Day: August 2, 2019

NOTE: This work due in 2.5 hours. 

 

 

 

Please read a document carefully in the attachment, which includes “Chapter 3: The Third Week [of the Research Process]” (p. 79-110).

 

 

 

And then answer 6 questions. Your answers must be correct at all. Please be Careful! Thanks!!

 

 

 

QUESTION:

 

1. According to Ballenger, what is the benefit of writing in the middle of the research process?

 

2. Give an example of an attribution tag.

 

3. What are the four kinds of borrowing that often happen in student work (and which describe different types of plagiarism or near-plagiarism)?

 

4. As Ballenger writes, it is not necessary to reference a source when you discuss “common knowledge” in a paper. How can you determine whether something is common knowledge or not?

 

5. According to Ballenger, what is the difference between “dump truck driving” and “knowledge making” in a paper?

 

6. Review the note-taking techniques described on pages 97-106. Which note-taking technique do you think would be most useful for you during your research and why?

 

Alternatively, if you have already begun using one of these techniques in your research, which one have you been using and why?

 

 

 

IF the answer get full credits, there are 2 more assignments need your help. 

 

Thanks.

Marketing Degree, Consultancy style dissertation based on future threats for Enterprise Rent A Car and developing a marketing / communications strategy for them. 

Im really aiming to gain a first in this piece of work and hope you can help achieve this! 

This is direct feedback upon each area of the work aligned with the marketing criteria which i have attached below along with an estimate of the current marks in each section. 

Identification and clarification of the issue:

The topic which is a valuable are to study that is related to UN SDG is explained clearly in the introduction. The executive summary could have details about the key recommendations of the consultancy project. While the aim of the study is clear, the objectives are about the process rather than the outcome of the study. There is a long section which explains the details about the company that could focus on the implications of the study and could be summarised with relevant parts. Similarly, the figures about the company are descriptive and do not build the argument for the strategy.

Use of literature and development of conceptual framework:

The literature review section is more like a secondary research about the topic. It could be supported by the studies about sustainability, and innovation. There is a presentation of some key trends which inform the study but these don’t seem to translate into ideas or concepts from which a conceptual framework could be helpfully constructed. Therefore the section doesn’t provide the conceptual depth that is required for the study.

Quality of Research and Analysis:

While the choice of method, sample, and approach is described they are not justified with the support of other sources. The data provided generates useful insights from the participants. The development of the interview guide is not clearly explained. The findings are related to the objectives of the study but not discussed against the studies related to the topic e.g. sustainability.

Quality of Recommendations and Plan:

This section could be more robust if it was supported by justification of the recommendations and by discussing the findings of the study. The intentions and objectives of the plan are relevant to the aim of the study. More explanation & precision needed for the key strategy and underpinning message of the campaign. The time plan could have more details about the implementation of the campaign. The budget development needs to be supported by other sources. 

Structure and presentation of work:

There are consistent problems about the referencing style (e.g. missing parenthesis, usage of comma, abbreviation of first name). Some parts of the paper include sentences like bullet points, they could be combined into paragraphs. Punctuation particularly apostrophes is problematic. Presentation at times doesn’t feel very professional which is required for a consultancy project.

Referencing style must be BU Harvard referencing.