Lei 2014 Project Paper Based On Case Study 1 40%

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 3

MANAGING SECURED ENVIRONMENTS LEI 2014 & LE 6204 PROJECT PAPER

EXAMINATION BOARD OF SAITO UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

B.A. DEGREE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT (INVESTIGATIONS) (HONS)

PROJECT PAPER
__________________________________________________________________________________

SUBJECT : MANAGING SECURED ENVIRONMENTS

CODE : LEI 2014 & LE 6204

NAME :

MATRIX NUMBER :

SUBMISSION DATE :

MARKS : 40 MARKS
________________________________________________________________________________________

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES:

a. Read the assignment question very carefully before you start your planning.
b. Your assignment answers should be 3500 words each EXCLUDING references.
c. Type your answer using 12 point Times New Roman font and 1.5 line spacing.
d. Tables and figures where provided, should be appropriately titled.
e. All Case Study/Project Papers are strictly for the issuing Lecturer only.
f. Plagiarism is strictly prohibited.
g. List your references separately in the APPENDIX page using the APA format.
h. Electronically submit your answers to the concerned lecturer by Saito-UC Email

________________________________________________________________________________________

PREPARED BY : MR DAVID SOTHIE NAYSADORAI

This Assignment Paper consists of printed THREE (3) pages including the front cover.

© Saito University College 1


MANAGING SECURED ENVIRONMENTS LEI 2014 & LE 6204 PROJECT PAPER

This is a Case Study Analysis on the Research Paper titled: One More Broken Window: The Impact of the Physical Environment on
Schools Report By: Kate Broadhurst Katy Owen Gemma Keats Emmeline Taylor July 2008. Used with permission from Perpetuity
Research & Consultancy International (PRCI) Ltd

Instructions:
Read Sections 1, 2, 3 and Case Study 1 of the Research Paper and present the Case Study Analysis, of
Case Study 1 outlined as follows.
Question
Prepare report analysing the above research paper and,
(i) Abstract/Executive Summary: single paragraph summary including recommendations
(ii) Problem Statement: Overview of key issues arising from case analysis
(iii) Case Analysis: Theory-driven or Problem-driven analysis of case(s) identifying factors and
underlying key issues
(iv) Alternative Solutions: Pros and cons of possible solutions to problems
(v) Recommendations: Detailed description of optimal solution with rationale

Include answers to the following questions in your report

2.1 If the study considered weather or not and to what extent schools should have a role in addressing
the problems, how can this be delivered without adding to the burden to teachers, and senior
leadership team?

2.2 In your opinion, how does “Broken Window” theory, application of CPTED principals and
Environmental Criminology, contribute to the key policy and theoretical framework of the research.

2.3 After reading Summary and Conclusions of Case Study No.1, elaborate on the following: -
a) Did the closing down of the Funfair actually impact the low aspirations of the students?
b) Was there direct evidence to show that “Broken Window syndrome” indeed contributed to the
decline of students’ morale and the school?
(40 Marks)

End of Assignment Questions.

© Saito University College 2


MANAGING SECURED ENVIRONMENTS LEI 2014 & LE 6204 PROJECT PAPER

Rubrics for Marking


Award a maximum of 40 Marks using the following rubric for the written report (C4)
Dimension 0 1 2 3 4 5 WEIGHTING SCORE
Focus/Organization of The report Report is Report is Report is Report is The report 2.0
the slides/report/essay unacceptable poorly somewhat prepared to acceptable is very well
and compliance to the with no prepared, outlined. basic and organized
instruction organization Organization The standards. organized in and points
at all on the poorly done organization Organization a presentable are focused
main ideas. Minimal is unclear. is present. with good well. All
No or compliance Some Minimal logic flow of. instructions
minimal to instruction compliance compliance Full are fully
compliance to to to compliance complied
instructions instructions instruction shown. with.
shown.
Elaboration on the No Elaborations Elaborations Elaborations Elaborations Thorough 2.0
main points elaboration of unclear and done but done in shown with and
main areas. poorly somewhat normal minimal complete
enumerated, in a disarray manner, mistakes and elaborations
with some with with some gaps. Main on all
main points repetition of thought put points relevant
missed. prior in. Main covered well main points
knowledge points and relevant covered. No
covered areas covered gaps at all
found
Mechanics Numerous No analysis Some Analysis Analysis is Analysis is 4.0
minor and done, some analysis done, some objective but very
major errors supporting done, but objectivity no/inadequate objective
in the data incomplete shown with supporting and
analysis/no presented and not minimal examples supported
analysis done only some covering all acceptable shown. by
and/or weak matters, standard of Discussions examples.
application comparability with some eexamples lack depth. Discussion
are not and little evidence to and some is in depth
corresponding discussion support depth
with the data
referenced.

Total Weighting x Dimension = Total Score

© Saito University College 3

You might also like