BA (Hons) Global Business with Foundation Year
(Level 3)
PROJECT – FY002
2
Contents
1.Introduction
1.1. Module Details
1.2. Aims of the Module
1.3. Module Learning Outcomes
2. Scheme of work
2.1. Module Delivery and Assessment Planning
2.2. Mode of Delivery
2.3. Module Reading
2.4. Lecture and Assignment Schedule
3. Module Assignment
3
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Module Details
Module Name: Project
Credit Value: 20
Total Study Hours: 200
1.2 Aims of the Module
This Module aims to develop students’ understanding of the key concepts associated with Project
Management. This Module will allow you to understand how to deliver specific objectives and
integrate the necessary resources to deliver a project on time and within budget.
1.3 Module Learning Outcomes
Learning Outcome 1: Present and agree to a project proposal with the client
Learning Outcome 2: Use appropriate tools to collect, select and use information from
a range of sources;
Learning Outcome 3: Evaluate the data relevant to the proposal;
Learning outcome 4: Communicate the outcomes and recommendations
2 Module Delivery and Assessment Planning
2.1 Mode of Delivery
4
At present the Module is being delivered in a block, meaning that students will only study for one
Module at a time. The Module will run for 5 weeks in total:
• Week 1-4 will be lectures and tutorials
• Week 5 is Assessment Week where the summative assignment will be submitted
during this week.
2.2 Module Reading

5
2.3 Lecture and Assignment Schedule
Please note: Laptops will be needed in each session for the duration of the Module.

6

7

8

9

10

3.Module Assignment
11
12
13
14
15
Level 3
Introductory
knowledge
Cognitive and
intellectual skills
Application
of theory to
practice
(20%)
Reading and
referencing
Presentation,
style and
structure
Pass mark
50% – 59%
Adequate
understanding of the
basic underlying
concepts and
principles of the
Business
environment is
shown, but lacking
depth and breadth.
Presentation,
interpretation and
evaluation of
concepts are
adequate. Largely
logical and coherent
development of
judgements is
facilitated. There is an
emerging awareness
of other stances.
Application of
theory to
practice is
consistent and
accurate,
appropriate
links between
the two is
made.
Engagement with
an appropriate
range of reading
beyond essential
texts. Referencing
may show minor
inaccuracies or
inconsistencies.
Work is structured
in a largely
coherent manner
and is for the most
part clearly
expressed.
40% – 49%
Work shows limited
understanding of the
basic underlying
concepts of business
Environment.
Narrow or misguided
selection of material,
with elements
missing or
inaccurate.
A limited use of
concepts or evidence
to support emerging
judgements or
arguments, although
not always logical or
coherent and with
inaccuracies
Relevant
theoretical
knowledge
and
understanding
applied in
practice, but
not always
making logical
links between
the two is
made.
Evidence of
reading, largely
confined to
essential texts,
but mainly reliant
on taught
elements.
Referencing show
inaccuracies and
inconsistencies.
Ordered
presentation in
which relevant
ideas and
concepts are
reasonably
expressed.
Marginal fail
35% – 39%
Weak work
showing limited,
fragmentary
understanding of
the basic
underlying
concepts and
principles of the
Business
Environment.
Work
characterised by
Largely descriptive
work, with limited
effort made to use
concepts or
evidence to develop
judgements or
arguments.
Information
accepted
uncritically, with
unsubstantiated
opinions evident
Limited
understanding
of the
application of
theory to
practice, often
appropriate
links between
the two are not
made
Poor engagement
with essential
texts and no
evidence of wider
reading. Heavily
reliant on taught
elements.
Inconsistent and
weak use of
referencing.
Work is loosely,
and at times
incoherently,
structured, with
information and
ideas often
poorly
expressed.
16
Marginal fail
35% – 39%
Weak work
showing limited,
fragmentary
understanding of
the basic
underlying
concepts and
principles of the
Business
Environment.
Work
characterised by
inaccuracies,
irrelevant material
and absence of
appropriate
information.
Largely descriptive
work, with limited
effort made to use
concepts or
evidence to develop
judgements or
arguments.
Information
accepted
uncritically, with
unsubstantiated
opinions evident
Limited
understanding
of the
application of
theory to
practice, often
appropriate
links between
the two are not
made
Poor engagement
with essential
texts and no
evidence of wider
reading. Heavily
reliant on taught
elements.
Inconsistent and
weak use of
referencing.
Work is loosely,
and at times
incoherently,
structured, with
information and
ideas often
poorly
expressed.
Fail
20% – 34%
Unsatisfactory work
showing weak and
flawed
understanding of the
basic underlying
concepts and
principles of the
subject(s), for
example through
serious inaccuracies,
inclusion of a
significant amount of
irrelevant material
and/or absence of
appropriate
information
Descriptive work with
no effort made to use
concepts or evidence
to develop
judgements or
arguments. Views
expressed are often
illogical, invalid or
irrelevant. Minimal or
no use of evidence to
back up views.
Weak
application of
theory to
practice, with
only
occasional
evidence of
appropriate
links between
the two.
Limited evidence
of reading and
reliance on
inappropriate
sources. Limited
engagement with
taught elements.
Very poor use of
referencing
Work is poorly
presented in a
disjointed and
incoherent
manner.
Information and
ideas are very
poorly expressed,
with weak English
and/or
inappropriate style
< 20%
Highly
unsatisfactory
work showing
major gaps in
understanding of
the basic
underlying
concepts and
principles of the
Business
Environment.
Inclusion of largely
Work is largely
irrelevant and
inaccurate,
characterised by
descriptive text and
unsubstantiated
generalisations.
Complete lack of
evidence to back up
views.
Very weak
theoretical
knowledge
and
understanding,
with no
evidence of
appropriate
application in
practice.
No evidence of
reading or
engagement with
taught elements.
Absent or
incoherent
referencing.
Work is extremely
disorganised, with
much of the
content
confusingly
expressed. Very
poor English
and/or very
inappropriate style.
17