Task Details/Description:
Required:
You are to critically discuss and evaluate the relationship between dividends and earnings quality and to identify whether or not, on average, dividend-paying companies have better quality earnings than those who do not pay dividends, using relevant academic literature and examples.
Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:
Critically evaluate financial theory in the identification of effective solutions to organizational challenges.
Presentation Requirements: Word Count: 1,500
Font Size: Arial 11 or 12
Line Spacing: 1.5
Submission Date & Time:
Date: 19th February 2021 @ 12 noon.
Assessment Weighting for the Module:
Percentage: 50%
Assessment Criteria Marking Scheme:
| 70% +
Distinction |
60 – 69%
Merit |
50-59%
Pass |
Fail less than
50% |
|
| Critical evaluation (75%) | Highly analytical, coherent, balanced, well supported by research to inform and evidence arguments.
Own arguments and interpretation of research is evident. Conclusion and opinions are fully appropriate and flow logically from the material presented. |
Overall, there are some/good attempts to offer analysis, wellargued, some good links to research to evidence arguments.
Own arguments and interpretation of research is evident. Conclusion and opinions are appropriate and flow from the material presented. |
May be largely descriptive with some/little analysis.
Arguments may be lacking coherence. Will be largely accurate. Evidence of sound understanding. Some /limited references to inform and evidence arguments. Own interpretation of research is less clear and less coherent. Conclusion provided which is largely logical and flowing from previous arguments. |
Discussion limited to descriptions and lacking in
criticality, may be gaps or inaccuracies. Where references have been used, no or limited discussion to show own understanding has been provided. Major lack of coherence. Limited / very limited referencing to inform and evidence arguments. May be lacking a recommendation or conclusion. There may be inaccuracies contained within the discussion |
| indicating little understanding. | ||||
| Literature
(15%) |
Literature should be properly cited with reference to articles/text books using Harvard referencing.
Where literature is cited, this should be in support of your discussions, arguments, comparisons, evaluation and judgments. A wide range of relevant sources |
Literature should be properly cited with reference to articles/text books using Harvard referencing.
Where literature is cited, this should be in support of your discussions, arguments, comparisons, evaluation and judgments. Use of a good range of relevant sources |
Limited literature is cited with reference
to articles/text books using Harvard referencing. Where literature is cited, this should be in support of your discussions, arguments, comparisons, evaluation and judgments. Use a fair range of relevant sources |
No/very limited literature to support discussions |
| Presentation. This concerns the layout, communicatio n and
structure of your work (10%) |
Expresses opinions and ideas in a clear and concise
manner with excellent structure and presentation. Your assignment synthesises the discussions/issue. It should be clear and effective in communicating your critique. Your recommendations should be clearly articulated and aligned to your discussions in your essay. |
Opinions and ideas have a good degree of clarity.
Your assignment should be clear and effective in communicating your critique. Your recommendations are fairly articulated and aligned to your discussions in your essay. Your assignment could carry headings, subheadings, with |
Opinions and ideas have a reasonable degree of clarity.
Your assignment should be clear and effective in communicating your critique. Limited recommendations are articulated and aligned to your discussions in your essay. Your assignment could carry headings, subheadings, with an introduction with body, conclusion |
Minimal or unclear expression of ideas.
Poor spelling and grammar; format is hard to read and is incoherent. No recommendations are articulated in your discussions. Limited or no citations. |
| Your assignment could carry headings, subheadings, with an introduction, main body and conclusion. Excellent referencing. | an introduction with body, conclusion.
Good reference style. |
and appendices.
Adequate reference style. |
Ethical Requirements
Not applicable, assessment does not require the collection of primary data.
Essential Reading for Coursework Task
(if in addition to reading provided in the module outline):
Please note that this is not intended as an exhaustive or definitive list of readings for this piece of coursework. Instead, the articles/chapters listed below should be viewed as core or essential readings that act as a start point as you prepare to tackle this assignment:
Prentice Hall
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.
Read moreEach paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.
Read moreThanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.
Read moreYour email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.
Read moreBy sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.
Read more