ASSESSMENT: 2000-word Individual Critical Blog
Module Code: BHO0270
Module Title: The Future of Work (HKMA)
Assessment Type
(Initial/ Resit) 2000-word Individual Critical Blog
Academic Year 2024/25 Term 1
Assessment Task
2000-word critical blog. Weighting 60%
“The future of work is changing. Technology is powering a growth in flexible work
across the economy, whilst emerging technologies such as robotics and AI are set
to become common place. Organisations must consider the implications of digital
transformation in the world of work now, equipping people and businesses across
the country with the skills and conditions needed to take advantage of the
opportunities presented by the 4IR.” (techUK, 2024)
Write a 2000-word individual blog which considers the above quote and
discusses the evolving landscape of the future workplace. The blog should analyse
core trends and challenges considering Artificial Intelligence adoption and propose
strategies for organisations to foster a sense of connection between employees
and the company in an era where AI is projected to replace millions of jobs
globally.
In your blog, you should critically examine:
• how to provide meaningful work for employees when they are increasingly
required to work alongside machinery and technology
• the need to treat employees as human beings, not parts of a machine, and
explore ways to create an environment where human workers and
machines collaborate effectively
For the academic blog, please find the academic blogs guideline to write.
At least 25 references and 5 pictures, less than 25 references and not
include 5 pictures will deduce the grade.
Level of AI-Use permitted for this Assessment
Level 2 – Some use Permitted. Some use of AI tools is permitted in the
research/early stages of this assignment but you must ensure that the work you submit
is your own. If you use AI tools, you should acknowledge or reference this in your
work. Use the Text reference builder to learn how to reference AI generated ideas. The
sorts of questions to consider when using AI are:
2
• Is it accurate?
• Are the references genuine?
• Has it reproduced bias?
Duration: N/A Word Count: 2000 words
Task specific guidance:
• Draw on key evidence (blogs, statistics, academic writings).
• Knowledge and understanding should be demonstrated within the critical blog
through an evaluation and application of key theory.
• Students are expected to engage with relevant module resources on Brightspace
and through the Library website.
• In-text citations can be presented as hyper-links
• Students are expected to reference journal articles within their blog. Emphasis
should be placed on ‘up to date’ information where possible.
• High-quality websites may be used.
• Your work must be presented in a blog format e.g., headings, images. A blog is an
online journal and therefore has a more informal tone than an academic essay.
• Formative feedback on your work can be sought through the module team’s office
hours.
• Your final reference list does not count towards your word-count.
General study guidance:
• Cite all information used in your work which is clearly from a source. Try to ensure
that all sources in your reference list are seen as citations in your work, and all
names cited in the work appear in your reference list.
• Reference and cite your work in accordance with the APA 7th system – the
University’s chosen referencing style. For specific advice, you can talk to your
Business librarians or go to the library help desk, or you can access library
guidance via the following link:
o APA 7th referencing:
• The University has regulations relating to academic misconduct, including
plagiarism. The Academic Skills Team can advise and help you with how to avoid
‘poor scholarship’ and potential academic misconduct.
• If you have any concerns about your writing, referencing, research or presentation
skills, you are welcome to consult the Academic Skills Team, you can book tutorial
appointments with them via the website How to book a tutorial appointment
• Further study resources including the Academic Skills Team overview can be
found here: Study resources
• Your word count is +/- 10%
3
Assessment criteria
• The Assessment Criteria are shown the end of this document. Your tutor will
discuss how your work will be assessed/marked and will explain how the
assessment criteria apply to this piece of work. These criteria have been designed
for your level of study.
• These criteria will be used to mark your work and will be used to support the
electronic feedback you receive on your marked assignment. Before submission,
check that you have tried to meet the requirements of the higher-grade bands to
the best of your ability. Please note that the marking process involves academic
judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.
Learning Outcomes
This section is for information only.
The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated
learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these are the things
you need to show in this piece of work.
On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate:
ML02: Demonstrate systematic understandings of the changing dynamics and complexity
within contemporary business.
ML04: Produce critical discussions of their impact upon the future of work.
ML05: Apply methods and techniques to review, consolidate, extend, and apply your
knowledge to a topic.
Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions.
Submission information
Word/Time Limit: 2000 words
Submission Date: 06/01/25
Feedback Date: 27/01/25
Submission Time: 15:00 UK Time (23:00 HK time)
Submission Method:
Electronically via module site in Brightspace. Paper/hard copy
submissions are not required. For technical support, please
contact [email protected]
4
Appendix 1 Assessment criteria
These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed. They describe different levels of performance of a given
criteria.
Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.
The grades between Pass and Very Good should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module.
The Exceptional and Outstanding categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the Excellent requirements, perform at a superior
level beyond the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.
90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10 – 19 0 – 9
Level Exceptional
(Outstanding+)
Outstanding
(Excellent +)
Excellent Very good Good Pass Unsatisfactory Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Fulfilment of
relevant
learning
outcomes
Met Met Met Met Met Met Not met or
partially met
Not met or
partially met
Not met or
minimal
Not met or
minimal
Response to
the question
/task
Full command
of assessment
task;
imaginative
approach
demonstrating
flair and
creativity
Clear
command of
assessment
task;
sophisticated
approach
Very good
response to
task;
elements of
sophistication
in response
Well-developed
response to
assessment
task with
evident
development of
ideas
Secure
response to
assessment
task but not
developed
sufficiently
developed to
achieved
higher grade
Adequate
response that
meets minimum
threshold, but
with limitations
of development
Nearly a
sufficient
response but
lacks key
aspects.
Insufficient
response
Little response No response
Knowledge and understanding (F, I and H)
Knowledge requirements are different at F, I and H level. Please use the relevant level knowledge assessment criteria
Conceptual
and critical
understandi
ng of
contemporar
y knowledge
in the
subject and
its
limitations
(H) (30%)
Skilfully
integrates
conceptual
knowledge from
other modules
or disciplinary
areas to
provide original/
creative critical
insights into the
subject and its
ambiguities in a
Excellent
conceptual
knowledge
and critical
appreciation
of the key
tensions,
controversies
disagreement
s and
disputes
drawing on
Draws on an
extended
conceptual
knowledge
Shows very
strong ability
to apply/
critique ideas
and a well-
developed
consideration
Demonstrates
competent
conceptual
knowledge
drawing on a
broader
knowledge
base. A good
attempt at
integrating and
critiquing.
Some solid
Demonstrates
secure
conceptual
knowledge,
conventional
critical
understanding
of relevant
knowledge.
Some
awareness of
Demonstrates
adequate basic
conceptual
knowledge,
some formulaic
critical
understanding
and awareness
of limitations of
knowledge.
Mentions some
terminology
relating to
theories,
concepts
Demonstrates
insufficient
grasp of a basic
knowledge.
Very limited
critical
Demonstrates
little core
knowledge. No
critical insight
or awareness
of the
limitations of
knowledge.
Major
misunderstandi
ngs and
Demonstrates
virtually no
core
knowledge or
critical insight
or awareness
of the
limitations of
knowledge.
Wholly
irrelevant.
5
90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10 – 19 0 – 9
Level Exceptional
(Outstanding+)
Outstanding
(Excellent +)
Excellent Very good Good Pass Unsatisfactory Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
considered
individual voice
ideas from
beyond the
module
bounds.
Offers
original,
compelling,
insightful or
interesting
additional
perspectives.
of the
limitations of
knowledge.
Performance
at this level
and above
shows
intellectual
comfort with
doubt,
ambiguity,
controversy,
uncertainly
and
complexity –
rather than
seeking
certainty and
a single right
answer.
insights into the
limitations of
knowledge.
No major errors
or
misunderstandi
ng.
the limitations
of knowledge.
Lacks depth
of integrating
ideas.
Few
inaccuracies.
No integration of
ideas.
Some errors
and/or gaps in
coverage and
relevance
understanding
and awareness
of the
limitations of
knowledge.
Many errors in
understanding
and omissions.
significant
omissions.
Many errors in
understanding
and extensive
omissions.
Cognitive / Intellectual skills
A range of means of framing cognitive and intellectual skills are provided to reflect the variety of assessment tasks across the School. Module leaders should consider the following criteria and
select the one(s) that best reflect the assessment tasks. Assessment task briefs should be designed with sufficient information to provide students with a clear understanding of the core intellectual
skills expected within the bounds of the module– corresponding with the appropriate level of study
Module leaders should be clear about the nature of information / data to be analysed, as well as the ‘tools’ of analysis expected. Analytical tools can be based on logic (comparison, connection,
categorisation, evaluation, justification) and/or numerical (e.g. statistics, financial) or other.
Application
of
knowledge /
skills to
practice / a
solution(s) /
proposal /
conclusion
(20%)
Creative &
original
application of
knowledge
/skills to
produce new
insights and
offers a novel
and
comprehensive
solution /
proposal /
conclusion
which extends
beyond the
boundary of the
brief.
Applies
knowledge /
skills to
develop a
comprehensi
ve solution /
proposal /
conclusion
which
extends
beyond the
original
boundary of
the brief.
Extended
insights.
Applies
knowledge /
skill in a
sophisticated
manner to
develop a well
conceptualise
d and solution
/ proposal /
conclusion.
Alternative
approaches
might be
considered.
Applies
knowledge/skill
in a logical and
developed
manner to
provide a
considered
solution /
proposal /
conclusion.
Some good
insights
/creativity
No logical
errors.
Applies
knowledge/ski
ll in a logical
manner to
provide a
more
developed
solution /
proposal /
conclusion.
Some but
limited
insights/creati
vity.
Applies
knowledge/skills
in a basic
manner to
develop a simple
but limited
solution/
proposal/conclus
ion.
No insights /
creativity
Logical errors
evident.
Use of some
knowledge to
provide a
solution /
proposal /
conclusion, but
limited solution/
proposal /
conclusion
Some use of
knowledge, but
mostly
insufficient.
Weak use of
knowledge /
skills evident.
Very limited
solution /
proposal /
conclusion.
No evidence
of attempt to
analyse or
interpret
information or
provide a
solution/propo
sal/
conclusion.
6
90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10 – 19 0 – 9
Level Exceptional
(Outstanding+)
Outstanding
(Excellent +)
Excellent Very good Good Pass Unsatisfactory Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Thoughtful
and
developed
insights/
creativity.
Few logical
errors
Argument,
reasoning
(20%)
Intellectually
coherent and
comprehensive
argument that
articulates
authentic,
considered
stance in own
voice
Compelling
argument
that shows
intellectual
agility and
captures
ambiguity.
Wholly
relevant.
Sharply
focused and
complex
argument.
All points
wholly
relevant
Convincing
and coherent
reasoning.
Clearly
articulated
argument with
consideration
of different
perspectives.
Mostly relevant
points.
Logically
coherent
reasoning.
Satisfactory
argument but
limited in
complexity.
Broadly
relevant
points.
Some
limitations in
terms of
reasoning
Adequate basic
level of
argument
provided.
Some relevant
points but also a
number of
irrelevant points
Errors in
reasoning.
Weak argument
with substantial
errors in
reasoning.
Descriptive or
largely
incoherent
Largely
incoherent
No argument
is offered
Use of
referenced*
evidence
and sources
to support
task
*Normally
APA 7th or
OSCOLA
(20%)
Systematic and
rigorous use of
evidence/
sources beyond
the normal
bounds of the
module to
robustly support
purpose of the
work. Evidence
of independent
reading and
research.
Referencing
fully competent
and accurate
Comprehensi
ve use of
high-quality
evidence and
sources
beyond the
normal
bounds of the
module and
shows
evidence of
independent
reading and
research.
Referencing
fully
competent
and accurate
Task is very
well
supported by
very extensive
use of
evidence /
sources.
All points fully
substantiated.
No
unsubstantiat
ed points.
Referencing
fully
competent
and accurate
Task is well
supported by
more
developed use
of
sources/eviden
ce
Most points are
substantiated
and no major
unsubstantiate
d points
Referencing
largely
competent and
accurate.
Some minor
errors in
citations or
references.
Task is
supported by
several
sources
/evidence.
Some points
are
unsubstantiat
ed.
Referenced
appropriately
Referencing
largely
competent
and accurate
but may
include errors
Task supported
by basic
evidence and
sources but is
over-reliant on
very few
sources.
Significant
number of points
are
unsubstantiated.
Some effort to
reference, but
frequent errors
and omissions
One or two
apparent
references to
concepts
introduced in
the
assessment
task
Very few
points are
substantiated
using evidence
/ sources.
Significant
errors and
omissions in
referencing
Little or no
evidence
Significant
errors and
omissions in
citation and
application of
referencing
Unsupported
Very little
attempt to cite
or reference
No evidence
No citations
Language
and style
(10%)
Lucid, fluent,
elegant, and
compelling,
using a
distinctive and
individual voice
Clear and
fluent with a
breadth of
vocabulary.
Discernible
author voice.
Clear
functional
writing with a
discernible
author voice.
Clear and
straightforward
use language.
Largely error
free
Basic use of
vocabulary,
grammar and
syntax.
Limited flaws.
Basic use of
vocabulary,
grammar and
syntax that
conveys the
meaning of the
text.
Many
vocabulary,
grammar and
syntax errors
that obscure
meaning
Extensive flaws
in vocabulary,
grammar and
syntax that
prevent the text
from being
Unacceptable Insufficient
evidence
7
90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 20-29 10 – 19 0 – 9
Level Exceptional
(Outstanding+)
Outstanding
(Excellent +)
Excellent Very good Good Pass Unsatisfactory Unacceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
understandable
.
