Assignment Requirements and Guidelines The assignment should be a maximum of 4,000 words in length. Appendices and references are not included in the word count. There are certain key things to consider when preparing the written assignment. Whilst not an exhaustive list, ask yourself whether you have, for example • engaged with, and demonstrated your understanding of the relevant literature • demonstrated an analytical approach to the material. What are the strengths, weaknesses, limitations or usefulness of particular perspectives • integrated, or related, theory and practice • presented cogent, well structured argument • justified your arguments and supported them with empirical evidence, examples and references • addressed the question in a clear and focused way • provided evidence of wide reading. You should be drawing on a good range of journal articles and books when writing the assignment. All sources - ideas, models and materials that are not your own - should be appropriately attributed. You may find yourself drawing upon material gleaned from the online sources. As with all material, this should be utilised critically • referenced source material in the preferred style - Harvard referencing. Failure to do this shall be penalised. • Used tables, bullet points and other presentational devices to structure your assignment • Clearly labeled all figures, showing their source as well as what they show • Used appendices appropriately - these should be referred to in the text and should provide supporting information, and not as a mechanism for extending the word limit • Presented the assignment neatly. The preferred style is 12 point font size, line and a half spacing, justified text and numbered pages. Marks will be specifically awarded for: • Appropriate use of theoretical perspectives and models (clear knowledge and understanding of these – over use of theory may be as inappropriate as under use) • Analysis and synthesis of case material (integration of theory and practice) • Critical evaluation of material (cogent and logical argument, awareness of alternative perspectives) • Conclusions and recommendation (well-grounded, empirically supported)