Communication Skills (LANG 20002) Spring- 17 - CW- 3-QP
Assignment 2 – Fall 2019
Communication Skills (LANG 20002.1)
arks: 100 (Weightage 30%)
uration: 8 weeks
Learning Outcomes to be achieved:
On successful completion of this assignment, the students should be able to:
1. Apply well-reasoned and responsible judgment to oral and written forms of communication;
2. Apply problem-solving technique to generate practical and creative solutions;
3. Present clear and coherent arguments demonstrating attention to writing conventions;
4. Develop the ability to work collaboratively.
Instructions to Students:
• Topic for the task: Case Study.
• Work collaboratively in groups of 3-4 students.
• Carry out the task as given below and answer all questions.
• Generate a report and submit it on Moodle.
• Give a PowerPoint presentation of your findings and solutions provided by you.
• Marks awarded for the Proposal and Report will be the same for all the group members.
Whereas the marks for the PowerPoint presentation will vary according to the
Presentation Skills, Content Knowledge etc. of the individual members.
This is a group based assignment. Choose one of the case studies given below and respond on the basis
of the given instructions.
• Study the case in detail, identify related issues, analyse it and provide solutions/ recommendations.
• Read two research articles on the problems discussed in the chosen study and critically analyse
• Refer to the guidelines for writing a case study analysis.
Group size: 4 students
Max. Marks 10
The first task for this assignment is a Research Proposal. Each group is required to write a Research
٧ ﻣﻦ١ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
Proposal for the chosen case study which should contain the following:
• Introduction of the case
• Expected problems/proposed solutions
• Action Plan
It should be submitted by Week 4.
B. Group report
Max. Marks 60
Instructions for preparation and submission of written report:
▪ The group should generate a written report highlighting the details based on the discussions,
analysis and research. (Each report should have an Introduction, Discussion, Recommendations,
Conclusion and Annotated Bibliography. A Table of Contents and References should also be
added). Please ensure that you use accepted conventions, format and style for referencing
(CU Harvard Referencing). Your grades will be affected if your referencing is inadequate.
▪ The group shall be tested on the critical analysis, research based solutions, style of writing,
structure, layout and referencing. It is important to note that the group needs to understand the
case, analyze it effectively and give conclusions.
▪ Each group needs to submit only one report.
▪ Word limit: 1300 – 1500
▪ Last date of submission of assessment: During your class on Week 7.
▪ The assignment should be submitted on time. Late submission shall be penalized.
The report will carry the following sections:
✓ Introduce the case
✓ Discuss the main issues/problems (answer the questions given)
✓ Probable reasons
✓ Critical analysis (based on research and group discussion)
• Annotated Bibliography
C. PowerPoint Presentation
Max. Marks 30
▪ Groups will be marked on creativity, relevance and ability to convey the message to the audience.
▪ The PowerPoint Presentation will be held in Week 8 during the scheduled class time.
٧ ﻣﻦ٢ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
The marks allotment for evaluation is:
Expected problems/ Solutions
Analysis, Expression, Critical thinking, use of
Clarity and conciseness of the issues covered in
Recommendations and Conclusion
Slide design/ Layout (font; colours; visuals,
Logical sequencing of data/ information
Language (Vocabulary; accuracy)
Knowledge about the content
Handling audience questions
Soojin is a Korean woman who has acquired permanent resident ship of New Zealand. She works as an
HR Manager in a company where Daniel, her boss is British. Once a Korean client visited the company
and offered a huge joint business venture. Daniel could not understand much of what the Korean said.
Later in the evening, Soojin met this investor privately and discussed the whole venture with him and
asked him to meet her boss once again the next morning. The next day before Soojin could inform
Daniel about her meeting with the client the previous evening, the investor came and finalized the deal
without much talk. He kept on talking to Soojin in Korean and finally thanked her before leaving. The
٧ ﻣﻦ٣ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
boss got annoyed with Soojin and asked for an explanation.
• Why do you think Daniel got annoyed with Soojin even though the company got a huge business
• Do you think Daniel was justified in his behaviour? Why?
• Why do you think Soojin went out of her way to meet the investor privately?
• If you were Soojin how would you deal with such a situation?
• With reference to the case discuss how employee – employer relationship can be maintained in an
Tina and George were two journalists working for the same news channel in the UK. Once they were
sent by the channel to South Africa to cover an event. Both of them worked hard and came up with a
very good documentary film. After it was broadcast George took the whole credit for its success and
Tina was sidelined. This annoyed Tina and she had a big fight with George. The news of their fight
spread among all the staff of the channel and people started gossiping behind their backs. Tina could not
handle all this and she waited for the moment she would find a job in another country and would leave
the channel as soon as possible.
• Why do you think George behaved in this manner?
• Was George justified in his actions? Why?
• Was Tina’s behavior justified? Why?
• If you were the head of the channel how would you handle this issue?
• With reference to the case discuss a few methods of resolving workplace conflicts.
Dr. Vijay and Dr. Sheena are working in a private hospital in the same department. Both of them have
the same qualifications and are very good surgeons. Lately Dr. Sheena is becoming aware that all the
surgeries are being performed by Dr. Vijay. Whenever she tried to bring up this issue with him, he
brushed it aside. Once she heard him gossiping that women are physically and emotionally weak and the
best career for them is that of a homemaker. Dr. Sheena decided that she really needed to have a heart to
heart talk with Dr. Vijay.
• If you were Dr. Sheena how would you feel? Why?
• Why do you think Dr. Vijay was behaving like this?
• Discuss the issues faced by men and women while working together in an organization.
• Do you think discussing things openly with coworkers really helps to sort out issues
With reference to the case discuss a few methods of resolving workplace conflicts.
Refer to the guidelines for writing a case study analysis
A case study analysis requires you to investigate a problem, examine the alternative solutions, and
propose the most effective solution using supporting evidence. You are expected to read academic
articles carrying accounts of people in similar situations.
Preparing the response
Before you begin writing, follow these guidelines to help you prepare and understand the case study:
1. Read and examine the case thoroughly
• Take notes, highlight relevant facts, underline key problems.
2. Focus your analysis on
• Identify four to five key problems.
• Why do they exist?
• What impact do they have on the case/ issue at hand?
٧ ﻣﻦ٤ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
• Who is responsible for them?
3. Actions that can help
• Review course material, discussions, outside research, your experience.
4. Select the best solution
• Consider strong supporting evidence, pros, and cons: is this solution realistic?
Drafting the Case
Once you have gathered the necessary information, prepare a draft of your analysis including these
• Brief the case
• Mention the key problems and issues in the case study.
• Formulate and include a thesis statement, summarizing the outcome of your analysis in 1–2 sentences.
• Discuss the issue and compare it with the relevant studies/research articles you have read.
• Demonstrate that you have researched the problems in this case study.
4. Proposed Solution
• Provide realistic solutions
• Explain why these solutions were chosen
• Support them with evidence
• Concepts from class (text readings, discussions, lectures)
• Outside research
• Personal experience
• Determine and discuss specific strategies for accomplishing the proposed solution.
• What should be done and who should do it?
6. Final draft
After you have composed the first draft of your case study analysis, read through it to check for any gaps
or inconsistencies in grammar, content or structure: Is your thesis statement clear and direct? Have you
provided solid evidence? Is any component from the analysis missing?
When you make the necessary revisions, proofread and edit your analysis before submitting the final
Formative Feedback on assignments: Assignments will be due for Formative Feedback in class /
tutorials or as indicated by your lecturer on Moodle. No emails of assignment are expected for formative
Resubmission of assignments
Assignments must be submitted on time, no resubmission of assignments after the due date will be
Assignments in this unit are to be completed using the Harvard
requirements are detailed in the Moodle in due course of semester.
referencing style. Referencing
Assignments must be submitted via the Moodle (Turnitin link) created online at the date and time
specified. (Week 12 or / & 13 as will be specified).
٧ ﻣﻦ٥ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
Plagiarism and Academic Malpractice
For policies related to Plagiarism / Malpractice please refer to the Student Guide/Handbook. As per
MEC policy, any form of violation of academic integrity will invite severe penalty. Plagiarised
documents, in part or in whole, submitted by the students will be subject to this policy.
A. First offence of plagiarism
a. A student will be allowed to re-submit the assignment once, within a maximum period of one week.
However, a penalty of deduction of 25% of the marks obtained for the resubmitted work will be
b. Mark deduction: When the work is resubmitted, the marking will be undertaken according to the
marking criteria. In compliance with this policy, the 25% deduction is then made on the marks obtained.
For example, in an assessment that carries a maximum of 50 marks, suppose a student were to obtain 30
marks for the resubmitted work, the final marks for that assessment will be 22.5 (after deducting 25% of
the marks actually obtained for the resubmitted work).
c. Period of resubmission: The student will have to resubmit the work one week from the date he or she
is advised to resubmit. For example, if the formal advice to resubmit was communicated to the student
on a Sunday (latest by 5 pm), the student will have to resubmit the work latest by next Sunday 5 pm.
d. If the re-submitted work is also detected to be plagiarized, then the work will be awarded a zero.
e. Resubmission of the work beyond the maximum period of one week will not be accepted and the
work will be awarded a zero.
B. Any further offence of plagiarism
a. If any student is again caught in an act of plagiarism during his/her course of study (either in the same
module, same semester or in any other semester), the student will directly be awarded zero for the work
in which plagiarism is detected. In such cases, the student will not be allowed to re-submit the work.
a. Type 1: In case plagiarism is detected in any component or part submission (submitted at different
times) of one assessment (assignment), the deduction in marks will be applicable for the whole
assessment (assignment), even if only the component or part submission alone needs to be resubmitted.
b. Type 2: In case plagiarism is detected in a group assessment, all students of the group will be
considered as having committed an act of plagiarism irrespective of whether plagiarism is on account of
the act of all or a few or only one member. The policy will then be applied to all students.
c. Type 3: Combination of Type 1 and Type 2: In case plagiarism is detected in any component or part
submission (submitted at different times) of a group assessment (assignment), the deduction in marks
will be applicable for the whole assessment (assignment), even if only the component or part submission
alone needs to be resubmitted. All students of the group would be considered as having committed an
act of plagiarism irrespective of whether plagiarism is on account of the act of all or a few or only one
member. The policy will then be applied to all the students of the group.
d. Type 4: Variation of Type 1 and Type 2: In cases where the assessment consists of components or part
submissions that could be a group assessment component (e.g. group assignment) and an individual
assessment component (e.g. individual reflection), the following will be applicable:
1. If plagiarism is detected in the group assessment component, all students of the group will be
considered as having committed an act of plagiarism, irrespective of whether plagiarism is on account of
the act of all or a few or only one member. The policy will then be applied to all students of the group.
In such cases the group assessment component will be resubmitted as per the policy.
2. If plagiarism is detected in the individual assessment component, the individual assessment
component will be resubmitted as per the policy. The policy will then be applied to that student alone.
3. In both cases (a) and/or (b), the deduction in marks will be applicable for the whole assessment
٧ ﻣﻦ٦ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
D. Amount of similar material
a. The total amount of similar material in any form of student work from all sources put together should
not exceed 30% (including direct quotations).
b. The total amount of quoted material (direct quotations) in any form of student work from all sources
put together should not exceed 10%.
c. The total amount of similar material in any form of student work from a single source should not
exceed 7 percent. However, cases having a similarity of less than 7 percent in such cases may still be
investigated by the faculty depending on the seriousness of the case.
d. If faculty member finds enough merit in the case of a student work with a similarity (with a single
source) of more than 7 percent as not a case of plagiarism, the faculty member should provide detailed
comments/remarks to justify the case.
Penalty for late submission - 5% of the maximum mark specified for the assessment is to be deducted
for each working day for a maximum of one week.
٧ ﻣﻦ٧ ﺤﺔ0ﺻ
Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 2019, Vol. 34, No. 2, 233-253
Effect of Ego Depletion and Expectancy Beliefs
on Working Memory, Problem Solving,
Task Persistence, and Performance
Adnan Adil, Asmara Kanwal, Saba Ghayas, and
University of Sargodha
The present study was undertaken to examine the influence of ego
depletion and expectancy beliefs (EB) about the limited will power
of self-control on task performance and task persistence through a
2 (ego depleted vs. non-ego depleted group) x 3 (group with
positive EB, group with negative EB, and the group without any
EB) between subject experimental design. The participants
(N = 210) were undergraduates of University of Sargodha who
were randomly distributed to each of the six treatment conditions.
Ego Depletion Task (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, & Tice,
1998) and Feedback Task (Fried & Aronson, 1995) were adapted
for the manipulation of the independent variables. Working
memory (WM) was assessed through Digit Symbol Coding
subscale of WAIS (Wechsler, 1997) and scores and time taken on
an anagram task (Clarkson, Hirt, Jia, & Alexander, 2010)
operationalized performance on problem-solving and task
persistence, respectively. Multivariate analysis of variance
indicated that the participants in the non-depleted group had
significantly higher mean scores on problem-solving and WM
tasks than those of their counterparts in the ego-depleted group.
The group with the positive EB had the highest mean scores on
WM and problem-solving tasks as compared to the other groups.
The interaction effect of beliefs about limited will power of selfcontrol and ego depletion remained nonsignificant. Limitations and
recommendations for future research were reflected upon.
Keywords. Expectancy beliefs, ego depletion, working memory,
problem-solving, task persistence
The term ego depletion is widely explored and it has received
substantial attention from researchers working in various fields of
Adnan Adil, Asmara Kanwal, Saba Ghayas, and Anam Khan, Department of
Psychology, University of Sargodha, Pakistan.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Adnan Adil,
Department of Psychology, University of Sargodha, Sargodha, Pakistan.
ADIL, KANWAL, GHAYAS, AND KHAN
psychology. Baumeister coined the term of ego depletion (Muraven,
Tice, & Baumeister, 1998). Ego depletion occurs when after
performing a task that requires self-control, one’s reservoir of selfregulation resource may be depleted or exhausted owing to which
one’s performance on a subsequent self-control task could be impaired
(Dang, 2018). This means that ego depletion state is characterized by
the temporary decrease in the energy level required for the
preparedness to participate in a particular activity (Baumeister et al.,
1998). Hence, with the decrease in the level of energy required for
Purchase answer to see full