UTS: Managing People & Organisations (21129) Autumn 2019 Group Report

This group report from the Managing People and Organisations course (21129) at UTS, Autumn 2019, critically evaluates team dynamics and management. It addresses Tuckman's model of team development (forming, storming, norming, performing, adjourning) and examines the impact of social facilitation and social loafing within teams. The report includes skits demonstrating the five stages of management and the impact of social dynamics. It also contains a team charter outlining core values and responsibilities. The assessment includes both a written summary and a verbal presentation component, with feedback provided on argument, organization, critique, understanding of content, academic English, formatting, peer review, presentation content, delivery, and communication skills. The overall task result was a C grade (69.50), with specific feedback noting areas for improvement in referencing, independent thinking, and integration of empirical examples.

Student Task Report
Assessment 1: Group Report
SUBJECT: (21129) Managing People and Organisations
SEMESTER:2019, Autumn Session
STUDENT:Nguyen, Truong Quynh Lam(12807754)
26 May 2019
UTS | Faculty of Business
Course intended learning outcomes weightings - 21129
Q 10% - C10026v4 PLG 1 Be knowledgeable about business concepts necessary for a career in business and related professions
T 25% - C10026v4 PLG 2 Be critical, analytical and creative thinkers
P 65% - C10026v4 PLG 3 Be effective communicators with a capacity to work in teams within a professional field in a range of contexts
SELF MARKING TEAM MARKING PUBLISHED
not completed A A
This is for both the written (60%) and oral (40%) components of the first assessment task.
This task has associated files that can be downloaded from Review:
ASSESSMENTITEM1.pdf (198.19K)
F P C D HD
avg
staff
T Argument
10% weighting
Quality of purpose and topic given in essay.
RESULT: C (70.00) -There is one generally well-focused argument. Main ideas are somewhat clear and developed with the support of detailed information
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Organisation and Structure
10% weighting
This relates to the content within each section of the essay and flow
RESULT: C (70.00) -Essay structure is used. Introduction states the main argument and provides an overview of the paper. The body is generally on topic
A conclusion is included. Organisation supports argument and purpose; sequence of ideas could be improved.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
T Critique
15% weighting
This includes the reasoning, assumptions, connections and relationships between ideas.
RESULT: P (62.00) -Some connections between main ideas, limited clarity and complexity of thought, possibly assumes managerialist conclusions, lack o
counterfactual thinking.
LEGEND: staff - staff mark self - student self assessment
estimate (if available)
avg - class average mark penalty - if a penalty has been applied, it
represents the final mark
page 1 of 3The graphs and results in this document only represent student results entered into and published via REVIEW. They may not represent a complete
record of student achievement in these subjects. This document is for reference only and is not an official transcript.

Student Task Report
Assessment 1: Group Report
SUBJECT: (21129) Managing People and Organisations
SEMESTER:2019, Autumn Session
STUDENT:Nguyen, Truong Quynh Lam(12807754)
26 May 2019
UTS | Faculty of Business
F P C D HD
avg
staff
Q Understanding and Content
10% weighting
The reference to understanding the course content and literature to support main argument.
RESULT: C (70.00) -Satisfactory understanding and engagement with course materials. Use of course content is mostly accurate and fairly clear;
demonstrates solid but less accurate reasoning; contains some appropriate details and/or examples. Good use of primary and secondary sources and meets
minimum 6 references.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Academic English
5% weighting
Use of appropriate English
RESULT: C (68.00) -Sentences are generally well constructed and have varied structure and length. Paragraphs are generally well structured. The author
makes up to 5 errors in grammar, syntax, mechanics, and/or spelling, but they do not interfere with understanding.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Formatting and Referencing
5% weighting
Adheres to guidelines
RESULT: P (58.00) -Formatting looks fairly neat, but violates many assignment formatting guidelines. It is within the 1000 word limit (+/- 10%). Mostly
referenced according to Harvard UTS conventions: (i.e.) many mistakes with in-text citations. Reference list may be incomplete/improperly formatted. Possib
some references missing from list.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Addressing Peer Review
5% weighting
Ability to make recommended changes
RESULT: P (64.00) -Limited evidence of and reflection on application of feedback from peer reviewer. May include some mistakes.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Presentation Content
10% weighting
Quality of presentation content
RESULT: C (72.00) -Content was presented in a coherent manner without repetition of written summary. Content and materials were relevant to topic wi
good use of live cases and multimedia.
LEGEND: staff - staff mark self - student self assessment
estimate (if available)
avg - class average mark penalty - if a penalty has been applied, it
represents the final mark
page 2 of 3The graphs and results in this document only represent student results entered into and published via REVIEW. They may not represent a complete
record of student achievement in these subjects. This document is for reference only and is not an official transcript.

Student Task Report
Assessment 1: Group Report
SUBJECT: (21129) Managing People and Organisations
SEMESTER:2019, Autumn Session
STUDENT:Nguyen, Truong Quynh Lam(12807754)
26 May 2019
UTS | Faculty of Business
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Delivery
10% weighting
Ability to deliver the presentation
RESULT: D (75.00) -Coordination among team members was very good and engaged the audience. Presentation was within the minimum of five minutes
and a maximum of eight minutes timeframe. Time was well divided amongst the group members. Q&A response was very good.
F P C D HD
avg
staff
P Communication Skills
20% weighting
Ability to communicate
RESULT: D (75.00) -Presentation was succinct and clear using verbal and non-verbal communication tools to build a narrative around the topic without
reading. Good projection, rhetoric, modulation, pace, pronunciation, enthusiasm, humour, gestures, movement, attire, demeanour.
Overall task result
F P C D HD
avg
staff
Assessment 1: Group Report
25% weighting of subject
FINAL TASK MARKC (69.50)
TEAM MARKING COMMENT EXISTS:
Hi team, My comments: There were points raised by your reviewers that were still not addressed in your submitted paper
Your references were not in Harvard UTS style. There were writing mistakes. Albeit minor, these could have been preven
by simple thorough editing. There were jumps in your paper which was pointed out by the reviewers but which was not re
addressed in your actual paper. I find the paper restrictive in the sense that most of the discussion was on the Tuckman
model but there is a wide breadth of areas/changes that are covered in your lectures and readings that could have been
easily discussed. I have not seen a citation of an empirical example or case. The paper was meant to be a critical paper b
did not see your independent thinking skills being displayed. The presentation was good in that you were creative and
presented examples through skits. The engagement with your audience must be sustained and for most parts, they audi
was engaged, What could have hindered very good engagement was reading. When reading make sure that you are still
trying to engage your audience.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
LEGEND: staff - staff mark self - student self assessment
estimate (if available)
avg - class average mark penalty - if a penalty has been applied, it
represents the final mark
page 3 of 3The graphs and results in this document only represent student results entered into and published via REVIEW. They may not represent a complete
record of student achievement in these subjects. This document is for reference only and is not an official transcript.