BM4103 Research Methods Assignment 1 Brief  You are required to read this Assessment Brief in full and the Module Information Pack. This assessment is 3000 words and is worth [60%] of the overall module mark

BM4103 Research Methods Assignment 1 Brief 

You are required to read this Assessment Brief in full and the Module Information Pack.

This assessment is 3000 words and is worth [60%] of the overall module mark and should include your independent study to complete.

This assessment is designed to address the following module’s outcomes:

• Critically assess the different philosophical approaches to research design
• Critically evaluate the methodologies used in business and management research

BM4103 Assessment Task:

The assessment consists of two parts: 

2500 words of group report based on the critical review of two peer-reviewed articles listed below (80% of the grade – group grade – all individuals in your group will receive the same mark)

500 words individual reflection (20% of the grade – individual mark)

For this group (groups of 5) assignment, you will critically compare two academic articles related to research in the field of business, management and sustainability. The goal is to assess and evaluate the philosophical approaches to research design and methodologies used in the studies. This will allow you to deepen your understanding of different research paradigms and their application in the area of business, management and sustainability. Finally, the individual reflection will allow you to discuss how the assessment and sessions have impacted your learning about the dissertation process. 

How, When, and Where to Submit:

Submit your essay via the link in Blackboard by 1:59 pm on 27th June 2025.

You should aim to submit your assessment in advance of the deadline.

Note: If you have any valid mitigating circumstances that mean you cannot meet an assessment submission deadline and you wish to request an extension, you will need to apply online, via MyUCLan, with your evidence before the deadline. Further information on Mitigating Circumstances via this link.

We wish you all success in completing your assessment. Read this guidance carefully, and any questions, please discuss with your Module Tutor and/or Module Leader. 

Additional Support available: 

All links are available through the online Student Hub

• Referencing guide: Cite Them Right
• Academic support for this assessment will be provided by your tutor during the lectures. You can also contact her for
• Our Library resources link can be found in the library area of the Student Hub or via your subject librarian at SubjectLibrarians@uclan.ac.uk.
• Support with your academic skills development (academic writing, critical thinking and referencing) is available through WISER on the Study Skills section of the Student Hub.
• For help with Turnitin, see Blackboard and Turnitin Support on the Student Hub
• If you have a disability, specific learning difficulty, long-term health or mental health condition, and have not yet advised us, or would like to review your support, Inclusive Support can assist with reasonable adjustments and support. To find out more, you can visit the Inclusive Support page of the Student Hub.
• For mental health and wellbeing support, please complete our online referral form or email wellbeing@uclan.ac.uk. You can also call 01772 893020, attend a drop-in, or visit our UCLan Wellbeing Service  Student Hub pages for more information.
• For any other support query.
• For consideration of Academic Integrity, please refer to the detailed guidelines in our policy document. All assessed work should be genuinely your work, and all resources fully cited.  
• The use of AI is forbidden.

Do You Need BM4103 Assignment of This Question

 Order Non-Plagiarised Assignment

Preparing for your assignment

Task and Assessment Criteria Breakdown:

Selection of Groups:

You will divide yourselves into groups of 5. Individuals without a group will be allocated to a group by the module tutor. The groups should choose a leader, who will submit part ‘a of the assessment. 

Introduction (5% of your mark; 200 words)

A brief overview of the articles selected. Summary of the content to signpost the reader. 

Comparison of Philosophical Approaches (30% of your mark; 1000 words)

• Philosophical Foundations: Discuss the research philosophies underlying the studies (e.g., positivism, interpretivism, etc.). How do these philosophies influence the way research objectives/questions are framed, the methods chosen, and the interpretations made?
• Theoretical Frameworks: Identify and compare the theoretical frameworks employed in the articles. How do the chosen frameworks align with the philosophical assumptions of the researchers?

Evaluation of Methodologies (30% of your mark; 1000 words)

• Research Design and Methodology: Provide a detailed analysis of the methodologies used in each article (e.g., case study, survey, ethnography, experiment). Discuss the strengths and limitations of these methodologies about the research questions posed in the articles.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Critically evaluate the data collection techniques (e.g., interviews, surveys, secondary data) and analysis methods (e.g., statistical analysis, thematic analysis).
• Ethical Considerations and/or limitations: Discuss any ethical considerations and/or limitations raised in the articles and evaluate how the researchers addressed these issues.

Synthesis and Conclusion (5% of your mark; 300 words)

• Synthesis: Summarise your comparison and evaluation, highlighting key differences and similarities in the philosophical and methodological approaches.
• Summarise the content of the report (not the articles)

Individual Reflection  (20% of your mark; 500 words)

• This is an individual part of the assessment, in which you’re expected to utilise a reflection theory or framework of your choice. Please make sure you reference it. Reflect on the process of reading the articles and writing this assignment. You should look back at past experiences (reading and writing) to perform better in the future. Please note, the reflection is about your experience, not a summary of articles.

Structure, academic writing and referencing (10% of your grade)

Assessment Criteria

• Evidence of a well-structured analysis related to the question
• Evidence of wider reading, drawing upon appropriate material to support, illustrate and develop the analysis that is being put forward
• Ability to reflect critically upon the highlighted experience/s
• Quality and depth of analysis, evidence and examples presented.

Group Work Expectations

• You are expected to work collaboratively with your group members. This includes dividing the tasks and ensuring that each member contributes to the research, writing, and editing of the report. It is not the responsibility of the group leader, but of all members.

Submission Requirements

• Submission Format: Your group must submit a single document in a Word Document – the report submission is to be made by the group leader.
• Reflection will be submitted separately and individually by each member of the group

There will be multiple support sessions throughout the semester. 

Things to consider:

Your submission must:

• Be a professional and individual piece of work in a report format
• Use headings, subheadings and paragraphs to organise your work
• Present a content page.
• Section ‘a should be written from the 3rd person’s point of view, while section ‘b’ is a reflective report written from the 1st person’s point of view.
• Details such as a relevant report title and page numbering are essential in an academic report
• Use the guided Blackboard lecture and teaching materials.
• Ensure your citations and references are correctly presented (Harvard).
• Check your grammar and spelling to avoid losing cheap marks (You may find Grammarly helpful).
• Your report must be written in UK English, not US English. For example, behaviour (UK) not behaviour (US).
• 3,000 words in total NB: +/- 10%.
• Use academic theory and credible sources that support your work.
• Make sure you understand what is being asked and what issues or themes the question requires you to consider.
• Plan with key points outlined before you begin to write the full answer.
• Simple statements of opinion or prescriptive assertions are not adequate; use academic evidence.

Marking – Level 7 Assessments (E.G., Postgraduate Taught Programmes) BAND

Band	Numerical Equivalent	Indicative Language
Exceptional Distinction	100	Exceptional, creative, insightful, illuminating, inspiring, exciting, authoritative, challenging
Very High Distinction	94
High Distinction	87	Persuasive, sophisticated, original, reflective, ambitious, meticulous, critical, convincing, unexpected.
Mid Distinction	80
Low Distinction	74
High Merit	68	Fluent, thorough, analytical, precise, rigorous, confident, consistent, thoughtful
Mid Merit	65
Low Merit	62
High Pass	58	Satisfactory, clear, accurate, careful, congruent, coherent   Sufficient, adequate, descriptive, limited
Mid Pass	55
Low Pass	52
Marginal Fail	45*	Incomplete, inadequate, inconsistent,     derivative, contradictory, superficial, irrelevant
Mid + Fail	42	Erroneous/wrong, missing, extremely limited, inappropriate, insufficient, incoherent, unstructured
Mid Fail	40
Fail	35	Absent/none Lacking, formless, detrimental