Research Methods for Business hbk
Module Code Module Title Module Credits GRM5035 Research Methods for Business 10 Academic Year and Semester Examination Board Level & Block 2023-24, 2nd Semester July 2024 5-2 (BM) & 5-1 (MM) Method of Assessment Term (Mid-term /End-term) Weighting Coursework End Term 100% Module Leader Module Leader email Dr. Agustin D. Cortez Jr. [email protected] Additional Information (if any) Word Limit 2000 words equivalent with ±10%: This is an end of term assignment/assessment Minimum: 1800 words Maximum: 2200 words Version 1 Page 1 of 13 Contents 1. Assessment Details 2. Submission Details 3. Assessment Criteria 4. Further Information ➢ Who can answer questions about my assessment? ➢ Referencing ➢ Submission problems ➢ Unfair academic practice ➢ How is my work graded? 5. IV form Version 1 Page 2 of 13 Assessment Details Assessment title Abr. Weighting Coursework WRIT1 100% Pass marks for undergraduate work is 40%, unless stated otherwise. Task/assessment brief: Please read the assignment guidelines carefully. Follow the required format and structure of the research paper to avoid missing out the important details of the paper. This assessment introduces the formal research proposal processes to strengthen the research skills which is relevant in your academic and professional development. This is an individual assessment (assignment) of 2000 words weighted at 100% to be submitted at the end of the term. Proper citation of sources needs to be established using the Harvard style of referencing. The reference list should be presented in a separate page specifically at the end of the paper. Think or select a topic and submit for approval on week 3 before engaging into the topic. There should be NO duplication of topic in the same class. Choose the topic that is aligned to your specialisation. Inform your research supervisor (tutor) if you change your topic to get approval of the new topic. Start working on the topic which was approved. Update of the paper shall be checked every week/session until submission. The research proposal should follow the following contents and structure. In writing the paper, no need to write the expected number of words in each section but follow the required number of words for each section. Provide reflective headings and subheadings as maybe necessary. 1. Introduction. (150 words) ▪ Write a brief but substantial background and description of the chosen topic ▪ Cite certain scenario or conditions that necessitate and inquiry or investigation on that topic. ▪ Highlight the reasons that prompted you to take on the topic. Justify your choice. 2. Statement of Research Problem. (100 words) ▪ Clearly state research question/statement based on the topic or research idea being proposed. ▪ The specific research questions and statement should clearly mention the focus of the study ▪ The research question/statement should lead to the identification of the research objectives. 3. Research Objectives. (50 words) ▪ Research should be based on the research question/s. ▪ Objectives should be specific to give clear answer to the research problem/s. ▪ Two or three research objectives would be enough unless it requires more for clarity. Consider the limitations of the words. 4. Review of Related Literature. (1000 words) ▪ Literature reviews should be based or anchored on the research objectives ▪ Use different sources of information for the related literature (i.e., Journals, books, e-books, websites & other relevant secondary sources). ▪ Follow the sequence of the research objectives as presented in the previous section. Version 1 Page 3 of 13 Present the reviews of literature chronologically as presented in the previous section. Clearly cite or recognise the source of the information/data using the proper format (i.e. author’s last name, year of publication) ▪ Citation could be at the beginning, middle, or at the end of the paragraph where appropriate. ▪ Summarise or paraphrase the literature but maintain the main idea/s of the author ▪ Use appropriate transition or connecting words to maintain coherence and smooth and logical presentation of the reviews. 5. Research Philosophy. (100 words) ▪ Clearly state the research philosophy followed in the proposed research ▪ Explain the basis of the research philosophy 6. Research Methodology. (400 words) ▪ Use the future tense while presenting the sub-headings below. ▪ Write a short statement about this section before presenting the subheadings. ▪ Clearly discuss the essence and significance of the methodology in the proposed study. o Research Design and Strategy. (100 words) o Participants of the Study. (100 words) o Data Collection. (100 words) o Statistical Analysis. (100 words) 7. Ethical Consideration. (100 words). ▪ Clearly discuss the actions and procedures undertaken to maintain the integrity and in safeguarding the rights of the sources of information. ▪ Be specific of the actions taken of protecting and maintaining integrity of the information 8. Conclusion. (100 Words). ▪ Highlight the main points mentioned at each section of the paper. ▪ No need for citations in this section ▪ Write the number of words right below the conclusion. 9. References ▪ Use at least10 varied sources of information following the standard format (Harvard) ▪ Use recent editions of sources (i.e. 2010 onwards) ▪ Presented in a separate page ▪ ***END of Paper*** Additional instructions: ************* Word count (or equivalent): 2000 words This is a reflection of the effort required for the assessment. Word counts will normally include any text, tables, calculations, figures, subtitles and citations. Reference lists and contents of appendices are excluded from the word count. Contents of appendices are not usually considered when determining your final assessment grade. Academic or technical terms explained: Version 1 Page 4 of 13 Submission Details Submission Deadline: End – 30 May 2024 th Estimated Feedback Return Date After the result announcement (10 working days) – July 2024 EB Submission Time: 9:00 PM Turnitin: Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as a non-attempt unless you have had an extension request agreed or have approved mitigating circumstances. See the Gulf College website for more information on submission details and mitigating circumstances. File Format: The assessment must be submitted as a word document and submit through the Turnitin submission point. Your assessment should be titled with your: Student ID number, Module code and Assessment ID, e.g. 1610200 GAC3000 WRIT1 Feedback Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Turnitin / MS Teams / Face to Face. Feedback will be provided with comments on your strengths and the areas which you can improve. Module tutors give students two types of assessment feedback: formative, which is given when the student is working on the completion of an assignment or coursework, and summative, which is given upon completion of the module. A comprehensive assessment feedback on your performance will be given after the announcement of the results. (10 Working Days) Assessment Criteria Learning outcomes assessed On successful completion of the module, a student should be able to: 1. A knowledge of the research process in its wider context. 2. An ability to critically evaluate the robustness of different research approaches and their strengths and limitations 3. An ability to design research proposals in terms of methodology and approach 4. The practical skills to administer a range of research techniques particularly in relation to data collection and analysis Version 1 Page 5 of 13 In addition, the assessment will test the following learning outcome: 1. Gain knowledge of the research processes and apply in wider context. 2. Identify and evaluate the robustness of different research approaches and their strengths and limitations 3. Design and write research proposals applying different methodology and approaches 4. Develop skills in administering different techniques in data collection and analysis Marking/Assessment Criteria Part/Section 1. Introduction 2. Statement of the Problem 3. Research Objectives 4. Review of Related Literature 5. Research Philosophy Description Clear and relevant background of the study Marks Allocated 10% Clear and focused problem statement reflecting the topic 10% SMART objectives reflecting the problem of the study 5% Logical, relevant, and cohesive presentation of literature (10 marks) Critical reviews made of the literature presented. (10 marks) Clear citations of the presented literature. (5 marks) Clear statement and explanation of the research philosophy 25% 10% Objective choice and explanation of research design (5 marks) Clear discussion of the data collection process (5marks) 6. Research Methodology Relevant explanation of statistical analysis methods to use (5 marks) 20% Clear discussion and determination of the source of information (5 marks) 7. Ethical Consideration 8. Conclusion Substantial reflection and discussion of the ethical aspect of the study Clear summary and highlights of the main points presented 5% 10% 5% 9. Structure Clear application of academic format like paragraph spacing, language syntax and errors, alignment, citations, and referencing style) Total Version 1 100 Page 6 of 13 AY: 2023-24 / 2nd Semester Marking Criteria/Rubrics Marking Rubrics: No answer (0) Very Poor (20) Poor (30.00) No title provided /no company name provided in the topic. Irrelevant introduction or the statements were entirely different that of the topic. No objectives and company name Title provided which is too generic also without company name and highly irrelevant explanation in introduction Poor choice of topic and irrelevant introduction No objectives and company name or irrelevant objective which is not matching with the topic. Statement of Problem (5%) No stated problems. Need to have focus and a clear identification of problem faced for the topic need to be provided. Literature Reviews (25 Marks) A very poor or no analysis and review of related literatures are made. Statement of problem provided but with very limited relevance to the topic. Need to have focused and a clear identification of problem faced for the topic need to be provided. A very poor or no analysis and review of related literatures are made. Interpretations Research Topic/ Title and Introduction (10%) Research aims & Objective (10%) Version 1 Satisfactory (40.00) Very basic topic with limited introduction Good (50.00) Very Good (60.00) Excellent (70.00) Good topic with an introduction that reflects ideas about the topic. Very good topic supported by an introduction reflecting relevant ideas about the topic. Excellent topic supported by an introduction reflecting relevant ideas about the topic. Irrelevant objective. The name of the company is not given. Objective provided with limited relevance. The name of the company is not given. Lacks Little clarity. Good and relevant objectives are given. The name of the company is given. But more objectives provided required only one. Very good and wellfocused objectives. The name of the company is given. Excellent and wellfocused objectives. The name of the company is given with high level of understanding provided. Problems are not clear. Need to have a clear identification of problem related to the topic. Very limited relevance of problem Problems of the study are reflected. A more relevant and interesting problems can be considered as basis of a more relevant to the study. Problems of the study are clearly defined were good. A little push for a smarter and interesting statement of the problem. Problems of the study are clearly defined were very good. Relevant and interesting statements. Problems of the study are clearly defined were excellent. Relevant and interesting statements. Poor analysis and review of related literatures. Interpretations made on the cited literatures A very basic analysis and review of related literatures. Basic interpretations are made on the A good analysis and review of related literatures. Satisfactory interpretations are made on the cited A very good and scholarly analysis and review of related literatures. Relevant interpretations are An Excellent and scholarly analysis and review of related literatures provided from journals. Relevant Page 7 of 13 Outstanding (80.00) Outstanding topic supported by an introduction reflecting relevant outstanding ideas about the topic. Exceptional (100.00) Exceptional and unique choice of topic supported by an introduction reflecting exceptional ideas about the topic. Outstanding and well-focused objectives. The name of the company is given with high level of understanding provided. Problems of the study are clearly defined were outstanding with appropriate explanation. Relevant and interesting statements. Exceptional and well-focused objectives. The name of the company is given with high level of understanding provided. Problems of the study are clearly defined were exceptional. Highly Relevant and interesting statements. An Outstanding and scholarly analysis and review of related literatures provided from highly cited An exceptional and scholarly analysis and review of related literatures provided from Interpretations made on the cited literatures are totally irrelevant and without a link with the current study. made on the cited literatures are totally irrelevant and without a link with the current study. are out of focus without any link with the current study. cited literatures that barely linked with the current study. Reviews not provided from journals. literatures liking with the current study. Some reviews not from journals. made on the cited literatures with a clear link with the current study. Reviews were provided from Journals. interpretations are made on the cited literatures with a clear link with the current study. journals. Relevant interpretations are made on the cited literatures with a clear link with the current study. Research Philosophy 10% Research philosophy fully omitted. Highly irrelevant and inappropriate research philosophy chosen. No in-text citation. Irrelevant and inappropriate research philosophy chosen. No proper in-text citation. Relevant research philosophy chosen but no appropriate reason. Mistakes on in-text citation. Good and appropriate research philosophy chosen supported by appropriate reason. Mistakes on in-text citation. Very good, moderately relevant and appropriate research philosophy chosen supported by the appropriate and detailed reason. Proper in-text citation used. Excellent, moderately relevant and appropriate research philosophy chosen supported by the appropriate and detailed reason. Proper in-text citation used. Outstanding, moderately relevant and appropriate research philosophy chosen supported by the appropriate and detailed reason. Proper in-text citation used. Research design and strategy – 5% No answer given or a totally irrelevant answer. An attempt to model the theory but no originality; no application of knowledge to address the issue; very poor organisation of ideas; no details and evidences Poor modelling of theory with no originality; very limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas are not organised; very limited details with no relevant evidences Basic modelling of theory with limited originality; limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas not properly organised; preparation of assessment details supported by limited evidences Good modelling of theory with originality; ability to apply knowledge to address issues; organised collection of ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by evidences. Very good interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with perception and originality; ability to apply knowledge with evidences to address issues; organised collection of thoughts and ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Excellent interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Outstanding interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Data collection – 5% No answer given or a An attempt to model the theory Poor modelling of theory with no Basic modelling of theory with Good modelling of theory with Very good interpretation and Excellent interpretation and Outstanding interpretation and Version 1 Page 8 of 13 highly cited journals which were listed in Scopus. Relevant interpretations are made on the cited literatures with a clear link with the current study. Exceptional, moderately relevant and appropriate research philosophy chosen supported by the appropriate and detailed reason. Proper in-text citation used. Exceptional interpretation and modeming of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Exceptional interpretation and totally irrelevant answer. but no originality; no application of knowledge to address the issue; very poor organisation of ideas; no details and evidences originality; very limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas are not organised; very limited details with no relevant evidences limited originality; limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas not properly organised; preparation of assessment details supported by limited evidences originality; ability to apply knowledge to address issues; organised collection of ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by evidences. modelling of theory and concepts with perception and originality; ability to apply knowledge with evidences to address issues; organised collection of thoughts and ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Statistical analysis – 5 % No answer given or a totally irrelevant answer. An attempt to model the theory but no originality; no application of knowledge to address the issue; very poor organisation of ideas; no details and evidences Poor modelling of theory with no originality; very limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas are not organised; very limited details with no relevant evidences Basic modelling of theory with limited originality; limited application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas not properly organised; preparation of assessment details supported by limited evidences Good modelling of theory with originality; ability to apply knowledge to address issues; organised collection of ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by evidences. Very good interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with perception and originality; ability to apply knowledge with evidences to address issues; organised collection of thoughts and ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Excellent interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Outstanding interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Participants – 5% No answer given or a totally irrelevant An attempt to model the theory but no originality; no application of Poor modelling of theory with no originality; very limited Basic modelling of theory with limited originality; limited Good modelling of theory with originality; ability to apply knowledge to Very good interpretation and modelling of theory and Excellent interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with Outstanding interpretation and modelling of theory and Version 1 Page 9 of 13 modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Exceptional interpretation and modelling of theory and concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Exceptional interpretation and modelling of theory and answer. knowledge to address the issue; very poor organisation of ideas; no details and evidences application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas are not organised; very limited details with no relevant evidences application of knowledge to address issues; collection of ideas not properly organised; preparation of assessment details supported by limited evidences address issues; organised collection of ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by evidences. concepts with perception and originality; ability to apply knowledge with evidences to address issues; organised collection of thoughts and ideas; preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Ethical consideration 5% Ethical Implications fully omitted. Highly irrelevant discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given. Some relevant discussions of the ethical implication of the topic chosen. Satisfactory discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given. Good discussions of the ethical implication of the topic. Very good discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given. Excellent discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given. Outstanding discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given. Conclusion (10%) Overall summary of the assignment There is no conclusion. There is no conclusion or very poor conclusion. Conclusion contains very limited key points from research results and poorly presented. Conclusion contains some few key points from research results with fair presentation. Conclusion contains some important key points from research results with good presentation. Conclusion contains important key points from the research results with very good presentation. Excellent Conclusion contains important key points from the research results with very good presentation. Related with the Learning Outcomes Outstanding Conclusion contains important key points from the research results with very good presentation. Related with the Learning Outcomes Exceptional Conclusion contains important key points from the research results with very good presentation. Related with the Learning Outcomes Structure (5%) Academically and professionally looking report • Good command and usage of the English No answer given or a totally irrelevant answer. Very poor use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure does not meet the assessment requirement; very limited reasoning of points with Major errors on the use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure does not meet the basic assessment requirement; limited Visible mistakes on the use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure meets assessment requirements with no attention to details; Noted some inconsistencies on the use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure meets assessment requirements with limited attention to Minor inconsistencies on the use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure that meets assessment requirements with attention to Excellent and consistent use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure that meets professional and assessment requirements with attention to Outstanding and consistent use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure that meets professional and assessment requirements with attention to Exceptional and consistent use of grammar, spelling, and punctuations; structure that meets professional and assessment requirements with attention Version 1 Page 10 of 13 concepts with high degree of perception and originality; ability to apply relevant knowledge with related evidences to address issues; highly organised collection of thoughts and ideas; comprehensive preparation of assessment details supported by relevant evidences Exceptional discussion of the ethical implication of the topic given.. language Version 1 inappropriate choice of words; thoughts or ideas with no unity, clarity and use of sentence structure and coordination. Very poor and very limited citations made if not missing and incomplete. Format is very weak. reasoning of points with poor choice of words; thoughts or ideas with no unity, clarity and use of sentence structure and coordination. Citations are visible but poorly structured. reasoning of points with acceptable and limited choice of words; thoughts or ideas with highly visible mistakes on unity, clarity and use of sentence structure and construction. Citations are evident and recent but very limited resources scanned. Page 11 of 13 details; logic and reasoning of points with inappropriate choice of words; thoughts or ideas with mistakes on unity, clarity and use of sentence structure and construction. Citations are clearly presented and updated, and recent resources are evident but limited. details; degree of logic and reasoning of points with inconsistency on choice of words; thoughts or ideas with unity, clarity and use of sentence structure and construction. Citations are clear and properly organised Updated, recent, and substantial resources are evident. details; high degree of logic and reasoning of points with excellent choice of words; thoughts or ideas with unity, clarity and creative use of sentence structure and construction. Citations are clear and format is commendable. Updated, recent, and resources are evident details; outstanding degree of logic and reasoning of points with outstanding choice of words; thoughts or ideas are highly and cohesively organised. Outstanding use of sentence structure and construction. Citations are clearly presented, and format is highly commendable. Updated and recent resources are very substantial. to details; superior degree of logic and reasoning of points with exceptional choice of words; thoughts or ideas are superiorly and cohesively organised. Superior and creative use of sentence structure and construction are observed. Citations excellently presented, and format is superiorly presented. Updated and recent resources are very substantial. Further Information Who can answer questions about my assessment? Questions about the assessment should be directed to the staff member who has set the task/assessment brief. This will usually be the Module tutor. They will be happy to answer any queries you have. Referencing and independent learning (Not applicable for Examination) Please ensure you reference a range of credible sources, with due attention to the academic literature in the area. The time spent on research and reading from good quality sources will be reflected in the quality of your submitted work. Remember that what you get out of university depends on what you put in. Your teaching sessions typically represent between 10% and 30% of the time you are expected to study for your degree. A 20-credit module represents 200 hours of study time. The rest of your time should be taken up by self-directed study. Unless stated otherwise you must use the HARVARD referencing system. Further guidance on referencing can be found in the on Moodle. Correct referencing is an easy way to improve your marks and essential in achieving higher grades on most assessments. Technical submission problems (Not applicable for Examination) It is strongly advised that you submit your work at least 24 hours before the deadline to allow time to resolve any last minute problems you might have. If you are having issues with IT or Turnitin you should contact the IT Helpdesk on (+968) 92841521/ 92841217. You may require evidence of the Helpdesk call if you are trying to demonstrate that a fault with Turnitin was the cause of a late submission. Mitigating circumstances Short extensions on assessment deadlines can be requested in specific circumstances. If you are encountering particular hardship which has been affecting your studies, then you may be able to apply for mitigating circumstances. This can give the teachers on your programme more scope to adapt the assessment requirements to support your needs. Mitigating circumstances policies and procedures are regularly updated. You should refer to your Academic Advisor for information on extensions and mitigating circumstances. Unfair academic practice Cardiff Met takes issues of unfair practice extremely seriously. The University has procedures and penalties for dealing with unfair academic practice. These are explained in full in the University’s Unfair Practice regulations and procedures under Volume 1, Section 8 of the Academic Handbook. The Module Leader reserves the right to interview students regarding any aspect of their work submitted for assessment. Types of Unfair Practice, include: Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another person’s words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were one’s own work, for instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged paraphrasing. Further examples include: Version 1 Page 12 of 13 • Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons, whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, where quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation marks and acknowledged. • Use of another person’s words or ideas that have been slightly changed or paraphrased to make it look different from the original. • Summarising another person’s ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a bibliography/reference list. • Use of assessment writing services, essay banks and/or any other similar agencies (NB. Students are commonly being blackmailed after using essay mills). • Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet. • Re-use of one’s own material except as authorised by your degree programme. Collusion, which can be defined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is submitted and passed off as solely the work of one person. Modules will clearly identify where joint preparation and joint submission are permitted, in all other cases they are not. Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations, interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other way. How is my work graded? Gulf College uses Cardiff Metropolitan University’s Generic Band Descriptors (GBD), in conjunction with programme-specific and/or assessment-specific descriptors that are developed in accordance with the principles underpinning the generic descriptors, as a reference in marking student work outputs. This is to ensure that marking is consistent across all Cardiff Met students’ work, including the work outputs of students in Gulf College. Assessment marking undergoes a meticulous process to make sure that it is fair and truly reflects the performance of students in their modules. Marking of work at each level of Cardiff Met degree programmes are benchmarked against a set of general requirements set out in Cardiff Met’s Guidance on Assessment Marking. https://www.cardiffmet.ac.uk/registry/academichandbook/Documents/AH1_04_03.pdf To find out more about assessments and key academic skills that can have a significant impact on your marks, download and read your Module Handbook from Moodle and your Programme Handbook from the college website. Version 1 Page 13 of 13
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
