DDD70018 Design Leadership Case Study Report Writing

Project 2

Semester 1 2020

 4000 words or equivalent (including 15 references) Due:

Key elements of task: A case study allows for a real-world problem to be identified, discussed, and evaluated (individually and/or as a group) before a solution is

proposed. This includes the development of multiple hypotheses and approaches so that multiple possible solutions can be explored before one is proposed.

The case study can be based on any of the work previously completed in this unit or on an entirely new topic, area, or theme; it can focus on design leadership or an aspect of design leadership.

Note: literature can be any reference sources i.e. books, articles, other texts, video, papers, case studies, white papers, blogs etc. A mix of sources is recommended.

Assessment criteria

Grades Introductory material Descriptions of the setting and data collection process Record of observations Discussion, logic, and conclusions Structure, language, and conventions
High distinction

80-100%

The introduction provides a well- developed context for the project. The significance of central questions is illustrated by references to course materials. The narrative contains well-developed descriptions of the setting and the data collection process (which is built on concepts from current research, theory, and course materials). The narrative contains observations from multiple sources, includes qualitative and quantitative data, and makes references to models of appropriate practice that are supported by current research and theory. The discussion is thorough and complete. Conclusions are logical; they address the central questions, demonstrate insight and leadership, propose strategies for addressing weaknesses, and reference current research and theory extensively as well as course work. The response suggests new ideas or innovation with clear analysis and recommendations. All components reflect high academic and professional standards. Submission is error free.
Distinction

70-79%

The introduction provides a clear and considered context for the project. The purpose is identified through reference to one or more central questions. The narrative contains clear descriptions of the case study setting and the data collection process (with good reference to concepts from current research, theory, and course materials). The narrative contains observations from multiple sources or includes qualitative and quantitative data with some references to models of appropriate practice that are supported by current research and theory. The discussion seems complete. Conclusions are logical; they address the central questions, suggest possible strategies for addressing weaknesses, and are tied to the course work as well as current research and theory. The response may introduce new ideas or innovation with clear analysis and recommendations. Most components reflect expected academic and professional standards. Submission had a few minor errors.
Credit

60-69%

The introduction is adequate but clear. Identification of the purpose and central questions is limited. The narrative contains an adequate description of the setting, and an incomplete description of the data collection process (with some reference to concepts from current research, theory, and course materials). The narrative contains observations from at least two sources with limited references to models of appropriate practice that are supported by current research and theory. The discussion seems complete. Conclusions are logical and address the central questions. Some components reflect expected academic and professional standards for language and argument. Submission had many minor errors or a few significant errors.
Pass

50-59%

The introduction is unclear. Identification of the purpose and central questions is unclear or vague. The narrative contains an incomplete or vague description of the setting, and no description of the data collection process. The narrative contains observations from only one perspective, or of a single type of data; one reference or model of appropriate practice is noted. The discussion is adequate, but conclusions – if present – do not match the central questions. Work needed on the clarity of language and expression.

Inconsistent application of citation style.

Submission had many minor or significant errors.

No pass There is no Inadequate narrative or The narrative contains The discussion is incomplete or illogical, Poor structure showing
introduction. The vague description of the observations from only one and conclusions are missing or unrelated lack of clarity. Poor
purpose is not setting. No description of perspective, or of a single to the central questions. language. Poor
identified. the data collection type of data application of citation
process. style. Submission had
many errors.