Rationale:

Project management discipline is continually evolving. There is currently an overwhelming body of research that was conducted to fill a knowledge gap by contributing to existing literature, improving processes or exploring best practices in various aspects of project management. According to the Australian Qualification Framework, master degree students (level 9) must demonstrate competencies in research and critical thinking to be capable of advancing their discipline and/or resolving industry problems. This unit requires you to successfully complete the conception and planning phases of your research project lifecycle.

Overview

This individual assignment covers the conception phase of the research project. It tests your essential research competencies needed to identify a knowledge gap or a problem in the context of project management discipline that warrants research. It primarily assesses your understanding and level of engagement with learning resources at an early stage of the inquiry process. The assignment must be your own piece of work. You must not plagiarise, collude with others or get involved in contract cheating (i.e. by seeking help from friends or commercial providers in writing or helping you with this assignment). That is a serious academic offence that may eventually result in suspension or expulsion from CQUniversity.

Assignment 1 (Critical Review Report) consists of two deliverables or parts:

1. Assignment 1A, 15%: Critical Review Report, due by end of week 4
2. Assignment 1B, 5%: Self and peer assessment of the report, due by end of week 5

Note: Each part will receive a mark of ZERO if not completed by the given deadline to complete the work.

Task

Assignment 1A:

Assignment 1A requires you to choose an initial research topic using a supplied research topic generation tool. Next, you will conduct a literature search to identify relevant scholarly sources. You will provide a summary of the most relevant scholarly article using your own words. You will then critically evaluate the article by identifying patterns, themes, similarities and differences as compared with the other articles you have identified. The evaluation process should lead you to identify a potential gap or an opportunity that may warrant further research. This gap or opportunity can be distilled from any explicit or implicit limitations, recommendation of further research and/or flaws in that article. If you are unable to identify such gap, it is acceptable that, with justification, you opt to replicate the research reported in that article in a different context, country or perspective. As a logical conclusion of this assessment task, you must derive up to two preliminary research questions to address the gap or the opportunity. You must also include a screenshot of Turnitin similarity report showing the similarity percentage. Then, you will provide your personal reflection of your learning experience in this phase. The reflection should record your experiences, feelings and reactions during the entire phase. This may include your commentary on Turnitin similarity percentage and evaluation of the adopted approaches, techniques or tutorial activities that have been helpful or unhelpful. You must also reflect on the consultation process you have had with your lecturer/tutor, peers and Moodle sources.

Specifications:

Your critical review report should not exceed 1200 words. The report must substantially include the following components:

1. A description of the topic using a supplied tool.
2. A table of four relevant articles (presented in Harvard format) and keywords or combination of keywords used to identify each article.
3. A summary of the most relevant article to the topic. (up to 300 words).
4. A critical appraisal of the article. (up to 300 words)
5. Preliminary research questions.
6. A screenshot of the Turnitin similarity report.
7. Your personal reflection. (up to 300 words)

Please note the following details:

• You must remove any detail identifying your name in the submission.
• Submit your report via Workshop Platform in Moodle.
• As a guideline, the length of the report should not exceed a maximum of 1000-1200 words.
• Referencing should be in a consistent style - typically Harvard formats.
• Upload your file in a Word format only (.doc or .docx).

Assignment 1B

Assignment 1B requires you to assess two reports submitted by your peers as randomly assigned to you. You must also self-assess your report. You will conduct the assessment using a supplied marking tool. Peers will communicate the submissions and assessments double-blindly. You must be objective and careful when assessing yourself and other students. You must provide constructive and adequate comments to your peers. Your lecturer will monitor the peer assessment for quality assurance.

Further details and training about self and peer assessment process will be provided in Moodle site.

Assignment 1A:

Assessment will be done according to presentation, accuracy and coverage of the content for each part of the assignment 1 as set out under 'Specifications' section. The Turnitin similarity percentage must not exceed 10%. A marking tool will be available in Moodle to ease the assessment process. The final mark for assignment 1A is the average of the marks given by yourself and reviewers. 

Assignment 1B:

You will also receive marks for the quality of assessing yourself and assessing others' submissions. Moodle will compare your assessment with your peers' assessments. Based on how close your assessment is to the best assessment of the submission, you will receive a score for the quality of your assessments. The system picks one of the assessments to be the best assessment that is closest to the mean of all assessments - and gives it a grade of 100%. Then it measures the 'distance' of your assessments from this best one and gives them lower grades depending on how different they are from the best assessment (given that the best one represents a consensus of the majority of assessors). 

The maximum Marks will be allocated as per the following table:

ASSIGNMENT TASK

Rationale:

Planning for a research project may be a complex undertaking. Collaboration is a useful and standard approach to plan effective and high-quality research projects. Working in groups will ensure that students will learn from each other and benefit from the diversity of their experiences, backgrounds and capabilities. Group setting fosters a positive learning experience that contributes to student learning, attainment of learning outcomes and overall success. It also encourages group members to develop and apply project management competencies including teamwork, leadership, time management, conflict management and communication. This group assignment will give you the opportunity to take ownership and be an active participant in the learning journey for the remaining duration of this unit. This fundamental assignment tests your understanding of all unit learning outcomes of this unit. Successful completion of this assignment will trigger the end of the (Planning Phase) of your research project.

Overview:

This is a group assignment. It comprises 80% of the total mark of this unit. You must achieve a minimum score of 50% of the available marks of this assignment task to pass this unit. The assignment is designed to encourage students to teach each other to improve understanding of various aspects of the research planning process through additional discussion and explanation. The ultimate goal is to develop a viable research proposal of high academic standards. The assignment consists of four deliverables or parts:

1. Part 2A, 10%: Outline Research Proposal, due in week 8
2. Part 2B, 10%: Oral presentations of proposals, due in week 10
3. Part 2C, 40%: Detailed Research Proposal, due in week 12
4. Part 2D, 20%: Group self and peer assessment (performance evaluation), due in week 13

Group forming

The Unit coordinator will form your group in week five. Each group will comprise 3-6 students depending on the number of students enroled in each class or setting. Group members will be assigned semi-randomly. Then, each group member must enrol in his/her group online. Your group leader will be assigned by the Unit Coordinator. The group must negotiate the group rules by filling in a group charter. Your group must meet on a weekly basis, ideally during tutorial sessions for on-campus students and via Zoom for distance students until the end of the term. Interim evaluation of group performance will take place by end of week 8. Support will be given to dysfunctional groups to facilitate their corrective actions to work more efficiently.

Note: Your contributions to the assignment as a group member must be your own piece of work. You MUST not plagiarise, collude with others or get involved in contract cheating (i.e. by seeking help from friends or commercial providers in writing or helping you with this assignment). That is a serious academic offence that may result in suspension or expulsion from CQUniversity.

Task:

Part 2A: Outline Research Proposal (10%)

This is the first deliverable of your group that will be due in week 8. The task requires your group to develop an outline proposal of approximately 1500 words excluding references with key information about your intended project. This document essentially outlines the what, why and how of the group research project.  Your group will discuss the research ideas of each group member as explained in the conception phase, prioritise each project idea and eventually agree upon the group research topic for further adoption in assignment 2. In case of disagreement, your group must adopt the topic of a group member who has achieved the highest overall mark in assignment 1.

You should use the guidelines provided within the detailed research proposal template (see Part 2C) for completing the required sections as applicable. The outline proposal should include the following components.

1. A description of the final research topic
2. A brief rationale to justify the need and significance for the project.
3. Research questions or hypothesis (up to three questions)
4. A brief Methodology
5. Expected research findings and their implication.
6. A list of recent main scholarly articles relevant to your group topic that will inform your literature review. (List a minimum of 10 papers using Harvard style)

Part 2B: Oral presentations (10%)

This is the second deliverable of your group and is due in week 10. Your group must prepare a strict 8-slide PowerPoint presentation file (excluding the title slide and references) to present your intended research project. The presentation must adequately cover the critical elements of your detailed research proposal excluding project management part. Presentations will take place during tutorial sessions in week 10 for on-campus students and via Zoom for distance students. Each group will present its project to the respective tutor and peers. Each group will have strict 10 minutes of presentation time plus 5 minutes of Q&A and feedback time (10+5=15 mins). Each group must select one or two group members to make the presentation on behalf of the group. However, each group member is expected to join the presenter(s) and be ready to answer any question by the tutor. Students who are not available during the presentation may be penalised. Exceeding the time limits for presentation will encounter mark deductions; therefore, you are encouraged to have adequate rehearsal in advance.

Part 2C: Detailed Research Proposal (40%)

Developing a detailed research proposal is the third and most important deliverable of the assignment. The proposal is effectively your research project plan. You should think of it as a document that should be detailed enough so anyone else can use your plan to execute the project. You must consider the feedback received during oral presentations seminars to improve your research proposal.

The proposal should include the following sections. A template will be supplied with sufficient guidelines to complete each section.

1. Self-assessment (by ticking the boxes of a given checklist)
2. Title: Develop a concise title that indicates the overall purpose of your study (15 words).
3. Abstract: Summarize the significant elements of your proposal (200 words)
4. The rationale for the study: Provide a research background and explain a suitable gap in project management literature that warrants research (800 words)
5. Significance: (200 words) Explain the importance and possible implications of the outcomes emerging from the proposed research.
6. The research question, hypothesis and objectives: Define the problem in the form of a research question, hypothesis and objectives.
7. Research Design: (200 words) Select and justify a research design or methodological approach to solve the problem.
8. Data collection: (800 words) Select and justify the data collection method, procedures, sampling plan, instrumentation, ethics protocol, etc.
9. Preliminary literature review: (2000 words) Conduct a preliminary literature review of the most relevant arguments by other scholars relating to the chosen topic (a minimum of ten scholarly refereed papers).
10. Research Project Management: Include project plans and/or documentation as per the guidelines in the supplied template.
11. Responsibility matrix: The main contributions of each group member in this part of the assignment.
12. References and NOT bibliography.
13. Appendices: Provide a list of items included in the proposal and provide a shared link to access the folder where these documents are located. The shared folder must include the following documentation:

• Project Schedule using MS Project including Gantt Chart
• The draft of data collection instrument (questionnaire survey, interview schedule, etc.)
• The draft of Ethics submission documentation.

Make sure that you are fully aware of the assignment requirements and the assessment rubric. Your group must submit the research proposal in WORD format (DOC or DOCx). Make sure that you allow sufficient time to consult Studiosity and Turnitin before the final submission.

Part 2D: Group Self and Peer Assessment (Performance Evaluation) (20%)

Evaluation of group members is the fourth and last deliverable of the assignment. At the beginning of week 13, you will receive an email from the Unit Coordinator inviting you to respond to a compulsory survey. You must respond by the given deadline, mentioned in that email which will be around the end of week 13. The survey includes many rating questions using a 5-point Likert scale format. The survey aims to evaluate the performance of each group member regarding leadership, attendance of group meetings, timely action, cooperation, quality of contribution, etc. You must self-rate your performance as well as rate each member of your group against the given criteria. You must respond to the survey independently and privately. You must be objective and honest in your assessment as you may be penalised if your assessment is found to lack objectivity. To ensure accurate assessment, it is worthwhile to keep a private diary to record incidents that might help you complete the survey. Incidents could include positive or negative impressions about a group member regarding engagement in discussions, regular attendance at group meetings, quality of contributions, academic integrity, and adherence to deadlines. The survey results will then be used as a basis to calculate your mark. In calculating and finalising your mark, other factors will be considered including, but not limited to, your group ability to resolve conflicts and delegate tasks as well as, the group members' level of participation and engagement with online resources, lecture-discussions, tutorial activities, teaching staff and peers to ensure consistency and objectivity.

Part 2A: Outline research Proposal

This part will be assessed based on the following criteria:

1. The accuracy and viability of the research project (40%).
2. Alignment between all sections of the proposal (20%).
3. Relevance and credibility of cited scholarly sources (20%).
4. The format, language and presentation (20%).

Part 2B: Oral Presentations

This part will be assessed based on the following criteria

1. Clear alignment between rationale, research questions and methodology (20%).
2. Research is presented in a coherent & logical sequence (20%).
3. The presentation contains sufficient, accurate and focused information (20%).
4. Ability to answer questions competently (20%).
5. Length of presentation is within the assigned time limits (10%).
6. Overall quality of the presentation (10%).

Part 2C: Detailed Research Proposal.

The below rubric will be used for marking this part:

Part 2D: Evaluation - Group Self and Peer Assessment

This part will be assessed based on the level of your engagement as a group member regarding your leadership, teamwork, attendance at group meetings, timely action, academic integrity, cooperation, quality of contribution, etc. The assessment criteria will also consider analytics data and the lecturer/tutor records of group ability to resolve conflicts and delegate tasks as well as the active engagement of each group member with online resources, tutorial activities, class participation. In particular, students must participate in all compulsory activities as specified in the unit schedule. Marks will be deducted from the overall calculated mark of this assessment as a penalty for lack of participation in the following compulsory activities: