PRINCIPLES OF FINANCE
ASSESSED COURSEWORK ASSIGNMENT
Year
2017–2018
Date for
Submission 17Th February 2018
Assessment Instruction
Assessed coursework must represent the work of individual students and references to
published works must be cited. Plagiarism constitutes an examination offence and if discovered will render a student(s) liable to the
appropriate provisions of the University’s Examination Regulations.
COURSEWORK ASSIGNMENT TOPIC
`Technical analysis, the prediction of price
movements based on past price movements, has been shown to generate statistically significant profits
despite its incompatibility with most economists’ notions of efficient markets”.’
(from ‘Head and Shoulders: Not Just a Flaky
Pattern’, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, C.L. Osler and P.H. Kevin Chang,
Staff Report No. 4, August 1995)
YOU ARE REQUIREDto critically discuss the above
statement with reference to technical analysis and Efficient Market Hypothesis and use of the recent
articles from academic journals.
Students will be expected to research the topic themselves and provide a well-argued
essay addressing the topic.
Maximum words: 2,000 (excluding appendices)
Coursework Marking Criteria
Your coursework will be awarded a grade in accordance with the following
criteria:
A good assignment will:
(i) be clearly and appropriately
structured;
(ii) demonstrate a good understanding of the issues involved;
(iii) put forward all the relevant arguments in a logical format;
(iv) show evidence of original
thinking and research into the topic
(all references should be properly acknowledged);
(v) use language in a precise and
concise manner.
University Grading Scheme for Undergraduate Programmes: 2017/18
|
Marking criteria
|
Letter grade
|
Mark recorded
|
Work showing evidence of:
Work which fulfils all the criteria of the grade below, but at
an exceptional standard.
|
A+
|
95
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of distinguished quality which is based on a rigorous
and detailed knowledge base, including major theories of the discipline(s) and awareness of the
variety of ideas, contexts and frameworks and wider implications. Work will demonstrate
sustained ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and interpret concepts, principles and data
within field of study in a considered manner, as well as to develop convincing arguments and
judgements appropriate to the field of study/ assessment task. There will be strong
evidence of competence across a range of specialised skills using them to plan, develop and
evaluate problem solving strategies, to challenge received opinion and develop own judgements.
Clear evidence of capability to operate autonomously and self-evaluate in situations of varying
complexity and predictability, but within defined guidelines will be demonstrated. Outputs will
be communicated effectively, accurately and reliably.
|
A
|
85
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of very good quality which displays most but not all
of the criteria for the grade above.
|
A-
|
75
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of highly commendable
quality which clearly fulfils the criteria for the grade below, but shows a greater degree of capability in relevant
intellectual/subject/key skills.
|
B+
|
67
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of commendable quality based on a strong detailed
knowledge base for the field of study, including an assured grasp of concepts, principles and
major theories, together with effective deployment of skills relevant to the discipline and
assessment task. There will be evidence of considered analysis, synthesis, evaluation and
application, and the ability to work effectively with minimum direction to meet defined
objectives and develop own judgements. There will be consistent evidence of capability in
all relevant subject based and key skills, including the ability to self-evaluate and work
autonomously with minimal direction to use effectively a range of techniques in situations of
varying complexity and predictability.
|
B
|
63
|
Work showing evidence of: Work which clearly fulfils all
the criteria of the grade below, but shows a greater degree of
capability in relevant intellectual/subject/key skills.
Some understanding which goes beyond average but lower than
|
C+
|
57
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of sound quality based on a firm factual/ conceptual
knowledge base for the field of study, including a good grasp of relevant theories, together
with the ability to organise and communicate effectively. The work may be rather standard
and limited in its theoretical grasp, but will be mostly accurate and provide some evidence of
the ability to analyse, synthesise, evaluate and apply standard methods/techniques, with minimal
guidance. There will be no serious omissions or inaccuracies. There will be good evidence
of ability to take responsibility for own learning, some capability to challenge received
opinion and form own judgements. Evidence of the ability to operate with increased
autonomy in situations of varying complexity and predictability, selecting and applying
appropriate techniques will be demonstrated within limits. There will be competence in relevant
key skills. Some average understanding of the issues required by the
assignment.
|
C
|
53
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of satisfactory quality demonstrating a reliable
knowledge base and evidence of developed key skills and/or subject based skills, but still
containing limited evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation or application, or of appropriate
detail or skill application. Some lower level understanding above the
basic level
|
D+
|
47
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of bare pass standard demonstrating some familiarity
with and grasp of a factual/conceptual and theoretical knowledge base for the field of study,
together with evidence of some ability to employ specialist skills to solve problems required by
the assignment, but only just meeting threshold standards in areas like evaluation and
interpretation of the information, reasoning and soundness of judgment, communication,
application, or quality of outputs. Work may be characterised by some significant errors,
omissions, limitations or problems Some basic understanding of a minimum
pass standard.
|
D
|
43
|
Work showing evidence of: Work that falls well short of the threshold standards in
relation to one or more area of knowledge, intellectual, subject based or key skills. It may
address the assessment task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with
some of the subject matter, but such satisfactory characteristics will be clearly outweighed by
major deficiencies across remaining areas. Some understanding but not
enough to attain a minimum pass mark.
|
E
|
37
|
Work showing evidence of: Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal
understanding, application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity
with knowledge or skills appropriate to the field of study or task and/or demonstrate inadequate
capability in key skills essential to the task concerned.. Only of little understanding of the issues at stake in the assignment
|
F
|
23
|
Fail (non-submission)
|
NS
|
0
|
Damodaran, A., 2016. Damodaran on valuation: security analysis for
investment and corporate finance. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Vernimmen, P., Quiry, P., Dallocchio, M., Le Fur, Y. and Salvi, A.,
2014. Corporate finance: theory and practice. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Gullifer, L. and Payne, J., 2015. Corporate finance law: principles and
policy. London>: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Frino, A., Hill, A. and Chen, Z., 2015. Introduction to corporate finance.
Australia: Pearson Higher Education AU.
Ballings, M., Van den Poel, D., Hespeels, N. and Gryp, R., 2015. Evaluating
multiple classifiers for stock price direction prediction. Expert Systems with
Applications, 42(20), pp.7046-7056.
Ghosh, S. and Kanjilal, K., 2016. Co-movement of international crude oil price
and Indian stock market: Evidences from nonlinear cointegration tests. Energy Economics, 53,
pp.111-117.
Ahmar, A.S., Rahman, A., Arifin, A.N.M. and Ahmar, A.A., 2017. Predicting
movement of stock of “Y” using Sutte indicator. Cogent Economics & Finance, 5(1),
p.1347123.
Qiu, M. and Song, Y., 2016. Predicting the direction of stock market index
movement using an optimized artificial neural network model. PloS one, 11(5), pp.133-155.
https://www.stocktrader.com/2009/05/04/predicting-stock-market-trends-rules/
https://www.stocktrader.com/2009/04/27/reading-stock-charts-technical-analysis-explained/
sample