Convincing Features
Assignment Type
Subject
Uploaded by Malaysia Assignment Help
Date
| Course Code / Title: | MRM700 Research Methods |
| Assessment No: | Assessment 3 |
| Title: | Project Written Proposal |
Task type: Report
Method: Individual
Weighting: 50%
Due date: 23:59 MYT, Sunday, Week 6 (2 November 2025)
Length: 5,000 words +/- 10% Course learning outcomes:
The first three chapters of a Master’s dissertation or research project generally include the Introduction, Literature Review, and Methodology. This assessment evaluates the clarity, quality, and structure of these draft chapters, as well as the alignment of each chapter with the research question and objectives.
Your assessment will be marked using the rubric below.
| Criteria/Level High Distinction, Distinction, Credit, Satisfactory, Fail, A+ A B to B+ C to C+ F (90%-100%) (80%-89%) (60-79%) (50-59%) (0-49%) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Introduction [20 marks] | The introduction is exceptionally clear and engaging. It clearly defines the research problem, purpose, research questions, and objectives. Provides a strong rationale for the study’s significance. | The introduction is clear and outlines the research problem and objectives but may lack depth or clarity in explaining the research gap or rationale. | The introduction is adequate, but the research problem or objectives may be underdeveloped or unclear. The rationale for the study is weak. | The introduction is unclear or lacks critical components like the research problem or objectives. The rationale is vague or missing. | The introduction is missing or entirely off- topic. The research problem, questions, or objectives are not defined. |
| Literature review (critical analysis) [20 marks] | The literature review is comprehensive, well-organized, and critically engages with the key theories and debates. Gaps in existing research are clearly identified, and their relevance to the research | The literature review is well- organized and includes relevant studies. It engages with key debates but may lack a critical edge or deeper analysis of some key areas. | The literature review is adequate but mainly descriptive, with little critical engagement. Some studies may not be fully relevant or integrated. |
The literature review is incomplete or lacks critical engagement. Some sources may be outdated or irrelevant, and the research gaps are not clearly identified. |
The literature review is missing or does not engage with relevant academic sources. There is little to no critical analysis. |
| problem is wellexplained. | |||||
| Research questions and objectives [20 marks] | The research questions and objectives are clearly defined, focused, and aligned with the overall research problem. They are directly linked to existing literature and gaps in knowledge. | The research questions and objectives are clear but may be a bit broad or lack focus. They are somewhat connected to the research gap, though some details are missing. |
The research questions and objectives are adequate but may be too general or not fully aligned with the research problem. The connection to the literature is not strong. |
The research questions and objectives are vague or poorly defined, with no clear connection to the research gap or literature. |
The research questions and objectives are missing or completely unrelated to the research problem or literature. |
| Methodology (research design) [20 marks] | The methodology is highly detailed and appropriate for the research problem. The design, sampling methods, and data collection techniques are thoroughly justified, and their relevance to the research questions is clearly explained. | The methodology is clear and well- structured but may lack detail in some areas, such as sampling or data collection techniques. The justification for the methods is provided but could be expanded. | The methodology is adequate, but some parts are underdeveloped, such as sampling methods or rationale for choosing certain methods. Some methods may not be fully explained. | The methodology is unclear or lacks sufficient detail. Justification for methods is weak or absent, and key aspects of research design are not explained. |
The methodology is missing or completely unsuitable for the research problem. There is no justification or explanation for chosen methods. |
| Clarity and coherence [10 marks] | The thesis is exceptionally well-organized and each chapter flows logically. Transitions between sections are smooth, and the language is clear and concise throughout. | The thesis is well- organized, and the structure is clear, but some sections may need better transition or connection. The writing is generally clear, though occasionally verbose. |
The thesis is adequately structured, but some areas may be hard to follow due to unclear transitions or verbosity. Writing is generally clear but lacks conciseness in places. | The thesis lacks clear organization, and some sections may feel disconnected. The writing is sometimes unclear, and the structure is difficult to follow. | The thesis is disorganized and unclear. The writing lacks structure, making it difficult to understand or follow. |
| References and citation [10 marks] | References are comprehensive, relevant, and properly cited according to the chosen citation style (e.g., APA, Chicago). The thesis uses a wide range of highquality sources, including recent studies. | References are relevant and mostly cited correctly, though there may be minor errors in citation style or missing sources. The range of sources could be broader or more recent. | References are adequate, but there may be some inconsistencies in citation style or the use of outdated sources. The citation format may have some errors. |
References are incomplete or inconsistent, with errors in citation style or the use of irrelevant sources. | References are missing or completely incorrect. Citation style is not followed, or sources are irrelevant or unreliable. |
For further support, please visit HELP Learning Resources Centre for a range of support services and resources to help you in your learning.
Assessment plagiarism, cheating, fabrication, falsification of data or any form of assessment dishonesty is a misconduct. Refer to the Programme Handbook for more information regarding student responsibilities.
You can find information on how to request for an assessment extension in the Course Outline. You can find more important information regarding penalties for late assessment submissions, publication of results, return of marked assessments and re-sit in the Programme Handbook.
Many Malaysian students struggle to complete their MRM700 Research Methods assignment due to a lack of understanding or time. Don’t worry — Malaysia Assignment Help is here to guide you! Our expert writers create 100% original, well-researched assignments that follow your university’s guidelines. You can also check our MRM700 assignment samples to see the quality of our work. If you want to score higher grades without stress, get professional Research Methods assignment help in Malaysia today!
