MODULE CODE:  66-606220 Talent Development

Task

This assessment task involves you delivering a presentation critiquing an identified talent development system in a sport of your choice. Your critique will:

  • Be pitched at the Performance Director of the selected sport
  • Aimed at addressing identified issues or challenges associated with the individual, environment, or task constraints relating to talent development within the chosen sport pathway
  • Critique the current sport offer and provide solutions / adaptions to address identified issues and challenges
  • Incorporate theory to support your presented issues, challenges and solutions. 

First Sit Assessment

The intended learning outcomes of this assessment task are to

  1. Critically evaluate models of talent development by using relevant academic literature
  2. Design, explain and defend changes to a model of talent development implemented in a sport of your choice
  3. Categorise the factors of high-performing talent development systems and analyse how they influence expertise acquisition.

The assessment will be summatively assessed by the submission of an individual video presentation. The assessment is worth 100% of the overall module grade.

Submission type:                                           Online (Blackboard)

Turnitin[1] used:                                               No

Feedback method:                                        Inline

Feedback type:                                              Audio/screencast

In-Module Retrieval (IMR)[2] available:    Yes

Non-Assessment[3] Requirements:             No

Word Length, Duration and Penalties

The duration of this assessment presentation is 15 minutes.

1 grade point will be deducted for work which exceeds the word duration by more than 10%.

Format

Your presentation will be developed on Powerpoint and submitted via a ScreenCast or Video link to Blackboard.  

Handing-In Details

Please submit your assessment via

a) the online submission point on the module Blackboard site

You will find both these links under the \’Assessment\’ 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.

Enquiries

Any enquiries relating to this assessment should be directed to Martyn Rothwell m.rothwell@shu.ac.uk  

Further Assessment Details

The assessment is scenario-based, detail that scenario here:

Pass Threshold Statement

In order to pass this module assessment the students will be expected to have:

  • a systematic understanding of key aspects of Talent Development, including awareness of the complex, coherent and detailed knowledge domains that inform aspects of this area
  • develop conceptual understanding to devise and sustain arguments, and/or to solve problems, using ideas and techniques to describe and comment upon identified contextual applications, of current research, or equivalent advanced scholarship, to their chosen context
  • an appreciation of the uncertainty, ambiguity and limits of knowledge
  • the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of initiative, personal responsibility and decision-making in complex and unpredictable contexts

the student can:

  • apply methods and techniques to review, consolidate, extend and apply knowledge and understanding within a defined context to initiate and carry out the assessment project
  • critically evaluate arguments, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete), make judgements, and frame appropriate questions to achieve a solution / or range of solutions to a defined context
  • evaluate evidence, arguments and assumptions to reach sound judgements and to communicate them effectively
  • communicate information, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist and non-specialist audiences
  • deploy accurately established techniques of analysis and enquiry within a discipline
  • use analytical techniques and problem-solving skills that can be applied in different situations
  • manage their own learning, and to make use of scholarly reviews and primary sources at least some of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of defined aspects of a discipline

Academy of Sport and Physical Activity Grade Descriptor – Level 6

ClassCategoryGeneral Characteristics
  1st (Exceptional)Exceptional 1stExceptional 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 1stExcellent 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.
Mid 1st
Low 1st
2.1 (Very good)High 2.1Very 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.
Mid 2.1
Low 2.1
2.2 (Good)High 2.2Good 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.
Mid 2.2
Low 2.2
  3rd (Sufficient)High 3rdKnowledge 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.
Mid 3rd
Low 3rd
    FAIL      Borderline FailInsufficient 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.
Mid Fail
Low Fail
Very Low FailNo 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.
ZEROZeroWork not submitted, work of no merit, penalty in some misconduct cases.

[1] 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

[2] In-module retrieval refers to a feature of a module\’s assessment design whereby if you achieve below 40 in an assessment task at the first attempt you are given an opportunity of reworking the assessment task for a capped mark of 40%

[3] 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

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.