The primary aim of this assessment task is to appraise and critically analyse a participant development model of your choice in relation to developing 13-16 year olds engaged in sport and/or physical activity in Hong Kong.
The assessment will be summatively assessed by the submission of an essay.
The assessment is worth 50% of the overall module grade and is assessment 2 of 2.
Submission type: Online (Blackboard)
Turnitin used: Yes
Feedback method: Inline
Feedback type: Inline
In-Module Retrieval (IMR) available: Yes
Non-Assessment Requirements: No
Word Length, Duration and Penalties
The word length of the summative assessment, excluding references, is 2000 words. Further details of the breakdown of the word count can be found in the mark scheme below. Note that all text, apart from the list of references at the end of a document and text in appendices, is included in the word count.
1 grade point will be deducted for work which exceeds the word limit/duration by more than 10%.
The assignment should be submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format3 . Popular alternatives (such as OpenOffice, MacOS files such as Pages, Numbers and Keynote and Google Docs) need to be converted prior to submission using the \’Save As\’ functionality built-in to the software/platform. Assessment not submitted in the specified format will receive a zero mark. Standard presentation requirements (size 11 font, 1.5 line spacing, 2.5 cm margins) should be strictly adhered to. The task should include Module Title, Module Code, Name and Student Number (not your Student Login) in the ‘header’ at the top of the document. Standard presentation requirements (size 11 font, 1.5 line spacing, 2.5 cm margins) should be adhered to.
Please submit your assessment by 3pm on the deadline date specified.
Please submit your assessment via
a) the online submission point on the module Blackboard site
b) the Turnitin link on the Module Blackboard site
You will find both these links under the \’Assessment / Reassessment\’ tab on the module Blackboard site.
Feedback will normally be available fifteen working days after the hand-in date. You will be notified when feedback becomes available.
Stuart Bonner: firstname.lastname@example.org
or Sam Li: email@example.com
Further Assessment Details
1. Identify a prominent youth talent development model (e.g. Cote’s Development Model of Sport Participation, Lloyd and Oliver’s Youth Physical Development Model etc.)
2. Critically evaluate the model, using examples and evidence to support this analysis, in relation to a local (i.e. Hong Kong) sports setting
3. Consider and discuss the validity and application of the model to either participation or performance athletes between the ages of 13 and 16.
4. Prepare a 2000-word essay considering the context within which you are working, the critique you have undertaken and with a clear position relating to the validity and application of the model
Pass threshold Details
|1st (Exceptional)||Exceptional 1st||Exceptional breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding of the area of study, significantly beyond what has been taught in all areas; evidence of extensive and appropriate selection and critical synthesis of reading and research beyond the prescribed range, in both breadth and depth, to advance arguments; excellent communication; performance deemed to be beyond expectation. Work at publishable or commercial standard. The ability to make decisions and systematically carry out tasks with autonomy in unpredictable situations; exercise of initiative in the completion of practical tasks; exceptional leadership skills and evidence of personal responsibility in group contexts; creative flair; extremely well-developed problem-solving skills; the ability to carry out sustained critical reflection on practical work within the wider context of the industry. Exceeds expectations set by the industry context.|
|1st (Excellent)||High 1st||Excellent knowledge and understanding of the area of study as the student is typically able to go beyond what has been taught (particularly for a mid/high 1st); evidence of extensive and appropriate selection and critical synthesis and analysis of reading and research beyond the prescribed range, to direct arguments; excellent communication; performance deemed beyond expectation of the level. The ability to make decisions and carry out tasks with a high level of autonomy; creative flair and the ability to (re)interpret predefined conventions to select and justify individual working practice; excellent problem-solving skills; accuracy and fluency; excellent command of skills appropriate to the task; the ability to reflect critically on practical work within the wider context of industry. Meets expectations set by the industry/employment context.|
|2.1 (Very good)||High 2.1||Very good knowledge and understanding of the area of study as the student is typically able to relate facts/concepts together with some ability to apply to taught contexts; evidence of appropriate selection and critical evaluation of reading and research, some beyond the prescribed range, may rely on set sources to direct arguments; demonstrates autonomy in approach to learning; strong communication skills. Broadly autonomous completion of practical tasks; ability to adapt in response to change or unexpected experiences; decision making is very highly developed; a clear command of the skills relevant to the task; ability to reflect on practical work and set future goals within the wider context of industry. Adherence to standards set by the industry context.|
|2.2 (Good)||High 2.2||Good knowledge and understanding of the area of study balanced towards the descriptive rather than critical or analytical; evidence of appropriate selection and evaluation of reading and research, some may be beyond the prescribed range, but generally reliant on set sources to direct arguments; communication shows clarity, but structure may not always be coherent. A confident approach to practical tasks; a solid grasp of the related processes, tools, technology; creativity in the completion of the task; proficiency is demonstrated by an accurate and well-coordinated performance; tasks are completed with a good level of independent thought and autonomy; an ability to reflect on practical work and set future goals. General adherence to standards set by the industry context.|
|3rd (Sufficient)||High 3rd||Knowledge and understanding sufficient to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts but fails to make meaningful synthesis; some ability to select and evaluate reading and research however work may be more generally descriptive; general reliance on set sources to advance work; arguments may be weak or poorly constructed; presentation is generally competent but with some weaknesses. Competence in technical skills; tasks are completed with a degree of proficiency and confidence; tasks are completed with a sufficient level of independent thought; effective judgements have been made; evaluation and analysis of performance in practical tasks is evident. Errors in completion of the task; general adherence to appropriate conventions set by the industry context.|
|FAIL||Borderline Fail||Insufficient knowledge and understanding of the subject and its underlying concepts; some ability to evaluate given reading and research however work is more generally descriptive; naively follows or may ignore set material in development of work; given brief may be only tangentially addressed or may ignore key aspects of the brief; communication shows limited clarity, poor presentation, structure may not be coherent. Practical tasks are attempted; skill displayed in some areas; there are a significant number of errors; a lack of proficiency in most areas; guidance may be needed to reproduce aspects of the task and apply learned skills. Tasks may be incomplete; failure to adhere to some of the conventions set by the industry context.|
|Very Low Fail||No evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject; no understanding of taught concepts, with facts being reproduced in a disjointed or decontextualised manner; ignores set material in development of work; fails to address the requirements of the brief; lacks basic communication skills. A general level of incompetency in practical tasks; an evident lack of practice; set tasks are not completed; few or no skills relating to tasks are evident. No adherence to conventions set by the industry context.|
|ZERO||Zero||Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty in some misconduct cases.|
 Turnitin is used by academic staff to ascertain whether cheating, as defined by the University assessment regulations, has taken place. It should also be used to evaluate your assignment for accidental plagiarism prior to the hand-in date
 In-module retrieval refers to a feature of a module\’s assessment design whereby you are referred in an assessment task at the first attempt you are given an opportunity of reworking the assessment task for a capped mark
 It may be stipulated for some modules that you have to do something in order to undertake assessment on a module. Any assessment where these requirements are not fulfilled will not be classed as a valid attempt and will receive a mark of zero. Further details can be found later in this assessment brief