Presentation Brief
|
Programmes
|
BSc(Hons) Finance and Investment Management
BA (Hons) International Banking and Finance (Top-up)
BA (Hons) Business and Finance (Top-up)
|
|
Module Code
|
AF6036_LD6077
|
|
Module Title
|
Risk in Financial Institutions I
|
|
Distributed on
|
First Week of Teaching
|
|
Submission Time and Date
|
|
|
Presentation Day and location
|
|
|
Word Limit
|
10-15 minutes presentation
|
|
Weighting
|
This presentation accounts for 20% of the total mark for this module.
|
Instructions on Assessment
This work should be completed in a group. Students with approved special circumstances can work individually (please contact your Module Tutor).
You should create a group of 5 or 6 members and send the name of your group members to Module Tutor by 18th October 2024. The presentation will take place in Week 11. The presentation slides should be submitted 1 day before the date of presentation by 12.00 pm GMT.
All members of the group should contribute to creation and delivery of presentation. You are required to be present from 9am to 5pm on presentation day.
Group Presentation
Prepare a group presentation on a contemporary issue/topic in international banking regulation, market risk, credit risk or liquidity risk. Any topic without clear links to risk or regulation is unacceptable.
The presentation should clearly justify the relationship to financial risk or regulation, introduce the topic and its purpose, explain its relevance and significance, motivation, research-based critical analysis and discussion, recommendations, and conclusions.
(15 minutes maximum, 100 marks)
Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives
Programme (Level) Learning Outcomes that this module contributes to:
Knowledge & Understanding (KU):
· Appraise knowledge of contemporary professional practice in business and management informed by theory and research (PLO1).
· Appraise knowledge of business and management to complex problems in or related to professional practice in order to identify justifiable, sustainable and responsible solutions (PLO2).
Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities (IPSA):
· Evaluate effective interpersonal communication skills and the ability to work in multi-cultural teams (PLO3).
Personal Values Attributes (PVA):
· Critique creative and critical thinking skills that involve independence, understanding, justification and the ability to challenge the thinking of self and others (PLO4).
Module-Specific Assessment Criteria
Knowledge & Understanding (KU):
· Develop a knowledge and understanding of capital risk in financial institutions arising from credit, market and liquidity risk. (MLO1)
· Critically evaluate measurement models and management issues in the context of the regulatory requirements within the banking and finance sector. (MLO2)
Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities (IPSA):
· Develop quantitative and qualitative evaluation skills whilst measuring and managing the risks covered in this module. (MLO3)
· Develop an ability to apply regulatory requirements to real-life banking and financial institution scenarios (MLO4)
Personal Values Attributes (PVA):
· Develop an awareness of the risks facing international financial markets and how management can be equipped with knowledge and expertise to implement stronger organisational controls to address risks. (MLO5)
Marking Rubric
|
|
0 – 29%
|
30 – 39%
|
40 – 49%
|
50 – 59%
|
60 – 69%
|
70 – 79%
|
80 – 90%
|
90 – 100%
|
|
Presentation slides and delivery (10 marks)
|
Very poor performance, no real attempt.
|
Poor presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
|
Adequate presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
|
Good presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
|
Very good presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
|
Excellent presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Outstanding presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Exemplary and professional, presentation slides, clarity of speech and body language, relationship with the audience, and timekeeping.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
|
Content and Structure of presentation (80 marks)
|
Very poor performance, no real attempt.
|
Poor choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
|
Adequate choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
|
Good choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
|
Very good choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
|
Excellent choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Outstanding choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Exemplary choice of the contemporary and relevant topic, evidence of extensive research and critical thinking, clear and coherent structure of the presentation, and response to questions.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
|
Evidence of group cohesion (10 marks)
|
Very poor performance, no real attempt.
|
Poor coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
|
Adequate coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
|
Good coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
|
Very good coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
|
Excellent coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Outstanding coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|
Exemplary coherence of presentation and evidence of teamwork and collaboration.
A high level of engagement was demonstrated.
|