COURSEWORK ASSIGNMENT 1

SPRING 2019

MSc ACCOUNTING AND FINANCE

LEVEL SEVEN
ADVANCED FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
7AC505

Individual abstract and paper

Electronic submission date: FRIDAY 10th MAY 2019

Total weighting for

coursework: 50%

This assessment will assess the following learning outcomes:

1. Analyse the impact of macroeconomics and emerging issues in the financial

management of multinationals.

2. Apply and evaluate alternative advanced treasury and risk management

techniques.

Sensitivity: Internal
 Assignment guidance and requirements:

 This is an individual piece of work.

 You will write a paper that critically evaluates the application (and misapplication) of
investment appraisal techniques, alongside decision making and risk management,
used by organisations in the process of capital budgeting both for domestic and
international investments.

Your assignment submission will comprise of the following:

 An abstract and full paper (2,500 words including the abstract) on the above
topic area.

The abstract will:

 Be no more than 500 words, it will be a short but concise summary of your
full paper.
 The abstract will generally have the following features:
1. An informative but short title;
2. Clear statement of the research question or issue being addressed;
3. The key points and/or arguments of the proposed paper, with generalised
supporting information;
4. Logical outline of the connections between material included; and
5. Concluding point(s).

 Submit your abstract and full paper electronically (Via Turnitin) by 10th MAY
2019.

Submission of assignment
The assignment will need to be submitted electronically as part of the University of Derby’s
policy to reduce unnecessary travel and queuing time for students. Please refer to the eSub
website www.derby.ac.uk/esub as this is the main site where you will find out how to submit
electronically and support you through the eSubmission process; the website provides
support documents and videos to talk you through the whole process. The date on which you
can access feedback on your submission via Blackboard will be stated at the electronic
submission point.

You will submit your work via Turnitin plagiarism software on Blackboard under the
assessment section of course resources for this module. I will take your last submission on
the final deadline date. You will also find a printable guide In the Assessments area of your
module called Electronic Submission Guide for Students; this will talk you through the
submission process and guide you to further resources to help you submit your work.

Sensitivity: Internal
 COURSEWORK ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

% Mark Descriptors

Category
Mark These are typical characteristics of the quality of work associated
with each grade. The descriptors are illustrative only and for
guidance only. They are not comprehensive and will need
contextualisation within individual courses to reflect the
academic discipline concerned.

90-100% Excellent

Distinction
Meets all criteria in 80-89% range below, plus demonstrates exceptional ability and
insight, indicating the highest level of technical competence; work is virtually flawless
and has potential to influence the forefront of the subject and may be of
publishable/exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at the highest
possible standard.
Exceptional achievement distinguishable even amongst the best quality work and
deserving of the highest possible marks within the Distinction grade.

80-89% Excellent
High to very high standard work with most of the following features: authoritative

Distinction
subject knowledge; a high level of critical analysis and evaluation; incisive original
thinking; commendable originality; exceptionally well researched, with a very high level
of technical competence; high quality presentation; impressive clarity of ideas;
excellent coherence and logic. Work is close to the forefront of the subject and may be
close to publishable or exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at
a very high level. Referencing is consistently used, complete and accurate. Only trivial
or very minor errors.
Very high-quality work worthy of a high Distinction grade mark.

Excellent
70-79% Authoritative, current subject knowledge; excellent critical analysis and evaluation –
including dealing with ambiguity in the data; significant originality; well researched with
Distinction

a high level of technical competence – work is accurate and extensively supported by

appropriate evidence; excellent presentation; commendable clarity of ideas; thoughtful
and effective presentation; very strong sense of coherence and logic; relevant generic
skills are demonstrated at a high level; referencing is excellent– consistently used,
complete and accurate; a small number of misunderstandings/minor errors only.

High quality work deserving of a Distinction grade.

Very good
60-69% Work is well-developed and coherent; demonstrates sound, current subject
knowledge; a very good level of critical analysis and evaluation; some evidence of
original thinking or originality; well researched; no significant errors in the application of
Merit

concepts or appropriate techniques; a very good standard of presentation; ideas

generally clear and coherent; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very good
level; referencing is very good; minor errors and misunderstandings only, possibly with
some deficiencies in presentation.

Well above pass standard and worthy of a Merit grade.

Sensitivity: Internal
 50-59% Good/Satisfactory
Has achieved intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features.
Satisfactory subject knowledge; a fair level of critical analysis and evaluation; the work
is generally sound but tends towards the factual or derivative, and there may be
minimal evidence of original thinking or originality; adequately researched; a sound

Pass
standard of presentation; ideas fairly clear and coherent; some significant errors and
misunderstandings, possibly shown by conceptual gaps or limited use of appropriate
techniques; relevant generic skills are generally at a satisfactory level; referencing is
generally accurate; some weakness in style or presentation.

Satisfactory overall – a clear pass

40-49% Unsatisfactory
Has narrowly failed to achieve intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the
following features. Satisfactory subject knowledge to some extent; some sound
aspects but some of the following weaknesses are evident: factual errors;

Marginal Fail
conceptual gaps; inadequate critical analysis and evaluation; little evidence of
originality; not well researched – limited use of appropriate techniques; presentation
does not meet the standard required; ideas unclear and/or incoherent; some
significant errors and misunderstandings; relevant generic skills unsatisfactory to
some extent; referencing may be inadequate.

Work is unsatisfactory but shows potential for achieving learning outcomes if

feedback is addressed. - Marginal fail

5-39% Very poor

Well below the pass standard, with many serious errors. Standard of presentation totally
unacceptable, incoherent and may be severely under- length. No evidence of
evaluation or application. A very clear fail, well short of the pass standard.

1-4% Nothing of Merit

Nothing of value is contained in the submitted work. The work presents information that
is irrelevant and unconnected to the task; no evident awareness of appropriate

Fail
principles, theories, evidence or techniques

NS Non-submission
No work has been submitted.

Z Academic offence notation

Applies to proven instances of academic offence.

Sensitivity: Internal