NBS8234 Assessment Guideline
MODULE ASSESSMENT:
Assessment is by an individual assignment, where a student would need to write a 2,000 words essay examining a ‘live’ project (Assessed; 100%).
Submission due day: 9th January 2026 via Canvas
Context
Project management is central to shaping, delivering, and closing projects that align with organisational strategy and stakeholder needs. Success depends not only on technical tools but also on governance, life cycle analysis, effective delivery, and organisational learning. This assessment requests you to critically examine project management concepts and analytical methods from across the module and demonstrate how they contribute to successful outcomes in practice.
You are required to choose a live project of your choice (e.g., from your workplace, industry, or public domain) to illustrate your arguments. The project does not need to be large-scale but should allow you to meaningfully discuss governance, life cycles, delivery, assurance and/or closure.
Do You Need Assignment of This Question
Assessment Task
You are required to write a critical essay that explores the principles and analytical methods of project management and governance introduced in this module. Your essay should demonstrate both theoretical understanding and critical evaluation in a global perspective, supported by relevant literature.
Depending on the real-life case selected for this assessment, students may focus their essay on one or more perspectives drawn from the principles studied in this module, such as
- Critically explore how governance structures and early project or programme shaping can influence project success, paying attention to the ways in which accountability, oversight, and strategic alignment are established.
- Evaluate different project life cycle models, comparing linear, iterative, and hybrid approaches, and reflecting on their suitability for the chosen project context.
- Evaluate the project delivery and analyse whether criteria and approaches that case adopted remain sufficient for defining success in contemporary project environments, or whether broader measures should be incorporated.
- Examine the role of assurance, learning, and maturity in project management, analysing how monitoring, control, and knowledge management contribute both to delivery and to the enhancement of organisational capability.
- Assess the outputs of a project, considering how these are defined and measured, and how quality is planned and controlled throughout the project life cycle.
Suggested Structure for the Essay
Introduction
The introduction should present the background of the selected case and establish the context for analysis. It should also set out a clear central argument or thesis and define the overall aim and scope of the essay.
Main analysis and discussion
The main body of the essay should provide a critical analysis of the selected case from multiple perspectives. Arguments should be developed systematically and supported with evidence drawn from academic literature, relevant data, and details from the case itself. This section should demonstrate both depth of analysis and critical engagement with theory and practice.
Recommendations and conclusion
The essay should conclude by offering recommendations that are grounded in academic theory and informed by the analysis of the case. This should be followed by an overarching summary of the key arguments, avoiding unnecessary repetition. The final section may also highlight the broader implications, significance, and lessons learned from the case, linking these insights to both theory and practice.
Submission Requirements
- Integration of theory and evidence with examples from a live project (chosen by the student).
- Use of at least 20 academic references from high-quality sources.
- A 2000-word (+/-10%) essay must be submitted via Canvas.
- What is excluded from the wordcount: Cover Page, Content list (if included), Reference list, Appendices, Figures and Tables.
- Appendices where included must be referenced in the essay.
- Use Harvard referencing style in citation. Referring to the source provided by Newcastle University Library https://www.ncl.ac.uk/mediav8/academic-skills-kit/file-downloads/manage-info/2025%20Cite%20Them%20Right%20Harvard%20Style%20Sheet.pdf.
Buy Answer of This Assessment & Raise Your Grades
Marking Criteria:
Assignment weighting: 100%
| Criteria | Weighting | Distinction (70%+) | Merit (60–69%) | Pass (50–59%) | Fail (<50%) |
| Understanding of Project Management Concepts & Governance | 20% | Demonstrates excellent and comprehensive understanding of project management principles, governance, life cycles, and assurance. Integrates multiple perspectives with strong theoretical grounding. | Good understanding with some critical insight, though not fully comprehensive. Some gaps in linking governance/life cycles/assurance to practice. | Adequate understanding of key concepts; descriptive in places with limited criticality. Limited integration of perspectives. | Poor or superficial understanding; largely descriptive; major gaps or inaccuracies. |
| Critical Analysis of the Live Project Case | 30% | Deep, critical, and insightful analysis of the chosen case. Effectively links theory to practice, identifies complexities, and evaluates success criteria and challenges. | Solid analysis with some critical reflection. Good but not fully developed linkage between theory and case. | Limited analysis; largely descriptive with little evaluation. Connections to theory weak or underdeveloped. | Minimal or no analysis; case described without meaningful evaluation or theoretical engagement. |
| Use of Literature and Evidence | 20% | Extensive engagement with high-quality academic literature. Excellent integration of theory, evidence, and examples. Demonstrates breadth and depth of reading. | Good use of literature and relevant references. Theory applied appropriately but may lack depth in integration. | Limited range of sources. Reliance on non-academic or outdated references. Literature used descriptively rather than critically. | Insufficient or inappropriate use of sources. Very limited or no academic references. |
| Structure, Coherence & Argumentation | 15% | Essay is exceptionally well-structured, with clear flow of arguments. Central thesis well-developed and consistently supported. Transitions smooth and logical. | Clear structure with logical development of argument. Some sections could be better linked. Thesis mostly clear. | Structure adequate but inconsistent. Argument fragmented or weakly sustained. | Poorly structured, disjointed essay. No clear central argument. |
| Recommendations & Conclusion | 10% | Provides insightful, well-grounded recommendations with strong links to theory and practice. Conclusion clearly summarises and reflects on broader implications and lessons learned. | Provides relevant recommendations with some theoretical grounding. Conclusion summarises main points well but limited reflection. | Provides recommendations but weakly linked to analysis/theory. Conclusion limited or repetitive. | Little or no recommendations. Weak or missing conclusion. |
| Academic Writing & Referencing | 5% | Excellent academic writing style. Fluent, precise, and professional. Accurate and consistent Harvard referencing. | Good writing style. Minor errors in expression or referencing. | Adequate writing with some errors in grammar, clarity, or referencing. | Lacking sufficient communication skills and the writing style as well as content are difficult to follow. |
Are You Looking for Answer of This Assignment or Essay
The post NBS8234 Project Management Assessment Brief – Newcastle University (NU) appeared first on Students Assignment Help UK.