Assessment Details
|
Assessment title |
Abr. |
Weighting |
|
Individual written assessment. |
WRIT1 |
70% |
|
Pass marks are 40% for undergraduate work and 50% for postgraduate work unless stated otherwise. |
||
Task/Assessment brief:
To critically evaluate the characteristics, challenges, and sustainability aspects of the Tea supply chain, with a focus on ethical issues in the upstream process.
Harvard style referencing to be used.
Notes on Academic Integrity:
- All work must be your own. Plagiarism will result in “Academic unfair practice” proceedings.
- Do Refer to the section on Artificial Intelligence Models – Guidance for this assessment.
Word count (or equivalent): 2,800 words equivalent
This a reflection of the effort required for the assessment. Word counts will normally include any text, tables,
calculations, figures, subtitles and citations. Reference lists and contents of appendices are excluded from the word count. Contents of appendices are not usually considered when determining your final assessment grade.
Academic or technical terms explained:
- Comprehensive design – you should draw a figure for the global supply chain for your product showing upstream and downstream partners, operations and processes including various flows.
- Critically evaluate – Consider both positive and negative aspects of the subject and discuss what would the impact be if programme had not existed.
- Critically discuss – you must put forward a balanced point of view, considering both sides of the argument, using relevant and up to date academic journal articles.
Artificial Intelligence Models – Guidance for this assessment:
Artificial Intelligence (AI) models can be a powerful tool to support your learning. The University has provided some resources to support you in its appropriate usage:
- Library Services AI Hub
- Student Guide to AI and Assessment
- Code of Conduct for Students on the use of AI
- Cite Them Right resource on citing materials relating to AI (if permitted)
As per the academic regulations (Academic Handbook Ah1_08), in all cases you must submit work that is your own, acknowledging any part of it that has been informed by another source – including that which is AI generated. Upon submission of work, you will be asked to confirm the following statement:
I confirm that this assignment is my own work, except where I have acknowledged the use of works from other sources, including the use of any artificial intelligence (AI) tools, in accordance with what is allowable as described in the assessment brief.
Please note the following:
- AI should not be used as a substitute for your own knowledge, and you should never include any material that you do not understand and could not explain if asked.
- Not being able to explain your work when asked is likely to be a key factor when considering cases of academic misconduct related to AI.
The following information provides specific guidance for this assessment about what level of AI use is appropriate for this assessment. Remember that in all cases you must submit work that is your own, acknowledging any part of it that has been provided by another source.
|
NO USE OF GENERATIVE AI EXPECTED |
|
· Your assignment should be produced using information sourced by you from your learning materials and academic sources and cited appropriately. · AI tools for checking spelling, grammar and referencing may be used. |
|
AI ACKNOWLEDGED |
|
· You can use AI tools to learn about your topic, as part of your study, or in preparing initial guidance on assignments (e.g. headline structure, suggestions for inclusion of topics). · Any materials that you have sourced from AI should be rewritten or reconfigured and integrated into your own work and referenced appropriately. It is recommended that this is confirmed by a relevant academic source. · Any support gained from AI should be acknowledged in a statement at the end of the assignment, making clear what the support was, and how you used it and developed it for your own work. Example statements are available in the Student Code of Conduct. |
|
AI EMBEDDED |
|
· Use of AI is an integral and expected part of the assessment. · The explicit inclusion of AI within the assessment means that instructions on the expected use will be part of the assessment brief. · Your assessment brief will describe how you should acknowledge the way in which you used AI tools. |
Submission Details
|
Submission Deadline: |
30th April 2026 |
Estimated Feedback Return Date |
This will normally be 20 working days after initial submission. |
|
Submission Time: |
By 4.00pm on the deadline day. |
|
|
|
Moodle/Turnitin: |
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as a non-attempt unless you have had an extension request agreed or have approved mitigating circumstances. See the School Moodle pages for more information on extensions and mitigating circumstances. |
||
|
File Format: |
The assessment must be submitted as a pdf document (save the document as a pdf in your software) and submit through the Turnitin submission point in Moodle. Your assessment should be titled with your: student ID number, module code and assessment ID, e.g. st12345678 BHL5007 WRIT1 |
||
|
Late Submission Window Eligibility |
Where submissions are eligible for the late-submission window this will be communicated in the relevant assessment submission point within Moodle. |
||
|
Feedback |
Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle. Feedback will be provided with comments on your strengths and the areas which you can improve. View the guidance on how to access your feedback. All marks are provisional and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at the programme Examination Board. |
||
Assessment Criteria
Learning outcomes assessed
- Explain the concept of ethical supply chain management through developing links between strategic operations management, logistics and various supply chain strategies.
- Critically evaluate the concepts, theories and disciplines, which underpin Supply Chain management with ethical business practices.
- Engage in a systematic identification, analysis and evaluation of the main variables in a wide range of relevant literature related to ethical supply chain.
Other skills/attributes developed
This includes elements of the Cardiff Met EDGE (Ethical, Digital, Global and Entrepreneurial skills) and other attributes developed in students through the completion of the module and assessment. These will also be highlighted in the module guidance, which should be read by all students completing the module. Assessments are not just a way of auditing student knowledge. They are a process which provides additional learning and development through the preparation for and completion of the assessment.
- Ethical- This module will provide a good discussion and analysis of sustainable supply chains covering wider social, ethical and environmental issues within the global supply chains.
- Digital- this module will discuss digital transformation of global supply chain operations including use of modern technologies.
- Global- this module is developed in the context of global operations and processes. The exam will enable students to critically apply their global supply chain related knowledge while discussing a global supply chain case.
- Entrepreneurial- This module develops skills in the areas of use of technology, networking, teamwork, problem solving and disruptions management; these skills will help students develop their entrepreneurial skills.
Marking/Assessment Criteria
Marking Scheme:
|
Marking Scheme |
|
|
<39 |
Unsatisfactory Little or no evidence of understanding of the topic. Little evidence of synthesis or reflection. Information largely irrelevant and not contextualised to the given scenario. Structure/ calculations/ graphs / style / grammar wrong and or poor. |
|
40-49 |
Bare Pass Some relevant material provided, and a partially successful attempt is made to contextualise the information. Little attempt to relate this to the assignment brief and shows limited understanding of the subject material. Little or no reference to literature. Expression/calculations/graphs/style/grammar/ balance weak. |
|
50-59 |
Pass Shows a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the essentials of the subject to create a clear, well-structured account. Lacks breadth and/or depth. Demonstrates an ability to solve limited, defined, problems. Sources of information other than lecture notes and set texts have been used. Calculations correct |
|
60-69 |
Good Pass Shows a good knowledge and understanding of the subject with no major gaps or omissions. Displays ability to analyse, interpret and organise information to produce coherent accounts or solve problems. Evidence of wider reading beyond lecture notes and standard texts is provided. |
|
70> |
Excellent / Outstanding Work displaying a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subject together with the ability to evaluate critically selected aspects of current knowledge and to suggest original solutions to problems which can be complex. Evidence of wider reading which includes research papers and reviews is shown. |
Marking/Assessment Criteria
|
Level 6 |
80%-100% (1st Class +) |
70%-79% (1st) |
60%-69% (2:1) |
50%-59% (2:2) |
40%-49% (3rd) |
30-39% (Narrow Fail) |
1-29% (Clear Fail) |
|
Overall summary |
Excellent (80-89%) or outstanding and exceptional (90-100%) Beyond level 6 Worthy of publication |
Very good |
Good |
Satisfactory |
Threshold |
Not met some learning outcomes/assessment criteria |
Not met many learning outcomes/assessment criteria 0% – Absent/work not submitted, penalty in some misconduct cases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowledge & Understanding |
Exceptional knowledge and systematic understanding. |
Subject knowledge and understanding full, detailed and systematic Can extend, transform and apply such knowledge Awareness of limitations of knowledge Confident discussion of complex topics Independent thinking Original insights Self-management of learning |
Subject knowledge and understanding detailed and thorough Can extend, transform and apply such knowledge The discussion of complex concepts is often tackled successfully Independent thinking and self-management of learning |
Subject knowledge and understanding sound Ability to apply such knowledge Tendency to reproduce information from elsewhere Some independent thinking A few errors and/or misconceptions not in important areas Self-management of learning. |
Basic subject knowledge and understanding Frequently reproduces information received from elsewhere Errors and misconceptions outweighed by the degree of knowledge and understanding overall Self-management of learning |
Limited subject knowledge and understanding Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions in important areas Irrelevant content |
Little subject knowledge and understanding Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions outweigh the degree of knowledge and understanding Serious/numerous errors/misunderstandin gs (1-19%) Substantially irrelevant Irrelevant (1-19%) Short (1-19%) |
|
Presentation and communication |
Professional standards |
Coherent and succinct Presentation standard high Logically organised Arguments are well-defined and clearly articulated |
Clear and succinct Well presented Appropriately organised Well-articulated |
Satisfactory communication Appropriately organised Some faults, but clear expression overall |
Adequate communication Reporting factual information rather than communicating complex ideas Generally appropriately structured Faults but clear expression overall |
Simple concepts and/or factual information communicated Unclear Confused and clumsily expressed |
Little ability to communicate Unclear, clumsy and inappropriate |
|
Analysis & critical enquiry |
Independent inquiry and appropriate application of techniques/methods |
Detailed analysis and critical enquiry Very good use of techniques Highly successful in presenting, synthesising and commenting on research outcomes Insight on the relationship between theory and practice and |
Some detailed analysis and critical enquiry Considerable success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes Some linkage between theory and practice and awareness of uncertainty, assumptions and the |
Some analysis and enquiry Some success in presenting and commenting on research process and outcomes Awareness of uncertainty, assumptions and the limits of their |
Limited analysis and enquiry Intermittent success in presenting and commenting on outcomes Awareness of uncertainty, assumptions and the limits of their knowledge |
Attempted enquiry/analysis and outcomes may be naïve, simplistic and/or unconvincing |
Little evidence of being able to undertake enquiry/ analysis Outcomes may be inappropriate, or absent |
|
Level 6 |
80%-100% (1st Class +) |
70%-79% (1st) |
60%-69% (2:1) |
50%-59% (2:2) |
40%-49% (3rd) |
30-39% (Narrow Fail) |
1-29% (Clear Fail) |
|
|
|
awareness of uncertainty, assumptions and the limits of their knowledge on findings |
limits of their knowledge |
knowledge |
|
|
|
|
Research / scholarship |
Substantial range of reference citations, beyond expectations |
Detailed, thorough knowledge and systematic understanding of current research/advanced scholarship The use of scholarly reviews/primary sources is confident Referencing accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Thorough knowledge and understanding of current research/scholarship Referencing almost always accurate and reading/investigation beyond sources provided Ability to determine, refine, adapt and use research knowledge and skills |
Sound knowledge and understanding of current research/scholarship Individual reading and investigation Occasional errors in referencing Can apply research knowledge and skills with tutor support |
Some knowledge and understanding of current research/scholarship Over-reliance on programme materials Errors in referencing Application of research knowledge/skills is less secure |
Limited or sporadic knowledge of research/scholarship Over-reliance on programme materials, little reading Frequent errors in the referencing Application of research knowledge/skills is largely unsuccessful. |
Little knowledge and understanding research/scholarship. Failure to apply this knowledge Reading and investigation negligible Frequent errors in the referencing Failure to apply research knowledge/skills |
|
Structured argument and critical evaluation |
May challenge the boundaries of knowledge Innovative and/or creative thinking New insights informed through critical evaluation |
Critical evaluation and informed judgements Recognition of the complexities of academic debate Arguments are well developed, sustained and substantiated Appropriate and sometimes innovative solutions are offered to problems Strong evidence of effective reflection on student’s practice and consideration for future development |
Critical evaluation and reflection Arguments are clearly considered and substantiated Appropriate judgements and solutions offered to problems Ability to reflect on student’s practice and plan |