Dissertation for Aviation and Airport Management | My Assignment Tutor

Submission DeadlineMarks and FeedbackBefore 10am on: 20th May 202120 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7)15 working days after deadline (L6)10 working days after deadline (block delivery)14th June 2021 Unit title & codeDissertation for Aviation and Airport Management (MAR025-3)Assignment number and titleAssessment 2Assignment typeDissertationWeighting of assignment80%Size or length of assessment10,000 words ± 10%Unit learning outcomes1. Critically address a specific issue and make a contribution to an existing debate in your area of study through the synthesis of knowledge. 2. Manage and present a dissertation which demonstrates a grasp of the vocabulary of the subject area and deploys a range of skills of written expression appropriate to the topic. What am I required to do in this assignment?Your Research Project should demonstrate that you can competently: Design and conduct an original, small-scale research investigation within a clearly defined topic of your choice Identify key concepts Clarify the problem and focus on a specific issue Review and analyse existing literature on the topic Formulate and test a hypothesis, or frame a research question Make use of appropriate research tools to collect and analyse data Evaluate and collate the information obtained Discuss your findings in detail and draw appropriate conclusions Communicate your findings in an appropriate written format Suggest ideas for further research on the particular issueIt is possible to structure a project in different ways. The most common structure is as follows: Title Page Abstract Acknowledgements Table of Contents List of Tables and Figures’ Introduction Literature Review Research Methodology Result Discussion Conclusions and Recommendations References and Bibliography AppendicesTitle Page (example):A study of the Motivation of Solo Rock Climbersby _____________________Project submitted in partial fulfilment of the Degree of BA (Honours) in Travel and TourismUniversity of Bedfordshire [Date]Abstract This is a summary of about 250 words (Max. one side of double-spaced A4), which describes the topic under examination and outlines the research question/hypothesis, objectives and methods of the study. It should also give a brief resume of the main conclusions and recommendations.Acknowledgements Under this heading the student has the opportunity to thank various people who have helped in the development of the project. It might include specific individuals who have given information, offered insightful clues, or generally have been especially supportive. Gratitude may be expressed to groups of people, like those formed the sample group, or fellow students. It is best to avoid tendencies towards the extremes of either flippancy or sycophancy!Table of Contents The content page gives the reader the first view of how the project is structured and how the author has attempted to develop the topic. It should list sequentially the chapters and the major sub-divisions of chapters, each identified by a heading and located by a page number.List of Tables and Figures Throughout the project you may want to present material in tabulated (tables) or diagrammatic (figures) form. Some such presentations will bear only indirectly or partially on your arguments, and in such cases you will need to decide about their proper location. More specifically, such additional or less relevant information may be better placed in an appendix (see below). Where you decide to locate tables or figures in the main body of the report, it is conventional to provide a list of tables and figures so that readers can easily find the information. Tables and Figures should each be listed on a separate page as shown below:Introduction The introduction should describe the subject under investigation, the purpose of the research and why you are doing the research. In the introduction you should justify your choice of focus and give some academic and/or industrial justification; we’re not looking, however, for a list of your personal motives, e.g. ‘I like playing snooker, thus I wanted to do a project on snooker’ etc. You should include a summary of how you are going to treat the chosen topic and importantly, set out and explain (if terminology requires clarification) your research question or hypothesis, your subsidiary questions or objectives. Your research question or hypothesis is arguably the key to your project and therefore, shouldn’t be hidden away or inadequate attention paid to ensuring reader understanding – this has been a weakness of several projects in the past. Additionally, is it clear that your subsidiary questions or objectives are related to your main research question or hypothesis, and thus, that you have a genuine focus. Finally, it is useful to show your intentions by briefly running through your intended chapters.Literature Review After an introductory chapter, most projects will include chapters where you draw upon and consider theories, arguments and findings from the literature and which obviously relate in some way to your question or hypothesis. You should have carried out and applied relevant literature searches – this would have included trying to collect the most authoritative sources, the most up to date references. Essentially you are “gathering it [the literature] together in a critical review which demonstrates some awareness of the current state of knowledge on the subject, its limitations…” (Gill and Johnson, 1997, p20-21). It should not just be a list of all of the literature you have discovered, rather it should be a critical appraisal of existing work, and you should be explicit as to how your study is related to, or has emerged from this literature. As Veal (2006, p85) maintains – “a review of the literature should draw conclusions and implications for the proposed research programme”. It might, therefore, be a good idea in your writing – perhaps at the end of your literature chapters –to come to some conclusion over ‘what other have said’ and how this has impacted upon your project, before moving on to your own contribution. In general, a literature review will begin with a broad focus on the overall theoretical perspective, and then narrow to a more detailed focus on your specific research. Thus, if you are researching direct marketing strategies of a particular health club, you may wish to start with a broad examination of the concept of direct marketing, and then focus in more specific detail upon direct marketing of health clubs. It is almost certain, therefore, that you will need to examine literature from outside the sport and leisure field, for example texts and journals related to marketing. You may also need to provide some background information to your research if necessary. For example, if carrying out a case study of a particular sports centre, you may need to include relevant material such as the location and historical development of the facility for example. A number of research objectives should emerge from your literature review. It is a good idea of clearly state these, and to show how they have developed. A common weakness in literature reviews is to list or summarise existing literature, then conclude with a number of research objectives that are unrelated to the literature. You should ensure that there is a strong link between your literature review and research objectives. A final point to make here is that the amount you will be able to write will vary – some topics have a wealth of literature sources, others very little – thus, comparing the number of pages in your literature chapters against those of other students won’t always be useful! Some will have one chapter, however, others may have two, or even three chapters reviewing the literature.Research Methodology Although the methodology may be one of the shorter sections, it is crucial to the entire project. You must address the area of research methods including a justification of the methodology chosen and an explanation of how the information was gathered. In the past, some students have failed to adequately report and discuss how data were collected and/or what their sources of information were. You shouldn’t expect the reader to be a mind reader and be able to work out how you collected your information – you need to clearly set out what you did. This also applies to projects where primary data collection isn’t involved, e.g. in the case of a literature based investigation. If someone read your project, could they carry out the same piece of research for themselves from what you have included? You will be expected to show that you have read relevant research texts and that your selection of methodology is appropriate for the project focus. At the same time, whilst you are justifying your choice of methods, we don’t want an overdose of basic information relating to research methods that we could read straight from a research methods text, e.g. if you’re combining quantitative and qualitative methods in your own project, it isn’t necessary to write on the general merits or otherwise of using a combination. You may way to discuss how such a combination was appropriate to your project, however. If appropriate, you might like to consider alternative methods of tackling your project focus, stating your rationale for not having chosen alternatives. Show an awareness of the strengths and limitations of your methodology.Results The results should follow on logically from the methods. Do not simply report every finding here – report those results that are relevant to your study. In terms of the presentation of results, think about how to put your findings over as clearly as possible. You may want to look at some journal articles to see how they have presented their results. The purpose of the data is to develop a series of logical and convincing answers to the research question(s) that emerged from the literature review. You should not present data that does not relate to your research, even if you think it would be “interesting”.Discussion You need to be able to relate the theory/literature you’ve uncovered and considered to your own findings – do your findings find support in the literature? Were they predicted by the literature? How does your research add to the literature? Discussion chapters are useful in drawing everything together. You must relate your discussion to your research question or hypothesis. Those of you setting off with a hypothesis rather than a research question might find that your data don’t support the hypothesis. This is perfectly OK and indeed, can give you lots of scope to discuss reasons for findings not being as you might have expected. It’s also important that discussion be grounded on your own observations, findings and from the literature. By doing so, your arguments are more likely to be well constructed and convincing. Although your arguments should be presented in a tightly structured form – you might use subheadings at regular intervals to achieve this.Conclusions Your discussion of findings/literature should lead to a chapter on conclusions – your conclusions are very important and often receive inadequate attention. Importantly, conclusions should stem from the findings/discussion, be feasible, and lead to consistent, sensible recommendations if applicable. All the matters you wish to discuss and develop in the concluding section should be related to and follow logically from what’s gone before. The conclusion should include a summary of your main arguments, drawing together the various themes and issues so that they can be brought to bear on the defined objectives or subsidiary questions of the study. The original research question or hypothesises should be revisited at this stage, and the dialogue would explain the extent to which this has been addressed within the context of the study. Limitations of your project and what, in hindsight, you might have done differently should be included.Recommendations Depending upon the nature of your project, recommendations often follow a conclusion, but not in all cases. You need to discuss the appropriateness of doing so with your tutor. Recommendations are more likely to be included where your project is of a practical nature, e.g. application to industry or education. In such cases, the recommendations should place your conclusions within a concrete, practical framework. In making recommendations you are constrained, however, by what is feasible and practical to do. Additionally, it can be useful to consider your recommendations in the context of possible human, financial, political, managerial implications etc.References Whatever you do, it is critical that you reference any work that you are citing accurately giving a detailed description of the source from which you obtained the information. You must acknowledge sources and clearly differentiate between ideas, words that are your own and those that originate from others. You must have a list of references which contains all items cited in the text in alphabetical order.Appendices Your appendices should match those listed in your ‘List of Appendices’. You should locate in the appendices all that information which gives an additional, relevant support to the arguments you are constructing. It is important however, that you put all the crucial information you wish to be read in the main text. All appendices referred to in the text should be included in your appendices, thus check you’ve done so. The appendices are not a dumping ground for material that you couldn’t find a place for in the main body. In the text, when referring to additional material in an appendix you should use phrases such as (refer to Appendix D which shows…or see Appendix 3 for further information on…). Appendices should be consistently signified by letter (APPENDIX A, APPENDIX B) or by number (roman or Arabic), and given titles that indicate their contents. Also included in the appendices of the final project submission must be copies of correspondence; details of organisations, people you have contacted. A sample of research instruments, e.g. blank and completed questionnaires/interview schedules should also be included in an appendix.What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF)Produce a dissertation which demonstrates evidence of working independently to reason, think and write in a coherent wayHow do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?The onus is on the student to keep in contact with the tutor and we expect you to see your supervisor at least once every fortnight. Past experience has shown that none or minimal contact correlates with failed work.How does this assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?There is no scheduled session on campus. All supervisions are conducted online. How will my assignment be marked?Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page.You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit. Criteria3rd Class – 40-49%Lower 2nd – 50-59%Upper 2nd – 60-69%1st Class – 70%+IntroductionAdequate definition of topic, but with little justification or rationale for topic choice provided. Scope of the topic is too broad. Aim and objectives are not clear to provide sufficient framework for the dissertation.Good definition and justification of topic area. Topic clearly derived from taught material with little evidence of individual motivation other than fulfilling the requirements of the project. Scope of the research is defined and is feasible within the time given. Aim and objectives are clear.Very good definition and justification of topic area. The rationale is supported by relevant examples. Topic clearly derived from taught material but demonstrates an individual approach and motivation. The scope of the research is defined and clear. The aim and objectives are explained clearly.Exceptional definition and full justification of topic area, providing relevance of, and motivation for choice. Topic has aspects of originality and has a wider significance and interest beyond a student project. The scope is explicitly defined. The aim and objectives are explained in specific context.Literature ReviewAdequate coverage of literature but limited to prescribed reading with style being largely descriptive with little evaluation of literature evident.Good coverage of reading, but somewhat limited range of resources utilised. Style is largely descriptive but does include an element of critical evaluation.Very good use and critical evaluation of reading, some of which is beyond the prescribed range, but focus is mainly on core literature covered on the course.Evidence of extensive and appropriate selection and critical evaluation of reading beyond the prescribed range and of a standard expected of publishable work.MethodologyThere is limited use of appropriate data/information selection. The method of analysis chosen is acceptable, but its use is not linked to the relevant literature and theory.The method of analysis chosen is acceptable, and there is an attempt to link its use to the relevant literature and theory. The research design is critically explained.The method of analysis chosen is appropriate and its use linked to the relevant literature and theory. Some reference is made to possible alternative methods of analysis.The method of analysis chosen is appropriate and its use is rooted in the relevant literature and theory. The choice of method of analysis is based on a rigorous analysis of the options available.Data Analysis and DiscussionAn identifiable narrative to the analysis, but only some of the elements have been drawn together in undertaking the analysis. An adequate, but limited, breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding shown. Mostly descriptive in nature with little critical evaluation.An identifiable narrative to the analysis, with most elements integrated to create a largely unified storyline. Good breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding shown, but there remains scope for greater critical analysis beyond the merely descriptive.A clear narrative is evident. All elements of the project are integrated to some degree. Very good breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding of the area of study. There is some appropriate critical analysis and synthesis of research.The clarity of the narrative is outstanding. The coherence with which the elements of the project have been utilised is outstanding. Exceptional breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding of the area of study. There is strong evidence of extensive and appropriate, critical analysis and synthesis of research.Conclusion and RecommendationsAdequate evaluation presented, but conclusions and recommendations are not always justified, or are not always related directly to the research.Good demonstration of evaluative skills, but conclusions and recommendations could have been justified more fully and derived more clearly from the research.Very good demonstration of evaluative skills, but conclusions and recommendations could have been justified more fully.Exceptional demonstration of evaluative skills in arriving at fully reasoned and justified conclusions and recommendations, based clearly on the research undertaken.PresentationAdequate presentation of the article. The clarity of the arguments could be improved with a clearer structure and the use of sections and section-headings. A suitable journal has been identified, but its style requirements have not been adopted fully or consistently.Good presentation. The structure allows the flow of arguments to be discerned. Use made of sections and section-headings. A suitable journal has been identified, and its style requirements have been implemented reasonably fully and consistently.Very good style of presentation. Logical structure makes the flow of the argument clear. A suitable journal has been identified, and its style requirements have been implemented fully and consistently.Exemplary presentation, extremely well written with impeccable referencing. The journal has been very well chosen and its style implemented flawlessly.Relevance and quality of research and reference sourcesSome evidence of research shown and some up-to-date literature drawn upon. Some suitable literature identified but the style requirements have not been adopted fully or consistently.A range of key and relevant sources drawn upon. Up-to-date sources used and referencing style is largely correct and consistent.A good range and depth of relevant sources used. Up-to-date sources used and referencing style adheres to the correct style and is consistent throughout.Extensive use of a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Sources are up-to-date and referencing style impeccable.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *