The main structure of paper is : 

-introduction 

-statement of the problem with literature review 

-analysis of the problem 

-conclusion

The marking breakdown: 

Statement of the problem – 30% 

Analysis – 40% 

Conclusion – 20% 

Presentation -10%

The total number of words must be up to 3000 words and similarity not more than 14% otherwise I ll be penalised with 10%!!!

-In the statement, you must write theory ( literature review) regarding the topic

-In the analysis, you must analyse and start answering the questions from your point of view, with no many references, but based on the statement 

-In conclusion, you must conclude, propose solutions, find literature gaps, answer the questions and make proposals from your point of view, without references, but based on statement and analysis.(Satysfying the marker that we have answered all questions clearly) 

In conclusion, you must avoid writing the abstract of what you wrote in the statement and analysed in the analysis but you must refer what you found out of this theory! That s the part that many students lose marks.

-Based on the conclusions, you will go to the introduction(In beggining) to write what you are going to describe and prove.

-There must be related and coherent introduction, statement, analysis and conclusion!

-Try use articles or reports from Natalya Sergeeva or John Kelsey from UCL Bartlett school as they are leaders of this module 

 

FEEDBACK OF THE PAPER I FAILED IN WINTER!

-In this paper, I have failed in winter and I must resubmit it. I attach you the old one with my professor feedback and the lectures of my professor as well. According to her feedback, the changes include:

-The statement of the problem is in the introduction and

section 2. In this part, the problem was not properly

introduced to the reader, as there appears to be some

miscomprehension of the project brief. In the statement

of the problem, we would like to see more information

on project leadership, project leadership competencies

and process and a definition, or multiple definitions of

what project success means, but we want these

elements to be connected to the project brief. Basically,

we need to see your understanding of the project brief

and all the terms it includes. Then you connect this with

the leadership models that you choose from the

literature and focus on. As it stands most elements in

the statement of the problem appear not relevant to

what we are asking. For example the literature on

diverse project management styles, is not connected

with the term paper brief and does not contribute

towards the advancement of the paper.

-The analysis is composed in section 3. Unfortunately,

these sections do not contribute to an answer towards

the project brief. Half of the theory presented appears

not relevant to the project brief and the relevant parts

appear confusing. The way in which section 3.2 is

written, with a focus on programme achievement (I

presume you mean project success here), makes it

very difficult to understand and connect with the

question of the term paper. The key project processes

are rarely discussed in the term paper. This is

unfortunate as these are at the core of the term paper

brief.

-The conclusions appear to be not connected with the

paper. They are not a summary of the paper, but

general information on leadership and leadership

styles, with no contribution towards the term paper.

This part is 20% of your mark so in the future invest

more time in summarizing the information in the paper

and highlighting your more interesting findings and

connections. In this way, you will also demonstrate

your critical thinking. In the end, you may add some

recommendations for managers or literature.

-Presentation-wise, there were numerous issues related

to figure and table referencing and language. Firstly,

the figures lack captions and are not cited properly. The

tables are cited in an incorrect way, as the original

author is not included in the caption, but rather the

author of the paper where the table was found. In the

reference list some references are listed by first and not

by last name. Secondly, the language used. The lack of

proper use of grammar and syntax made parts of this

paper very difficult to read and very difficult to

understand. Parts of this paper are written poetically

and not as an academic or even an industry paper. In

future essays, you need to focus on your English writing

skills. This is imperative.

There are also comments on professor feedback attached in additional materials