite relevant literature both in-text and in reference list. Checklist for Q5 (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Critically evaluate various forms of legal protection and how they contribute to innovation, fair competition, consumers’ protection and the security of national interest.Cite relevant literature both in-text and in reference list. Checklist for an overall presentation (recommendations for a good answer, but not limited to): Harvard style for references and in text citations.Headlines for sections and subsections.A balanced structure.Comprehensive range of relevant (academic and professional) sources. |
MARKING CRITERIA FOR PRESENTATION
| Marks | Criteria | 80-100% (Upper First) | 70-79% (First) | 60-69% (Upper Second) | 50-59% (Lower Second) | 40- 49% (Pass) | 0 – 39% (Fail) |
| 20 | Introduction and Background Information | Very well-articulated introduction clearly outlining the purpose of the presentation. Excellent application of research and understanding of the assessment brief when providing the relevant background information on the chosen areas. | All elements are present with the topic introduced clearly and concisely. Information and research applied within the introduction is relevant and appropriate to the level of study. Purpose and direction of the presentation has been very clearly introduced. | All elements are present and clearly outlined. Knowledge and understanding of the topic are accurately applied and the purpose of the presentation clear. Facts and information present are evidence based. | All elements are present and reasonably outlined. Sound knowledge and understanding of the topic and assessment brief clear. Overview of topic supported by research. Some relevant information is missing or unclear. | The company, product and country are outlined and a basic overview provided supported by some evidence. Introduction is broadly accurate but limited. Most elements are present. | Introduction is limited and not relevant to the assessment brief. Little to no research applied. Not all elements present, required factors not specified. |
| 40 | Evaluation of the specific institution chosen | Highly detailed knowledge of the main concepts. Views are supported excellently with evidence of an exceptionally wide range of appropriate academic and professional sources being read critically. Awareness of the limitations and ambiguities of the existing literature and knowledge base demonstrated. | Very good knowledge of the main concepts. Wide range of appropriate academic and professional sources read critically. Beginning to show awareness of the limitations of the existing literature and knowledge base. | Knowledge of main concepts is clear. Analytical ability, appropriate to the Level of study, is consistently demonstrated throughout the presentation. Wide range of appropriate sources have been read. | Sound knowledge and adequate critical skills. Analysis is adequately supported by appropriate sources. Knowledge of literature beyond core texts. | Some gaps in knowledge clear. Some evidence of reading at an appropriate level and discussed primarily in a descriptive manner. Analysis is supported superficially by research. | Little evidence of research at the appropriate level of study. The evaluation is vague and descriptive. Views are poorly supported and gaps in knowledge clear. |
| 20 | Presentation and Professional Skills | Excellent communication skills and use of presentation skills. Group members are cohesive and all elements have been fully integrated. Very articulate and persuasive delivery to the audience. Excellent answers provided to questions. | Well-articulated presentation demonstrating cohesive group work. Views expressed clearly and persuasively. Engaging and professional communication. Presentation is visually appealing and professionally formatted, use of graphs and diagrams is appropriate. Answers given to questions are strong, supported by knowledge and research. | Communication of the research and views is pitched appropriately for the audience. Presentation skills are more than adequate, engaging the audience. Clear structure and presentation tools used effectively. Questions fully addressed with reasonable answers. | Communication skills are adequate, delivery is clear and presentation structure sound. Timing of the presentation meets the requirement. Questions have been addressed though elaboration on answers is needed. Consistent formatting of slides and adequate ability to work as a group. | Communication is clear and presentation is structured reasonably. Uninspirational deliver and a basic ability to work effectively as a group. Somewhat professional formatting of presentation slides. Questions vaguely addressed. | Poor delivery of presentation, lacking in structure and not pitched appropriately for the audience. Slides are not professionally formatted, presentation tools poorly utilised. Questions addressed poorly. |
| 20 | Referencing and Academic Conventions | Accurate application of Harvard Referencing. Academic conventions excellently applied. | Accurate application of Harvard Referencing. Academic conventions consistently applied. | Mostly accurate application of Harvard Referencing and citations. Academic conventions (language, spelling, grammar) applied accurately throughout with few errors. | Harvard Referencing followed with only occasional errors in citations and references. Academic conventions are adhered to more consistently. | Harvard Referencing style applied and a clear attempt to cite sources on PowerPoint slides. Frequent inaccuracies in referencing and citations. | Harvard Referencing style not used and inappropriate sources listed. Academic conventions not applied; language is informal. |
| Grading criteria for case study | Knowledge and Understanding Demonstrates an understanding of the subject area, key sections and management accounting concepts are recognised within the research process. | Intellectual skills Ability to use business theories and tools to support arguments, such as the theory of “Management Accounting” and “Corporate Governance”. Uses logical and persuasive reasoning. Demonstrates creativity beyond basic ideas. | Scholarly practices Use of relevant literature through a range of articles/journals/reports/books/news. Understands how to interpret the literature. Uses Harvard referencing. | Enquiry and research skills Evidences research skills, both in data collection and/or theoretical collection. Is creative with ideas throughout communicates findings in an appropriate and interesting way, using tables/images/illustrations where appropriate. | Professional and life skills Showcases professional skills, such as report writing, problem solving, evaluative skills, and creativity. |
| Mark band | |||||
| 0-39: Fail | Gaps in systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Some inaccuracies in the understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. | Some evidence of analytical intellectual skills, but for the most part descriptive. Language and structure inappropriate. Gaps in evidence of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Ideas/findings sometimes illogical and contradictory. Generalized statements made with scant evidence. Significant errors or omissions in statistics or their interpretations. Conclusions lack relevance. Gaps in critical responses to theoretical discourses | Evidence of little reading and/or of reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Gaps in evidence of substantial investigations to address areas of theory or practice. Academic conventions used inconsistently and significant weaknesses in referencing. | Limited evidence of the research skills identified in the programme specification. Significant weaknesses evident, which suggest that the candidate has not yet gained the research skills required. Limited ability to apply knowledge to unfamiliar contexts, synthesise ideas and information in innovative ways and generate transformative solutions. | Limited evidence of the postgraduate skills identified in the programme specification. Significant weaknesses evident, which suggest that the candidate has not gained the skills necessary for postgraduate employment. Limited evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Limited identification, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts |
| 40-49: Fail | Unsatisfactory systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Unsatisfactory understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. | Unsatisfactory evidence to support findings/views, but evidence not consistently interpreted. Language and structure inappropriate. Unsatisfactory of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Unsatisfactory critical responses in theoretical discourses. Statistics when used show areas of weakness. Some relevant conclusions. | References to a few relevant sources. Some omissions and minor errors. Basic level academic conventions evident and largely inconsistent, with lapses. Unsatisfactory evidence of substantial investigations to address areas of theory or practice. Referencing conventions generally followed although some weaknesses. | E&R skills: Unsatisfactory undertake reasonably straightforward research tasks with minimum guidance. Unsatisfactorily communicated in writing at a standard appropriate for graduate-level employment, and with limited weaknesses. Work is presented with areas of weakness in supporting graphs, tables and other resources. Unsatisfactory ability to apply knowledge to unfamiliar contexts, synthesise ideas and information in innovative ways and generate transformative solutions. | Unsatisfactory evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Unsatisfactory evidence of identification, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts |
| 50-59: Pass | Evidence of systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Evidence of understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. . | Evidence of some logical, analytical thinking and synthesis. Language and structure appropriate. Can analyse new and/or abstract data and situations without guidance. Use of statistical analysis and accurate reporting of statistics where appropriate. An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support the argument. Evidence of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Evidence of critical responses in theoretical discourses. Valid conclusions. | Knowledge, analysis and evaluation of a range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved, analysed independently. Evidence of some investigations to address areas of theory or practice Academic skills applied. Referencing conventions generally followed accurately. | E&R skills: Can undertake reasonably straightforward research tasks with minimum guidance. Can communicate in writing, at a standard appropriate for graduate-level employment. Adopts style and register appropriate for audience. Work is presented satisfactorily, embedding graphs, tables and other resources when required. Evidence of ability to apply knowledge to unfamiliar contexts, synthesise ideas and information in innovative ways and generate transformative solutions. | Able to evaluate own strengths and weaknesses in relation to post-graduate employment. Evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Identification, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts |
| 60-69: Pass (with Merit) | Good systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Good understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. | Sound, logical, analytical thinking, synthesis and evaluation. Very clear language and structure. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity and significance of evidence. Independent use of statistical analysis and insightful and accurate reporting of statistics where appropriate. Ability to communicate ideas and evidence accurately and convincingly. Good evidence of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Good evidence of critical responses in theoretical discourses Sound, convincing conclusions. | Good knowledge, analysis and evaluation of a range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved, analysed independently with accuracy and assurance. Good academic skills, consistently applied. Good evidence of substantial investigations to address areas of theory or practice. Referencing conventions followed accurately and consistently throughout. | E&R skills: Can successfully complete a range of research-like tasks, including evaluation, with very limited external guidance. Can communicate well in writing and at a standard appropriate for graduate-level employment. Adopts style and register to engage audience(s). Work is presented effectively and professionally, embedding graphs, tables and other resources effectively when required. | Is confident and flexible in identifying and defining a range of complex problems and applying knowledge and methods to their solution. Able to take initiative in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses in relation to graduate-level professional and practical skills, and act autonomously to develop new areas of skills as necessary. Good evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Good identification, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts |
| 70-79: Pass (with Distinction) | Excellent systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Excellent understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. | Thoroughly logical work, supported by judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Excellent language and structure. High quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Independent use of advanced statistical analysis and insightful and accurate reporting of statistics where appropriate. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Excellent evidence of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Excellent evidence of critical responses in theoretical discourses Strong conclusions. | Excellent knowledge of research informed literature embedded in the work. Consistent analysis and evaluation of sources. High-level academic skills consistently applied. Excellent evidence of substantial investigations to address areas of theory or practice. Referencing conventions followed accurately and consistently throughout. | E&R skills: Can very successfully complete a range of research-like tasks, including evaluation, with a significant degree of autonomy. Can communicate in writing professionally and confidently for diverse audiences, at a high standard appropriate for graduate-level employment. Work is presented very effectively and professionally, embedding high quality graphs, tables and other resources effectively when required. Excellent ability to apply knowledge to unfamiliar contexts, synthesise ideas and information in innovative ways and generate transformative solutions. | Is professional and flexible in autonomously defining a range of complex problems and applying knowledge and methods to solution. Shows insight and autonomy in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses and developing professional and practical skills needed for graduate-level employment. Excellent evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Excellent identification, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts |
| 80-100: Pass (with Distinction) | Exceptional systematic understanding of specialised field of study and interrelationship with other relevant disciplines. Exceptional understanding of current theoretical and methodological approaches and its use in interpreting the knowledge base. . | Exceptional work; judiciously selected and evaluated evidence. Very clear structure and language. Very high quality analysis, developed independently or through effective collaboration. Independent use of advanced statistical analysis and insightful and accurate reporting of statistics where appropriate. Ability to investigate contradictory information and identify reasons for contradictions. Exceptional evidence of using ideas at a high level of abstraction. Exceptional evidence of critical responses in theoretical discourses Highly persuasive conclusions. | Outstanding knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Consistent analysis and evaluation of sources. High-level academic skills consistently and professionally applied. Exceptional evidence of substantial investigations to address areas of theory or practice. Referencing conventions followed accurately and consistently throughout. | E&R skills: Impressive ability to draw on own research, and that of others, to formulate meaningful research questions. Exceptionally successful in a wide range of research tasks, including evaluation, with a high degree of autonomy. Can communicate findings with real professionalism, adapting writing style easily for given audiences. Presentation of work of an extremely high quality, embedding high quality graphs, tables and other resources effectively when required. Exceptional ability to apply knowledge to unfamiliar contexts, synthesise ideas and information in innovative ways and generate transformative solutions. | Is exceptionally professional and flexible in autonomously defining and solving a range of complex problems. Outstanding ability to evaluate own strengths and weakness, showing outstanding attributes for graduate-level employment. Exceptional evidence of adaptation of making connections between known and unknown areas. Exceptional, evaluation and capability supporting effective communication in a range of complex and specialised contexts. |
Get Homework Help Now
Category: Uncategorized