Skip to content

Assessment 1 – coursework /2548

Reflective journal (Individual assessment) [50%]

  • 6 x 200 words
  • represents 50% of final grade
  • Submit whole journal (all six responses) by Tuesday 23rd March 2021 (week 25)
    – submit to  Turnitin (by 11.59am)

Each case study seminar (in weeks 3, 7, 10, 16, 19, 23) has a set of questions that you will need to prepare for prior to the seminar. For each case study, a reflective commentary question related to that case study will be published at the end of the seminar (on Blackboard and the module site).

So, for each of the case studies you have done in class you will also need to write a brief response to an aspect of that case identified by the relevant question. Your reflective commentary for that case should:

  • Build on the discussion in class and your own preparation for the case study discussion
  • Incorporate your reflection on the case issues
  • Address the specific question set for that case’s commentary

You should ensure that you offer a coherent and suitably structured response to the question chosen and that there is appropriate analysis, drawing on relevant theoretical models where appropriate.

The reflective journal as a whole will comprise all six reflective commentaries. Please ensure that your document clearly identifies and separates the six different responses and presents them in the order that the case seminars have taken place. The most effective approach is likely to be to write up your reflective response for each case within a relatively short period after that seminar, so that the matters discussed are relatively fresh in your mind. Attempting to produce all six responses just before the submission deadline is unlikely to produce the best outcomes.

Further research and reading beyond the case study materials may well be required, as you are aiming to produce a deeper and more considered response that builds on the discussion in class. You may need to add further examples, data or illustration of the issues and draw on the base of established academic literature. You must ensure that your journal is suitably referenced using Harvard format.

Feedback on the reflective journals will be provided on this pro forma.

Reflective commentary questions [these will be added sequentially]

week 3

How should economics, as an academic profession, address the causal factors identified by Javdani and Chang?

week 7

To what extent can market exchange alter the character of what’s being bought and sold?

week 10

To what extent are individual governments at fault for MNCs’ conduct in relation to tax avoidance?

week 16

Is it ethical for firms to seek to exploit consumers’ behavioural biases?

week 20

Should the policy interventions of market regulators always be aimed at creating competitive markets and making consumers act like rational economic agents?

week 23

To what extent is mainstream economic thinking to blame for our collective failure to respond adequately to the threat of climate change?

Learning Outcomes

Assessments relate directly to the module’s learning outcomes (below). The coursework’s assessment criteria will reflect the following learning outcomes:

  1. Demonstrate awareness of debates within and about economics
  2. Discuss and analyse economic issues, utilising suitable tools of analysis
  3. Critically assess applications of selected micro and macro models to contemporary economic contexts, with awareness of alternatives to orthodox theory
  4. Critically survey published literature from a variety of sources and engage effectively with online research tools.

Reflective commentary assessment criteria

Within your reflective journal as a whole, each of the six commentaries must:

  • Identify and respond explicitly to the reflective question set for that case.
  • Show suitable reflection and development from the discussion in class for that case.
  • Demonstrate a clear and concise writing style.
  • Where required, provide evidence of suitably relevant reading and research (and reference work appropriately using the Harvard format).
  • Where relevant, demonstrate the student’s understanding of the theoretical concepts that the case addresses.


  • Each commentary should be set in 12 point Arial or Helvetica (with 1.5 line spacing) and follow an essay-style format (ie no headings, not long lists of bullet points etc – just a series of developed paragraphs).
  • The maximum word count is 220 words per case study. Commentaries should not be less than 180 words (ie 200 words +/- 10%).
  • Each commentary should be on a separate page.
  • The journal should have a single reference list that covers all six responses.
  • The journal must be submitted in digital form to the Turnitin assignment drop-box on the module’s Blackboard site. Digital submissions must be received by the assignment deadline. Don’t assume instantaneous delivery.
  • Good referencing and academic practice will be credited, as will good standards of written English.
  • Any evidence of plagiarism will be dealt with severely in accordance with DMU regulations.
  • Late submissions will be penalised.

Reassessment opportunity

Non-submission of the reflective journal (and thus a zero mark for that component) producing an overall fail in coursework will normally lead to the Faculty’s standard referral process, with a reassessment in August.

In-course reassessment

Current faculty policy is that where the first assignment on a module is completed yet fails to achieve a mark of 40% then that assignment can be resubmitted without loss of a formal reassessment attempt. The maximum mark that can be achieved for a resubmission is 40%.  Please note – Students MUST have attempted the assignment in order to benefit from in-course recovery. In such cases, students must contact the module leader to seek reassessment and individual deadlines will be negotiated between the student and the module leader.