Overview
This unit is designed to introduce the importance of critical thinking and the benefits of using decision-making processes to assess and solve business, managerial and organisational problems. The key aspects of critical thinking and reasoning, including knowledge, comprehension, analysis, self-reflection and application are considered. You will learn how to critically analyse data and information related to typical business decisions. You will develop significant skills in building effective arguments by constructing, analysing, and critically evaluating the views and position adopted by stakeholders in the process of effective decision-making. The aim is to develop your ability to make effective and timely decisions, to communicate complex concepts and ideas, to influence and persuade others to adopt new strategies when required, and to constructively collaborate with others in order to generate solutions to multi-faceted business problems. You will also be introduced to the decision-making techniques leaders and groups use to solve problems in real-life business situations.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
There are no requisites for this unit.
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2018
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Postgraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Qualitative student evaluation.
The time lag between the presentations and the marks was too long.
Tutorials need to be added to this unit.
- Evaluate and reflect on the importance of critical thinking and the benefits of using decision-making processes to assess and solve business, managerial and organisational problems
- Develop a body of knowledge of research principles and methods applicable to key aspects of critical thinking and reasoning
- Critically analyse and synthesise complex information, problems, concepts and theories and to apply creative decision-making approaches to address business issues and problems
- Develop the capability to make effective and timely decision
- Communicate complex concepts, ideas and solutions to specialist and non-specialist audiences with the aim to influence and persuade others to adopt new positions.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
1 - Practical and Written Assessment - 30% | |||||
2 - Presentation and Written Assessment - 30% | |||||
3 - Written Assessment - 40% |
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |
1 - Knowledge | |||||
2 - Communication | |||||
3 - Cognitive, technical and creative skills | |||||
4 - Research | |||||
5 - Self-management | |||||
6 - Ethical and Professional Responsibility | |||||
7 - Leadership | |||||
8 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures |
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Graduate Attributes
Assessment Tasks | Graduate Attributes | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |
1 - Practical and Written Assessment - 30% | ||||||||
2 - Presentation and Written Assessment - 30% | ||||||||
3 - Written Assessment - 40% |
Textbooks
Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills
1st Edition (2014)
Authors: Michael Kallet
Wiley Hoboken, New Jersey, USA
ISBN: ISBN 978-1-118-72983-0
Binding: Other
Additional Textbook Information
An e-book, hardbook or paperbook version of the textbook is also acceptable.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Harvard (author-date)
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
c.j.white@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
(i) Introduction to critical thinking
Chapter
Textbook: Kallet, M. 2014. Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills.
- Section I: Introduction and the Framework for Critical Thinking
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for Week 1.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Introduction to the course.
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Instructions for accessing the Reflect tool will be provided.
Flex students will receive more specific instructions in moodle throughout the semester.
Assessment #1 discussed
Module/Topic
Module 1:
(ii) Framing and determining scope
Chapter
Textbook: Kallet, M. 2014. Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills.
- Section II: Clarity
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for Week 2.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Module/Topic
Module 1:
(iii) Accessing and synthesising information, and forming views
Chapter
Textbook: Kallet, M. 2014. Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills.
- Section III: Conclusions
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for Week 3.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Module/Topic
Module 2:
(iv) Understanding and development of self
Chapter
Students should complete the Reflect Tool (for self-assessment) prior to class to determine core traits along 10 critical management skill areas.
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for Week 4.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Student presentation(s) on an article
Reflect Tool exercises/ discussion.
Practical and Written Assessment Due: Week 4 Monday (26 Mar 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Module 2:
(v) Making major decisions
Chapter
Textbook: Kallet, M. 2014. Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills.
- Section IV: Conclusions and Innovations
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for Week 5.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Student presentation(s) on an article
Module/Topic
No classes in MGMT20135 this week.
Chapter
Students should take the time to read articles of interest from the reading pack.
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Module 2:
(vi) Balancing rational and non-rational approaches
Chapter
Textbook: Kallet, M. Think Smarter: Critical Thinking to Improve Problem-Solving and Decision-Making Skills.
- Section V: Decisions
See the reading pack. Students should choose any one article for week 6
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Module/Topic
Module 3:
(vii) Decision-making in uncertain or difficult to define situations.
Chapter
See the reading pack. Students should choose any two articles for Week 7.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Module/Topic
Module 3:
(viii) The nature of the contract
Chapter
See the reading pack. Students should choose any two articles for Week 8.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Self-Reflection Due: Week 8 Monday (30 Apr 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Module 3:
(ix) Working collaboratively
Chapter
See the reading pack. Students should choose any two articles for Week 9.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Module/Topic
Debate Workshop
Chapter
Students should take the time to research and develop their team's arguments for the debate.
Events and Submissions/Topic
In Class team meetings to prepare for the team debates in week 11.
Module/Topic
Module 4:
(X) Managing for all
Chapter
See the reading pack. Students should choose any two articles for Week 11.
Events and Submissions/Topic
The seminar includes a lecture and will involve a combination of student activities, such as, student presentations, experiential exercises, case analyses, video analyses, team and/or class discussion.
Debates
Final Debate Due: Week 11 Monday (21 May 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
Module/Topic
Debates
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Course wrap-up.
Debates
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Practical and Written Assessment
General Overview:
This assessment item accounts for 30% of your final grade for this unit. Both the essay and the presentation are worth 15 points each.
This is an assignment that must be completed by students individually.
The assessment is due in on Monday Week 4, 5:00 AEST
The presentations will take place in weeks 4 and 5.
The review must be 1500 words in length. Two points will be deducted for those essays that are over or under by 200 words.
The presentation should be 10 minutes in length. To points will be deducted for those presentations that are over or under by 2 minutes.
The review must include 15 academic references, one of which may be the assigned textbook for this course.
The essay must include a cover page that contains your name, student number, resident campus, assessment title, and lecturer.
On-campus students must write a review of an article from the reading pack and then present the review in class using PowerPoint.
Flex students must write a review of an article from the reading pack and then present using PowerPoint during an arranged Zoom session
The majority of the final mark for this assignment is based upon the oral presentation.
The review must conform to the APA study guide
Task Description: The purpose of this task is for you to demonstrate your ability to critically evaluate information and present that information to an audience or your peers. You may pick any of the articles listed on the unit’s Moodle site. You will then write a review based around your responses to the following questions. Please do not simply list the questions and your response to them. The questions are to be used simply as a means for you to critically think about your chosen article. You will then present this information in class.
Both the written review and the presentation must answer the following questions:
What is the topic of the article?
Based upon the article what do we know about the topic of the article?
Based upon the article is there a gap in the literature or some new development that needs to be explained?
How was the research conducted?
What where the findings?
What are the implications of the article for management practice?
What is your overall evaluation of the article's effectiveness and credibility?
Week 4 Monday (26 Mar 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
You must submit both your essay and your PowerPoint slides
Week 6 Monday (16 Apr 2018)
The essay will be returned by this date. The marks for the presentations will be released after all the presentations have been delivered.
Marking Criteria | Exceeds Expectations | Exceeds Expectations (Distinction) 75 - 84% | Meets Expectations | Meets Expectations | Below Expectations |
(High Distinction) 85-100% | (Credit) 65 – 74% | (Pass) 50 – 64% | (Fail) below 50% | ||
Introduction | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way which captures the audience's attention. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced with clarity. | Topic introduced, but the introduction is underdeveloped in terms of key points and/or purpose of presentation. | No topic, key points and/or purpose is introduced or the introduction is irrelevant to assessment item. |
Knowledge of content | The essay demonmstrates a thorough knowledge of the content | The essay demonstrates very good knowledge of the content | The essay demonsrates adequate knowledge of the content | The essay demonstrates some knowledge of the content | The essay demonstrates little or no understanding of the content |
Conclusion | Clear and concise summary with effective links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | Clear and concise summary of the presentation with links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | The conclusion provided links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear at times. | The conclusion provided some links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear. | No conclusion or no links established to the introduction and body of the presentation. |
Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. |
Key Criteria | Exceeds Expectations | Exceeds Expectations (Distinction) 75 - 84% | Meets Expectations | Meets Expectations | Below Expectations |
(High Distinction) 85-100% | (Credit) 65 – 74% | (Pass) 50 – 64% | (Fail) below 50% | ||
Introduction | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way which captures the audience's attention. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced with clarity. | Topic introduced, but the introduction is underdeveloped in terms of key points and/or purpose of presentation. | No topic, key points and/or purpose is introduced or the introduction is irrelevant to assessment item. |
Knowledge of content | The student has a thorough knowledge of the content as demonstrated by the student's handling of audience questions and research of the presentation topic. | The student has a very good knowledge of the content as demonstrated by the student's handling of audience questions and research of the presentation topic. | The student has an adequate knowledge of the content as demonstrated by the student's handling of audience questions and research of the presentation topic. | The student has some knowledge of the content as demonstrated by the student's handling of audience questions and research of the presentation topic. | The student has little or no understanding of the content as demonstrated by the student's handling of audience questions and research of the presentation topic. |
Organisation of presentation | Presents information and ideas in a logical and interesting sequence which the audience can easily follow. The student has a clear voice, is expressive throughout the presentation. | Presents information and ideas in a logical sequence which the audience can follow. The student has a clear voice, is expressive at times during the presentation. | Presents information and ideas at a reasonable level of logical sequence which the audience finds difficult to follow at times. The student has a clear voice, but is not expressive and/or pronounces some words incorrectly. | Presents information and ideas at a basic level of logical sequence which the audience generally finds difficult to follow. The student's voice is: not clear at times; not expressive and/or the student pronounces a number of terms incorrectly. | Presents information in a poorly developed and illogical sequence which the audience cannot follow. The student mumbles, incorrectly pronounces terms, is not expressive and cannot be heard by a majority of audience members. |
Visual Aids | The visual aids are well designed and confidently used, which effectively support and add impact to the presentation. | The visual aids are well designed, confidently used and effectively support the presentation. | The visual aids are well designed and effectively support the presentation. | The design of the visual aids are satisfactory or the aids are at times unrelated to the message presented. | No visual aids are used, the visual aids are poorly designed or they are largely unrelated to the message presented. |
Conclusion | Clear and concise summary with effective links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | Clear and concise summary of the presentation with links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | The conclusion provided links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear at times. | The conclusion provided some links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear. | No conclusion or no links established to the introduction and body of the presentation. |
|
- Evaluate and reflect on the importance of critical thinking and the benefits of using decision-making processes to assess and solve business, managerial and organisational problems
- Critically analyse and synthesise complex information, problems, concepts and theories and to apply creative decision-making approaches to address business issues and problems
- Communicate complex concepts, ideas and solutions to specialist and non-specialist audiences with the aim to influence and persuade others to adopt new positions.
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
2 Presentation and Written Assessment
-
General Overview:
The assessment is worth 30 % of your final grade for this unit.
The PowerPoint slides are to be submitted Week 11, Monday, 5.00 PM AEST
The presentation will be delivered during weeks 11 and 12. Students on the metro campuses will present in class, while distance students will present during the arranged Zoom session.
The written conceptual overview of the structured arguments must include a cover page that contains the group’s names, student numbers, resident campus, assessment title and lecturer. The conceptual overview should be 500 words in length. This is due one week after you present.
Each team will have 3 or 4 debaters. (NB. The number of debaters could be changed depending on the number of enrollees.)
Each speaker will have 5 minutes to argue their case. Palm cards and/or PowerPoint should be used. Students should not talk under-time - less than 4 minutes, or over-time - more than 6 minutes. A two-point deduction will be applied to presentations over or under time.
Each team must prepare a team charter, including a description of the team's objectives, communication methods, scheduled meetings/protocols, task allocations, conflict resolution and quality assurance methods
Task Description: The objective of this assignment is to build students’ abilities to structure arguments based on evidence and structured reasoning, including identifying consensus methods for identifying coherent group arguments.
As a group, you can choose any one of the following debating topics. You will then need to identify what would be a good response from both sides. That is, you need to simulate what would be good arguments that the affirmative and the negative teams are likely to provide if very good debaters and had time to thoroughly research the topic. Since this will be a very challenging thing to do, each speaker only needs to speak for a minimum of 4 minutes and a maximum of 5 minutes.
Clearly, you need to do a lot of research if taking up this option to identify what are going to be winning arguments that all the speakers from both sides could put forward. This approaches most definitely tests your ability to look at a contentious issue and see both sides of the argument. Essentially, you are simulating the whole debate as a single team. You are not going up against another team. You are going up against yourselves.
· Corruption is the price we pay for democracy.
· Innovation is more successful in small companies.
· Multinational corporations are detrimental to national economies.
· Technological change creates economic disparity.
· Corporate Mission and vision statements are a waste of time and energy.
· Boards of Directors need quotas for women.
· Sustainability is essential for every business.
· Emotional Intelligence - the essential factor in leadership.
· Education kills creativity.
· Performance management in corporations kills creativity and innovation.
· CEOs are given more credit than they deserve.
· Regulation is stifling business.
· Groupthink has its place.
· MBAs are a waste of money.
· Ethics and business are incompatible.
· People who are smokers should not be employed.
· Businesses should not try to influence government policy.
· If we all spent more time working and less time networking, society would be better off.
The first speaker on the affirmative defines the topic and the nature of the team's arguments, providing some examples
The first speaker on the negative reaffirms or redefines the topic and the nature of the team's arguments, providing some examples
The second speaker on the affirmative identifies the differences between both teams' arguments, providing a conceptual overview and evidence/examples for why the affirmative team's arguments are superior
The second speaker on the negative identifies how the affirmative is lacking, providing a conceptual overview and evidence/examples for why the negative team's arguments are superior
The third speaker on the affirmative summarises what was said, including which arguments or sources of evidence were particularly compelling/flawed, and explains why the affirmative should win
The third speaker on the negative summarises what was said, including which arguments or sources of evidence were particularly compelling/flawed, and explains why the negative should win
If there is a fourth speaker, ensure the fourth speaker is able to explain how the team researched the topic and the sources of evidence drawn upon, including found evidence that could be used to refute the opposing team's possible arguments.
Week 11 Monday (21 May 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
Only one member of the group needs to submit the PowerPoint slides and the Group Review
ey Criteria | Exceeds Expectations | Exceeds Expectations (Distinction) 75 - 84% | Meets Expectations | Meets Expectations | Below Expectations |
(High Distinction) 85-100% | (Credit) 65 – 74% | (Pass) 50 – 64% | (Fail) below 50% | ||
Introduction | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way which captures the audience's attention. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced in a clear and interesting way. | Topic, key points and purpose of the presentation is introduced with clarity. | Topic introduced, but the introduction is underdeveloped in terms of key points and/or purpose of presentation. | No topic, key points and/or purpose is introduced or the introduction is irrelevant to assessment item. |
Arguments are framed and articulated well from the beginning at all stages of the debate | Superior framing and articulation of all arguments. | Very convincingly framed and articulated. | Convincingly framed and articulated. | Effectively framed and articulated. | Poorly framed and articulated. |
Arguments put forward by the opposition are effectively refuted and strong evidence is used. | Superior refutations and use of evidence throughout. | Very convincingly refutes and uses evidence. | Convincingly refutes and uses evidence. | Effectively refutes and uses evidence. | Insufficiently addressed. |
Organisation of presentation | Presents information and ideas in a logical and interesting sequence which the audience can easily follow. The student has a clear voice, is expressive throughout the presentation. | Presents information and ideas in a logical sequence which the audience can follow. The student has a clear voice, is expressive at times during the presentation. | Presents information and ideas at a reasonable level of logical sequence which the audience finds difficult to follow at times. The student has a clear voice, but is not expressive and/or pronounces some words incorrectly. | Presents information and ideas at a basic level of logical sequence which the audience generally finds difficult to follow. The student's voice is: not clear at times; not expressive and/or the student pronounces a number of terms incorrectly. | Presents information in a poorly developed and illogical sequence which the audience cannot follow. The student mumbles, incorrectly pronounces terms, is not expressive and cannot be heard by a majority of audience members. |
Conclusion | Clear and concise summary with effective links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | Clear and concise summary of the presentation with links to the introduction and body of the presentation. | The conclusion provided links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear at times. | The conclusion provided some links to the introduction and body of the presentation, but was not concise or unclear. | No conclusion or no links established to the introduction and body of the presentation. |
Visual Aids | The visual aids are well designed and confidently used, which effectively support and add impact to the presentation. | The visual aids are well designed, confidently used and effectively support the presentation. | The visual aids are well designed and effectively support the presentation. | The design of the visual aids are satisfactory or the aids are at times unrelated to the message presented. | No visual aids are used, the visual aids are poorly designed or they are largely unrelated to the message presented. |
Group reflection | Superior overview of the arguments, including review of areas where improvements possible. | Very good overview of the arguments, including review of areas where improvements possible. | Very effective overview of the arguments, including review of areas where improvements possible. | Effective overview of the arguments, including review of areas where improvements possible. | Insufficiently and/or inconsistently addressed. |
- Develop a body of knowledge of research principles and methods applicable to key aspects of critical thinking and reasoning
- Critically analyse and synthesise complex information, problems, concepts and theories and to apply creative decision-making approaches to address business issues and problems
- Develop the capability to make effective and timely decision
- Knowledge
- Communication
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Research
- Self-management
- Ethical and Professional Responsibility
3 Written Assessment
This assessment is worth 40% of your final grade for this unit.
The assessment is due in Week 8 Monday 5.00 PM
The title page that contains your name, student number, resident campus, assessment title and lecturer.
This is an assignment which must be completed by the students individually.
It should be a minimum of 1500 words. Two points will be deducted for the essays that are 10% +/- 1500 words.
Essays that are submitted late will receive a late penalty of 2 points per day late.
Task Description: The objective of this reflective essay is to summarize what you learned from the unit (Weeks 1-7), and how you believe your learnings could be applied by you in your future career and in your life generally.
To successfully complete this assessment task you should answer the following reflective essay question:
- What did I learn from undertaking the course MGMT20135: Critical Thinking and Managerial Decision-Making?
- Identify two significant or important concepts from each weeks' learnings (Weeks 1-7). Explain why the concepts are important or significant to you.
- You should also explain what you learned about yourself by utilizing the Reflect tool.
- It will be very important for you to explain how the course allowed you to better understand yourself, and your skills and how to improve them. Likewise, it will be very important for you to explain how the unit allowed you to understand how new knowledge is developed and/or challenged.
- You should tie all your arguments/insights together at the end of your paper, highlighting how you think you will be able to use your learnings in your future career and in life generally
Week 8 Monday (30 Apr 2018) 5:00 pm AEST
Week 10 Monday (14 May 2018)
Written feedback provided in Moodle GradeMark
Key Criteria | Exceeds Expectations | Exceeds Expectations (Distinction) 75 - 84% | Meets Expectations | Meets Expectations | Below Expectations |
(High Distinction) 85-100% | (Credit) 65 – 74% | (Pass) 50 – 64% | (Fail) below 50% | ||
Identified and explained the importance or significance of 2 learning outcomes from each individual lecture/tutorial. | Regular updates and insightful reflection. Student insights are interesting, thoughtful and demonstrates an ability to put ideas into an appropriate conceptual frame. | Regular updates and insightful reflection. Student insights are interesting and thoughtful. | Regular updates and insightful reflection. | Regular updates and satisfactory reflection. | Irregular updates and unsatisfactory reflection. |
Explained how the self-reflect tool has enhanced your knowledge of yourself | Superior appreciation self-knowledge based upon the Reflect Tool. | Very convincing appreciation of self-knowledge based upon the Reflect Tool. | Fair appreciation of self-knowledge based upon the Reflect Tool. | Poor appreciation of self-knowledge based upon the Reflect Tool. | No appreciation of self-knowledge based upon the Reflect Tool. |
Discussed how knowledge is developed and/or challenged. | Superior discussion of how knowledge is developed and/or changed. | Very convincing discussion of how knowledge is developed and/or changed. | Fair discussion of how knowledge is developed and/or changed. | Poor discussion of how knowledge is developed and/or changed. | No discussion of how knowledge is developed and/or changed. |
Closing | Excellent articulation of task; tied the arguments/insights together highlighting the use in future career and life generally. | Good articulation of task; clearly tied the arguments/insights together highlighting the use in future career and life generally. | Fair articulation of task; mostly tied the arguments/insights together highlighting the use in future career and life generally. | Poor articulation of task; attempted to tied the arguments/insights together highlighting the use in future career and life generally. | Poor articulation of task; did not tie the arguments/insights together highlighting the use in future career and life generally. |
Presentation and Quality of Writing | Quality of writing at a very high standard. Sections are coherently connected to each other. Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation. | Quality of writing is of a high standard. Sections are mostly well structured. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. | Quality of writing is of a good standard. Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes. | Some problems with sentence structure and presentation. Frequent grammar, punctuation and spelling mistakes. Use of inappropriate language. | Quality of writing is at a very poor standard so barely understandable. Many spelling mistakes. Little or no evidence of proof reading. |
No submission method provided.
- Evaluate and reflect on the importance of critical thinking and the benefits of using decision-making processes to assess and solve business, managerial and organisational problems
- Develop a body of knowledge of research principles and methods applicable to key aspects of critical thinking and reasoning
- Develop the capability to make effective and timely decision
- Communicate complex concepts, ideas and solutions to specialist and non-specialist audiences with the aim to influence and persuade others to adopt new positions.
- Knowledge
- Cognitive, technical and creative skills
- Self-management
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.