Assessment Brief 1 Digital Marketing LSBM200
1. Module Details 2
2. Assessment Structure 2
3. Learning Outcomes for the item of assessment 2
4. Assessment Grading 3
4.1 Assessment 1 Details 3
4.2 Task 3
4.3 Submission requirements 4
5. Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances 4
5.1 Extensions 4
5.2 Mitigating circumstances 4
6. Word Limits 5
Appendix 1: Grade Criteria 6
Appendix 2: Declaration of Authorship 7
1. Module Details Module Name:
Digital Marketing Module Code: LSBM200 Level
5 Credit Value : 30 Module Leader:
Nisreen Ameen Delivery: 2018-2019
2. Assessment Structure
Item of Assessment : Report
Assessment Code : BABM/LSBM200/1819
Weighting: This assignment is worth 20% of the module grade
Word Limit : The word limit for this assessment is 1,000 words
Submission Deadline Friday/9 November 2018/3 pm
Feedback and Provisional Grade1 due : Feedback and provisional grades will normally be due 20 working days after the submission deadline
Resubmission Date: Friday/10 May 2019/3 pm
3. Learning Outcomes for the item of assessment
This item of assessment covers the following learning outcomes. For the full list of learning outcomes for the module, please refer to the Module Study Guide.
• Understand the digital landscape and explain how it differs from traditional marketing management.
• Explain the technology and management of data and analytics that drive digital marketing and underpin its success.
• Explain the facets of the digital consumer and the research tools that enable such an explanation.
• Explain and analyse the principles of web design, website management and usability and their role in the success of digital marketing initiatives.
1 The grade is provisional until confirmed by the relevant assessment board(s).
4. Assessment Grading
Your work will be marked in grades rather than percentages. This is considered to deliver the most accurate and fair outcomes for students. Each assignment that you undertake will be assessed using the common grading system. Information about the grading system can be found in your Course Handbook.
The Grade Criteria can be found in Appendix 1.
4.1 Assessment 1 Details
This assignment has been designed to allow students the opportunity to explore the digital marketing landscape and discuss how digital technologies have affected consumer buying behaviour. Use the Harvard referencing system throughout for your citations and reference list.
The Digital Landscape
‘…our analysis of market research confirms that many customers…want to move freely from channel to channel in an omnichannel experience’ (Bianchi et al 2016)
Write a report that outlines the differences between traditional and digital marketing, explaining the omnichannel nature of the customer journey, and how the analysis of data enables marketers to map this journey to improve company performance and improve the customer experience.
Refer to academic literature, reputable online resources such as McKinsey, Smart Insights and Clickz, and use industry examples.
Key areas for consideration:
• Differences between traditional and digital marketing
• Customer touch points and the omnichannel customer journey
• The role of data and analytics in digital marketing
• Introduction (150 words) 10%
• Discussion (700 words) 65%
• Conclusion (150 words) 10%
• References (not included in word count)10%
• Structure 5%
Bianchi, R., Cermak, M., Dusek, O. (2016) More than digital plus traditional: A truly omnichannel customer experience. McKinsey and Company. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/more-than-digital-plus-tradition... [Accessed 20 July 2018]
Assessment Brief: LSBM200 - 18/19 Page 4
4.3 Submission requirements
You are required to submit this assignment by Friday/9 November 2018/3 pm. You must submit your assignment by using the Turnitin gateway in the module’s Canvas site.
Please Note: The act of submitting your work electronically will be taken as an acceptance of the Declaration of Authorship (see Appendix 2).
5. Extensions and Mitigating Circumstances
Applications for extensions and mitigating circumstances, with supporting evidence (such as medical certificates), should be made through the Student Self-service Portal (SSP).
If a student experiences unforeseen circumstances that may prevent the student submitting an assignment at the first opportunity, it is possible to request an extension of up to two weeks. The length of extension requested will be evaluated by the Academic Administrator.
The granting of an extension will depend upon the nature of the difficulty the student is experiencing, whether the difficulty could and should have been anticipated, and the extent to which the circumstances were outside of the student’s control. For example, health difficulties would usually provide legitimate grounds for an extension; last minute computer issues or clashing deadlines would not. If an extension of up to two weeks is not sufficient the student should make a claim for mitigating circumstances.
NB: No extensions can be granted for TCAs and examinations.
5.2 Mitigating circumstances
If a student is unable to sit an exam or submit an assignment, the student may be able to claim mitigating circumstances, which, if accepted, would allow the student to complete the assessment for the first time at a later date, and receive an uncapped mark for it. The exam would be taken at the next sitting or the assignment would be submitted at the next submission opportunity, following the acceptance of the student’s mitigating circumstances. A claim for mitigating circumstances must be submitted before the original date for submitting the assignment or sitting the exam.
Mitigating circumstances are defined as a serious or acute problem, or an event beyond a student’s control or ability to foresee, which has prevented completion of assignment/s or attendance at examination/s. If a student is experiencing unforeseen or unexpected events – such as serious illness or severe disruption to their personal life – that may affect the student’s ability to take assignment/s or sit examination/s, the student should meet with their Module Leader, Course Leader or a Student Success Advisor to discuss the available options.
The University of Northampton’s Mitigating Circumstances Policy and Procedure document can be accessed through our Quality and Enhancement Manual:
6. Word Limits
All written assignments include clear guidance on the maximum amount that should be written in order to address the requirements of the assessment task (a ‘word limit’).
If the submission exceeds the word limit by more than 10%, the submission will only be marked up to and including the additional 10%. Anything over this will not be included in the final grade for the item of assessment.
Abstracts, reference lists, and footnotes are excluded from any word limit requirements.
Where a submission is notably under the word limit, the full submission will be marked on the extent to which the requirements of the assessment task have been met. Generally speaking, submissions under the word limit fall short of the requirements of the assessment task.
Appendix 1: Grade Criteria
An outstanding Distinction
Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at an exceptional standard
A very strong Distinction
Work of distinguished quality which demonstrates strong, convincing and consistent evidence appropriate to the task or activity.
Rigorous and authoritative command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A clear Distinction
Work of very good quality which displays most, but not all, of the criteria for the grade above in relation to the learning outcomes.
Work of highly commendable quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relation to the relevant learning outcomes.
A very strong Merit
Work of commendable quality which demonstrates good, robust and convincing evidence appropriate to the task or activity.
Strong command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A strong Merit
Work of good quality which contains most, but not all, of the characteristics of the grade above in relation to the learning outcomes.
A clear Merit
Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
Work of sound quality which demonstrates evidence which is sufficient and appropriate to the task or activity.
Sound command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A very strong Pass OR Bare/Basic Merit
Work of capable quality which contains some of the characteristics of the grade above in relation to the relevant learning outcomes.
A strong Pass
Work of satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of reliably achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree.
Acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
Work of broadly satisfactory quality which demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but to a limited degree.
Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A bare Pass
Work of bare pass standard which demonstrates evidence of achieving the requirements of the learning outcomes, but only to a limited degree.
Broadly acceptable command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
A marginal Fail
Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with the learning outcomes but which contains some significant omissions or misunderstanding, or otherwise just fails to meet threshold standards.
Evidence included or provided, but missing in some very important aspects.
Poor command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
Negligible or inappropriate evidence.
Unsatisfactory command of academic / professional conventions appropriate to the discipline.
Work submitted, but academic misconduct proven and penalty given was to award AG grade.
Work submitted but given an LG grade due to late submission.
Work of nil value
Work submitted, but work comprises no value.
Appendix 2: Declaration of Authorship
By submitting this work electronically to LSBM and the University of Northampton, I/we confirm that I/we have read and understood the Declaration and Definitions below:
Declaration of Authorship:
1. I/we hold a copy of this assignment which can be produced if the original is lost/damaged.
2. This assignment is my/our original work and no part of it has been copied from any other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made.
3. No part of this assignment has been written for me/us by any other person except where such collaboration has been authorised and as detailed in the Assessment Brief.
4. I/we have not previously submitted this work for any other course/module.
I/we understand that:
5. Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is one’s own. It is a form of cheating and is a serious academic offence which may lead to expulsion. Plagiarised material can be drawn from, and presented in, written, graphic and visual form, including electronic data, and oral presentations. Plagiarism occurs when the origin of the material used is not appropriately cited.
6. Collusion is working with someone else on an assessment task which is intended to be wholly your own work.
7. Contract cheating/Commissioning is where you contract out academic assessment to writers and purchase back the finished work and submit it as your own.
8. Duplication/Replication is submitting the same material more than once for the purposes of obtaining academic credit.
9. Fabrication refers specifically to the falsification of data, information or citations in an academic exercise, typically an assignment. This includes false excuses for missing deadlines and false claims to have submitted work. It may be specifically referred to as falsification.
10. Your completed assignment is submitted and checked for plagiarism through the use of plagiarism detection software called Turnitin. The Course Leader’s decision based on the plagiarism report is final; no appeal may be made by a student once such a decision is made.
Please note: Submitting work which is not your own [and cheating in exams] can be considered as fraud2 and handled in accordance with the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy. Penalties can include:
Reduction in grade for assignment.
Grade for module reduced to AG [fail for academic misconduct] and right to repeat module withdrawn.
Termination from studies.
Further information on plagiarism can be found in your Course Handbooks Section 13.10.
2 If a student is suspected of commissioning (e.g. paying someone to write an assignment for them), this could be classed as fraud under student disciplinary procedures, separate to academic misconduct procedures. If proven, the consequences would be severe, including removal from their course of study.