Assignment Brief Academic Year 2020-21
Module code and title: Project Module leader: Tajbir Ahmed
No. and type:
1. Presentation (500 words)
2. Board Report (1000 words)
Assessment weighting:
100% Course Work
Assignment submission Date:
Monday 9th of May at 2pm
Feedback Time and Date:
3 weeks from the date of final submission
Assignment Task:
This assignment involves the preparation of a presentation (which outlines the project proposal and rationale) followed by a Client Report which outlines the project plan, project scope and risk and evaluating the project success.
This assignment has been designed to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate your achievement of the following module learning outcomes:
LO 1 Present and agree to a project proposal with the client.
LO 2 Use appropriate tools to collect, select and use information from a range of sources
LO 3 Evaluate the data relevant to the proposal.
LO4 Communicate the outcomes and recommendations.
Task Requirement
Astra Plc is a small-sized company specialising in vitamin and mineral-based food supplements. The company is looking to diversify its portfolio by launching a new health and fitness app in the next three months. You have been hired by Astra Plc to assess the suitability of the new App.
Prepare an annotated PowerPoint presentation (8-10 slides maximum) for Astra Plc, which outlines the project proposal and rationale of the new health and fitness app (carry out relevant research e.g., background
information, what does the app do, why should it be built, potential customers, the likelihood of success) (LO1) [500 words]
1. The presentation slides should be attached to the report as an appendix. Include speaker notes at the bottom of each slide to explain the key points on the slide (Max 500 words). However, you are not required to do a live presentation. Keep the slides succinct, and you can use bullet points where necessary. The slides should be embedded in the assignment, followed by the report.
2. Prepare a client report that covers the following: (LO2, LO3 & LO4) [1,000 words]
a. The Project Plan (discuss a plan for your app using a GANTT chat) (150 words)
b. Project Scope (discuss the app design and launch cost, social media integration; in-app purchase; app customisation; testing of the app; launch of the app) (300 words)
c. Project Risk (what potential risks could impact the launch of the app, e.g., cost overruns, delays in app design, design and compatibility issues; competition from other apps) (300 words)
d. Project Success (how will you measure the app’s success?) (250 words)
The report should be written in a formal business report format, consisting of a title page, a table of contents, the main body of the work using appropriate headings covering the above four points, and a reference list.
Referencing and Research Requirements
You must reference all information used in the presentation and the report, using the Harvard Referencing Guide. You are required to include a reference list at the end of the report arranged in alphabetical order irrespective of the sources.
You can access guidance to Harvard referencing here:
How your work will be assessed
Your work will be assessed on the extent to which it demonstrates your achievement of the stated learning
outcomes for this assignment (see above) and against other key criteria, as defined in the University’s institutional grading descriptors. If it is appropriate to the format of your assignment and your subject area, a proportion of your marks will also depend upon your use of academic referencing conventions. This assignment will be marked according to the grading descriptors for Level 3

Assignment Brief
Please see the attached grid for the Level 3 grading descriptors.
Submission Details
This assignment should be submitted electronically via Moodle (module tutors will discuss this process with you during class time).
• The report must be submitted as one document and PowerPoint slides must be attached with the assignment in appendix as a part of the report.
You are reminded of the University’s regulations on academic misconduct, which can be viewed on the University website: In submitting your assignment, you are acknowledging that you have read and understood these regulations –
Submission Date and Time
• This assignment must be submitted before 14:00 UK time on Monday 9th of May 2022
You should submit all work for summative assessments by the above deadline. Work submitted up to three working days after the deadline will be accepted and marked, but the mark will be capped at the pass mark (40%) unless there is a valid reason for the late submission (i.e., having been granted an extension to the deadline or a deferral under the terms of the Extenuating Circumstances Policy). Work submitted more than three working days after the deadline without a valid reason will not be accepted and will be recorded as 0% RN (refer, no work submitted). For more information, please refer to: guides/assessment-the-basics-undergraduate
Feedback and marks for this assignment will be available in three weeks from the deadline.
General Grading Criteria
Level 3
In accordance with the FHEQ, at the end of Level 3 students will be expected to have a sound knowledge of the basic underlying concepts and principles of a subject, and an ability to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study. They should be able to present, evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data to develop lines of argument and make sound judgements in accordance with basic theories and concepts of their subject(s)
of study. They will have learned how to take different approaches to solving problems and wil be able to communicate the results of their study/work accurately and reliably, and with structured and coherent arguments.
Assessment category Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes Marginal fail Fail
1st: 70% – 100% 2:1: 60% – 69% 2:2: 50% – 59% 3rd: 40% – 49%
35% – 39%
20% – 34% 20%
Knowledge and High quality work Work of solid Adequate work Simple factual Weak work Unsatisfactory Highly
understanding of the basic underlying concepts and
principles of
the subject(s) showing detailed
understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the subject(s). quality showing
competent and
consistent understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the subject(s) showing understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the
subject(s), but
lacking depth and breadth. approach showing limited understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the
subject(s). Narrow
or misguided selection of
material, with
elements missing or inaccurate. showing limited, fragmentary understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the
subject(s). Work characterised by inaccuracies, irrelevant material and/or absence of appropriate information. work showing
weak and flawed
understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the
subject(s), for example through
serious inaccuracies, inclusion of a significant amount of irrelevant unsatisfactory
work showing major gaps in
understanding of
the basic
concepts and
principles of the subject(s).
Inclusion of largely irrelevant material,
absence of
appropriate information and
Assessment category Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes Marginal fail Fail
1st: 70% – 100% 2:1: 60% – 69% 2:2: 50% – 59% 3rd: 40% – 49%
20% – 34%
35% – 39%
material and/or absence of
appropriate information.
significant inaccuracies.
Cognitive and
Good presentation,
A limited use of
Largely descriptive
Descriptive work
Work is largely
intellectual skills presentation, interpretation and interpretation and evaluation of presentation, interpretation and concepts or evidence to support emerging work, with limited effort made to use with no effort made to use concepts or irrelevant or
evaluation of concepts or evaluation of judgements or concepts or evidence evidence to develop characterised by
concepts or evidence, facilitating concepts or arguments, although to develop judgements or descriptive text and
evidence, facilitating a highly logical, coherent and balanced a logical and
development of judgements or evidence, facilitating a largely logical and coherent
development of not always logical or coherent and with inaccuracies. judgements or arguments. Information accepted arguments. Views
expressed are often illogical, invalid or irrelevant. Minimal unsubstantiated generalisations. Complete lack of evidence to back up
development of arguments that judgements or uncritically, with or no use of views.
judgements or shows awareness of arguments. An unsubstantiated evidence to back up
arguments. Strong awareness of other stances. other stances.
emerging awareness of other stances.
opinions evident.
Application of Excellent
Sound application of
Consistent and
Relevant theoretical
Very weak
theory to application of theory to practice, accurate application knowledge and understanding of the understanding of theoretical
practice (for
courses with a theory to practice, with the student with the student making appropriate, of theory to practice, with the student understanding applied in practice, application of theory to practice, with the the application of theory to practice, knowledge and understanding, with
professional practice making highly
appropriate, well-developed and articulated links making appropriate links between the but with students not always making student often not making appropriate with only occasional evidence of the no evidence of appropriate
element) developed and between the two. two. student making
Assessment category Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes Marginal fail Fail
1st: 70% – 100% 2:1: 60% – 69% 2:2: 50% – 59% 3rd: 40% – 49%
20% – 34%
35% – 39%
articulated links between the two.
logical links between the two.
links between the two.
appropriate links between the two.
application in practice.
Reading and
Critical engagement
Engagement with a
Engagement with an
Evidence of reading,
Poor engagement
Limited evidence of
No evidence of
referencing with a wide range of wide range of appropriate range of largely confined to with essential texts reading and/or reading or
relevant reading, relevant reading. reading beyond essential texts, but and no evidence of reliance on engagement with
including research- Sound application of essential texts. mainly reliant on wider reading. inappropriate taught elements.
informed literature referencing, with no Referencing may taught elements. Heavily reliant on sources. Limited Absent or
where relevant. Consistently inaccuracies or inconsistencies. show minor
inaccuracies or Referencing may show inaccuracies taught elements. Inconsistent and engagement with taught elements. incoherent referencing.
accurate application of referencing.
and/or inconsistencies. weak use of referencing. Very poor use of referencing.
Presentation, Highly effective
Work is structured in Ordered Work is loosely, and Work is poorly
Work is extremely
style and presentation of presentation of work a largely coherent presentation in at times presented in a disorganised, with
structure * work that is in terms of structure manner and is for which relevant ideas incoherently, disjointed and much of the content
coherently structured and clearly expressed throughout. and clarity of expression. the most part clearly expressed. / concepts are reasonably expressed. structured, with
information and
ideas often poorly expressed. incoherent manner. Information and ideas are very poorly expressed, with weak English and/or inappropriate style. confusingly expressed. Very
poor English and/or very inappropriate style.
* Work that significantly exceeds the specified word limit may be penalised.


(USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)


The Best Custom Essay Writing Service

About Our Service

We are an online academic writing company that connects talented freelance writers with students in need of their services. Unlike other writing companies, our team is made up of native English speakers from countries such as the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, Ireland, and New Zealand.

Qualified Writers

Our Guarantees: