The following table scrutinises the assignment in detail.

Task 1a [80%] Analysis

Page
3

Sectio
n
1

Number
of words
57

% of
words
4

3
3&4
4&5

1.1
1.2
1.3

80
434
543

5
29
37

5&6

1.4

274

19

1.5
TOTAL

86
1474

6
100

Description of your work

Described who Gardiner Greene
Hubbard was.
Described his background.
Described his journey, 9 bullet points
Explained how the Bell Telephone
Company started
Discussed six factors for success.
Chance, vision, Not afraid to break
rules, Persistence, Social network,
Fighting for the public interest.
Told the reader about Hubbard legacy.

The table shows the breakdown of the response to Task 1a, which
consisted of five pages and @1500 words. Sections 1 to 1.2 described or
summarised facts about Hubbards life, there was no analysis here, simply
stating of facts. This was largely biographical data which is readily
available even from a basic Google search. The basic wiki entry for
Hubbard contains most of this information,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardiner_Greene_Hubbard.
Section 1.3 was entitled Grabbing the opportunities but focused on
explaining how The Bell Telephone Company came about. This was
effectively a narrative with no clear evidence of analysis. Furthermore
much of what was stated here was information s that was being repeated
from previous sections, albeit from an alternative perspective. Again this
is information which is very easily available.
In terms of awarding marks at this stage, at the very best the student
can possibly be commended for summarising Hubbards life story, but
certainly not for analysis or use of any kind of academic literature relating
to entrepreneurship.
The next section, 1.4 Factors for success at first seems promising, the
student presents six factors, but these are largely a set of truisms, not
based on any discernible theory model or framework. There is no level of
depth and completely inappropriate for a Masters level piece of work e.g.
Vision
Hubbard saw the opportunities of the telephone and knew how to
commercialise it.
Social network

Hubbards contacts within governmental bodies enabled him to get (financial)

support for his projects

The remaining section, 1.5 Legacy, simply states his achievements.

Analysing the response in detail therefore uncovers that 80% of what was
presented is basically information describing something (Hubbard) based
on readily available material. The remaining 20% (section 1.5) is a listing
of factors which have not been substantiated in any academic manner
and are effectively superficial observations.
Having thoroughly examined the response if we then relate it to the
marking criteria, we note the following:

Understanding The student may understand Hubbard and his

life, but it is hard to establish the understanding of
entrepreneurship based on this response.
Use of theory No evidence of this
Reading No evidence of academic reading
Evaluation Section 1.5 is very poor
Conclusions No clear conclusion
Critical thought None in relation to in-depth analysis or theory

Based on the response to Task 1a alone, the mark would have been lower,
however there were some redeeming features in Task 1b (not provided for
confidentiality reasons).
The key issues were limited use of any frameworks and furthermore the
limited analysis that was present was very poor indeed.