TALENT MODEL CRITIQUE: First Sit
The primary aim of this assessment task is to appraise and critically analyse a participant development model
of your choice in relation to developing 13-16 year olds engaged in sport and/or physical activity in Hong
The assessment will be summatively assessed by the submission of an essay.
The assessment is worth 50% of the overall module grade, and is assessment 2 of 2.
Submission type: Online (Blackboard)
Turnitin used: Yes
Feedback method: Online
Feedback type: Electronic
In-Module Retrieval (IMR)1
For this assessment, you will be expected to:
1. Identify a prominent youth talent development model (e.g. Cote’s Development Model of Sport
Participation, Lloyd and Oliver’s Youth Physical Development Model etc.)
2. Critically evaluate the model, using examples and evidence to support this analysis, in relation to a local
(i.e. Hong Kong) sports setting
3. Consider and discuss the validity and application of the model to either participation or performance
athletes between the ages of 13 and 16.
4. Prepare a 2000-word essay considering the context within which you are working, the critique you have
undertaken and with a clear position relating to the validity and application of the model
Word Length and Penalties
The word length of the summative assessment, excluding references, is 2000 words. Further details of the
breakdown of the word count can be found in the mark scheme below.
Work that is >10% over the word limit will be penalised by 10% of the available marks, i.e. you would lose
10 marks on this assessment task. Note that all text, apart from the list of references at the end of a
document and text in appendices, is included in the word count.
The assignment should be submitted in Microsoft Word or PDF format3
. Popular alternatives (such as
OpenOffice, MacOS files such as Pages, Numbers and Keynote and Google Docs) need to be converted prior
to submission using the ‘Save As’ functionality built-in to the software/platform. Assessment not submitted
in the specified format will receive a zero mark. Standard presentation requirements (size 11 font, 1.5 line
spacing, 2.5 cm margins) should be strictly adhered to.
There are no non-assessment requirements for this assessment task.
Please submit your assessment by 3pm on the deadline date specified. You can access your assessment
deadlines by visiting My Student Record. Go to ‘My Assessments’ and select ‘Assessment Statement’:
Turnitin should be used to assess your assignment for accidental plagiarism prior to the hand-in date. Once
your document is uploaded, allow up to a day for your work to be checked. You can do this as often as you
like up to the deadline.
Once the deadline has passed, the final submission will be used in conjunction with the marking of your
assignment submitted electronically to ascertain whether cheating, as defined in the University’s assessment
regulations detailed above, has taken place.
PLEASE NOTE: Submission to Turnitin only is not classed as a valid attempt and will not be marked as a
The consequences of late or non-submission are severe. As such, you are strongly encouraged to contact
your Student Support Officer if you are experiencing difficulties meeting assessment deadlines.
The University policy and procedures for dealing with cheating (e.g. plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating)
and late submission of assignments can be found at:
Handing Back Details
Feedback will normally be available fifteen working days after the hand-in date. You will be notified when
feedback becomes available, and by which method you will receive your marked assessment and feedback.
Introduction (approx. 200 – 250 words) 10
A concise discussion of the importance of modelling in sport
Clear rationale for choice of target model for critique
Model in Context (approx. 450 – 500 words) 20
Discussion detailing the development and formulation of the chosen model
Description of features of model, with relation to specific context (i.e. 13 – 16 year-old’s in Hong Kong)
Model Critique (approx. 950 – 1000 words) 30
Analysis of model strengths and weaknesses, in relation to either a performance or participation context
Detailed discussion of the validity of the model to the developmental stage of the 13-16 age range
Conclusion (approx. 200 – 250 words) 10
Evaluative summary of the validity of the chosen model
Recommendations as to how the model could be enhanced for the application to 13-16 year old’s
Use of Wide and Evaluative Literature and Examples 20
Critical and evaluative use of high-quality, evidence to support and reinforce key discussion points
Examples of practice (where applicable) to contextualise writing to own coaching circumstances
Presentation, References and Referencing 10
Use of American Psychological Association (APA) Harvard referencing system
A close match between references used in the text and in the References list
Appropriately structured with due regard to the normal conventions of English writing
Use of appropriate writing style
This Mark Scheme should be read in conjunction with any other assessment marking criteria