In Order To Graduate On February 4, Works Hard To Finish

In Order To Graduate On February 4 Works Hard To Finish

Student A is preparing to graduate on February 4 and aims to finish her master of engineering report by January 8. She plans to return home and get married immediately afterward. However, if she delays graduation to June 10, the next available date, she would incur substantial additional tuition fees to maintain her student status.

Her report includes a major marketing activity scheduled for January 20, involving a local company's new service package. Due to logistics, she cannot gather customer feedback data before January 8, which is required for her report evaluation, and her advisor, Professor B, is hesitant to accept the report without this data. Professor B cannot waive these requirements.

To resolve this conflict, an innovative approach is needed to allow Student A to meet her graduation goals without unnecessary financial burden while satisfying academic requirements.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

In addressing the conflict between Student A’s graduation timeline and the academic requirements for her report, a multifaceted strategy that balances logistical constraints with educational integrity is essential. This approach involves integrating simulation data, adjusting scheduling, and utilizing flexible assessment strategies to accommodate the existing deadlines without compromising the quality of assessment.

Primarily, since student feedback data, which is essential for validating her marketing activity analysis, will not be available before the report deadline of January 8, alternative methods of data collection and validation should be considered. A practical solution is to incorporate simulated customer feedback data, based on prior market research or analogous market responses, into the report. This simulative data can serve as a provisional measure, demonstrating the potential effectiveness of the marketing activity pending actual feedback, which can be added later if necessary.

Secondly, a proposal could be made to Professor B to allow a provisional or phased submission process. Under this scheme, Student A would submit her report by January 8 with all available data and preliminary conclusions. She could then include an appendix or addendum with detailed feedback once it has been collected post-January 20. This incremental submission would enable her to meet the January 8 deadline while fulfilling the data requirement subsequently.

Thirdly, academic flexibility can be negotiated. The university or department might permit a conditional passing grade contingent on the subsequent submission of the customer feedback data, thereby satisfying the requirement without delaying graduation. This would necessitate clear communication and agreement on terms, such as a deadline extension for the feedback and subsequent review, manageable within her April or June graduation planning.

Additionally, leveraging technology and remote data collection methods could accelerate feedback collection after the event. Surveys, online interviews, or digital engagement metrics gathered immediately after the marketing activity could serve as credible data sources, which can be appropriately integrated into her report for a more comprehensive analysis.

Finally, effective communication with her advisor, Professor B, is paramount. Student A should clearly articulate the constraints and proposed solutions, demonstrating a commitment to academic standards while respecting logistical and financial realities. Negotiating a flexible timeline or phased submission plan, supported by evidence of her proactive measures, can be persuasive and facilitate mutual agreement.

In conclusion, by integrating simulated data, proposing phased reporting, and leveraging technological tools for rapid feedback, Student A can resolve the conflict between her graduation schedule and the report requirements. Such innovative, flexible strategies ensure academic integrity is maintained while respecting the practical constraints faced by students and faculty alike, ultimately enabling her to graduate on time without undue financial burden.

References

• Brinkmann, S. (2018). Qualitative Research: A Critical Introduction. Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications.
• Friedman, T. L. (2005). The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• García-Murillo, M., & Venkatesh, V. (2013). Closing the loop: Aligning anthropology and psychology in innovation studies. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 403-418.
• Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. Sage Publications.
• Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1996). Evaluation of Training. Training & Development Journal, 50(1), 54–59.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Sage Publications.
• Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research. Wiley.
• Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a New Service-Dominant Logic for Marketing. Journal of Retailing, 80(1), 45-56.
• Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications. Sage Publications.