Contemporary Issues in Finance Written Assignment I

Component:	Individual Written Assignment (1,250 words)	Weighting:	50%
Academic year:	2021-2022	Semester:	1 / Fall
Module Code:	CH6010	Level:	6
Deadline:	Week 7 19th November 2021	Time:	12:00 PM

Assignment Brief Fintech is the use of technology to provide new and improved financial services. It has been generating so much excitement and research interest over the last few years because it is bypassing traditional intermediaries in the offering of financial services. As an expert on Fintech, you are expected to write a report about P2P lending. You are required to answer the following questions (covering all the learning outcomes): (1) What are the current developments with regard to P2P lending vs. traditional lending? (2) Will P2P lending replace traditional bank lending? You need to review a variety of sources related to this topic and use sufficient evidence to back up your arguments. The sources include academic literature, research reports and news. Word limit: The maximum number of words is 1,250 (excluding graphs, tables, appendices, reference list/bibliography). 10% marks deduction penalty will be applied on exceeding word limit. Words that exceed the word limit will not be marked. Submission Guidance All work must be submitted via https://student.zy.cdut.edu.cn/ or https://student.zycdut.net:888/ before the stated deadline in both a Microsoft Word document, and a pdf. Any document that is unable to be opened may be marked as 0. Please keep all copies of work in an external cloud (email, Baidu, iCloud etc) or hard drive as you may be asked to resubmit. For Exceptional Circumstances please see the academic policy for late submissions at https://www.brookes.ac.uk/students/your-studies/exceptional-circumstances/ Structure for the report/essay Please include the following sections in the report: You can adapt and move sections to fit the flow of your report but ensure that you have the following sections please: - Cover page - Table of Contents - Introduction - Literature Review - Current Developments in P2P Lending vs. Traditional Lending (question 1) - Future of P2P Lending (i.e. will P2P lending replace traditional bank lending question 2) - Conclusion - References - Appendices Presenting Coursework for Assessment

• Include in-text citations in Harvard format
• Include your student number and the word count on the cover page of your assignment.
• Give the file that you intend to upload a name that begins with your student number. For example: 201607090XXX_assignment name_module code
• All submissions should be in line with university regulations for line spacing and font size (below) and you may be required to resubmit your work if it does not.
• It must be word-processed in 11-point Arial font and double-spaced
• All pages must be numbered
• Headings and titles should be bold
• Tables and figures must be labelled and with citation where necessary
• Paragraphs should have a space between them
• Margins must be as follows: Top: 1 inch, Bottom: 1 inch (2.5 cm), Left: 1.25 inches, Right: 1.25 inches (3.2 cm)
• It should not contain your name
• Please review https://www.brookes.ac.uk/students/academic-development/online-resources/essays/ for further academic writing guidance

Feedback Timing Official marks and feedback for this module will be made available to students following the Subject Exam Committee. Preliminary feedback and grades may be given at different points throughout the term. Guidance Notes Structure and Presentation The report must adhere to standard academic documentation standards:

• Cover and content page

• Assignment must cover all the learning outcomes.
• All the monetary figures should be given in US Dollars.
• Pay attention to spelling, grammar, and punctuation mistakes. All the words should be in English if you are including graphs, pictures in other language then those must be translated to English as well.
• Have proofing language set to British English, check spelling and grammar

• Dont write too long paragraphs. Start a new paragraph when discussing a new concept.
• Dont write a couple of sentences then start a new paragraph. This breaks up the flow of the writing for the reader and reduces the critical analysis
• Remember to drop a line before starting a new paragraph

• Remember to give a reference of your source e.g. - One of the issues with SWOT analysis is that it is too subjective, and could not provide the correct answer. (according to whom?)

• Remember to do the Critical analysis of a source and critical analysis between sources

• Avoid overuse of I e.g. another journal article I read was ..

• Read each of the questions carefully. Be clear on what is required and answer the question asked.
• Avoid rambling answers, irrelevant detail and simple lists of information
• The marks available for each question are clearly stated
• Make sure that you answer all questions
• You are advised to tackle the questions in sequence, although you can of course come back and modify your answer to earlier questions as you work through the assignment
• Ensure that the contents page precisely reflects the whole content of the report including the appendices.

Reading and Referencing You are suggested to read the following papers to have a basic understanding of the topic; however, you MUST not limit yourself to these papers only. You should read more academic research papers on the topic, go through financial newspapers and magazines regularly to comprehend yourself with latest financial developments and issues.

• Thakor, A.V., 2020. Fintech and banking: What do we know?.Journal of Financial Intermediation,41, p.100833.
• Jagtiani, J. and Lemieux, C., 2018. Do fintech lenders penetrate areas that are underserved by traditional banks?.Journal of Economics and Business,100, pp.43-54.
• De Roure, C., Pelizzon, L. and Tasca, P., 2016. How does P2P lending fit into the consumer credit market?.
• Meyer, T., Heng, S., Kaiser, S. and Walter, N., 2007. Online P2P lending nibbles at banks loan business.Deutsche Bank Research,2(1), pp.39-65.

The report must adhere to standard referencing and research requirements:

• Your work must be referenced meticulously and should be word processed.
• Use appropriate citation and reference according to the Harvard Referencing format in order to avoid plagiarism. Cases of plagiarism will be penalized in accordance to University regulation.
• Should be in alphabetical order, avoid numbering, use one line space after each reference.
• Bibliography Example of referencing a journal article:
  • TREFTS, K. & BLACKSEE, S. (2000). Did you hear the one about Boolean Operators? Incorporating comedy into the library induction, Reference Services Review, 28 (4), p.369-378
• You should conduct detail research on the given topic to support your answer.
• All the discussions should be underpinned with the use of relevant academic concepts, journals, theories, models, and techniques.
• Use theory and models avoid discursive answers with no evidence of underpinning theory and concepts
• Demonstrate your learnings by engaging with related theory and concepts based upon contextual evidence from the case
• Use diagram to draw on key points/findings/conclusions in the body of your answer
• Critically engage in your writing
• Use your own words to convince that you understand what you are writing, and not just copy and paste.

Assignment length The length of an assignment is limited to aid the development of concise writing skills and to ensure all work is assessed equitably. This is why you are required to complete your assignment within the specified word limit. You will need to think carefully about how best to explain your case within the permitted number of words using, for example, an appropriate mix of text, drawings, diagrams and tables, supplemented if required by information contained in appendices. Please also remember that a report can be enhanced or damaged through layout. For example, placing all tables and drawings in appendices can hamper the flow of the discussion. Decisions therefore need to be made about the most appropriate place to use tables etc, to support your case. The specified word count refers to the main body of the report and does not include front cover, title page, contents page, tables, reference list, bibliography or appendices. The word count does include headings and in-text citations, but not equations or diagrams. Appendices themselves will not generally be marked unless specified. However, inappropriate use of appendices will be taken into consideration when awarding the final mark. Words that exceed the maximum allowed will not be marked. If in doubt, you should discuss this with the Module Leader before submission. Authenticating your coursework After work has been submitted, it may be necessary for you to be able to demonstrate that this work is your own. You should keep all working documents that you have saved until you have received your official final mark from Oxford Brookes. These documents could include, notes, interview schedules, screen shots of arrangements for interviews, completed primary research such as questionaries, and early copies of drafts. These can be kept as evidence of the originality of your work. You should save each revision of your assignment file with a different name (E.g. Assignment name_V1/V2/V3 etc). These can then be shown as evidence of originality. Additionally, submit drafts when asked to your module tutor. You may wish to ask a trusted friend, family member or professional service to proofread your work before submission. You must be careful that this proofreading does not result in you being cited for academic misconduct for collusion or contract cheating. Proofreading can consider the following:

• Identify spelling and typographical errors
• Identify poor grammar e.g. tense use, verb form, sentence structure, word order
• Highlight formatting errors or inconsistencies
• Identify spelling/grammar/typographical errors in labelling of diagrams, charts or figures
• Identify typographical errors in equations
• Highlight a sentence or paragraph that is overly complex or where the intended meaning is not clear
• Draw attention to repeated phrases or omitted words
• Identify errors in the referencing system applied

It is not acceptable for proofreaders to do the following:

• Rewrite passages of text to clarify the meaning
• Change any words or figures, except to correct spelling
• Check or rewrite calculations, formulae, equations or computer code
• Rearrange or reformat passages of text
• Contribute any additional material to the original
• Redraw, alter, or relabel diagrams, charts, or figures
• Alter argument or logic, where faulty.
• Implement or alter a referencing system or add to references
• Check or correct facts, data calculations, formulae or equations
• Correcting errors identified in the reference system applied
• Translate text drafted by students

Oxford Brookes Proofreading Policy available at: https://www.brookes.ac.uk/getmedia/33bacd08-5c43-4a59-a2ee-647654946e5f/Proofreading-Guidance.pdf Academic Misconduct Full policy and guidance available at: https://www.brookes.ac.uk/students/sirt/student-conduct/academic-misconduct/ Marking Rubric

	First 70% or above	Second Class First Division 69 60%	Second Class Second Division 59-50	Third 40 49%	Refer/Fail 0 39%
Use of Evidence such as figures and graphs to analyze the issues (30%)	Demonstrates excellent understanding and innovation in selection, handling and interpretation of data.	Insightful and appropriate selection of evidence and its interpretations.	Analysis and interpretation of evidence is correct and supports the key arguments but demonstrates basic knowledge.	Choice of evidence and analysis seem appropriate, but some aspects have been missed or misconstrued.	Inaccurate or inappropriate handling and interpretation of evidence.
Knowledge and Understanding of the Topic/Theory (30%)	Comprehensive knowledge of topic/ theory. Good awareness of the relevance of knowledge to given context. Arguments are accurate and linked well.	Reasonable knowledge of topic/theory and an awareness of a variety of ideas / contexts / frameworks.	Has given a factual and/or conceptual knowledge base of key theories.	Limited evidence knowledge of the topic/theory.	Little/No evidence of knowledge relevant to topic/theory.
Knowledge, Understanding and Critical Analysis of the Empirical Literature (30%)	Comprehensive knowledge of the empirical literature. Consistently demonstrates application of critical analysis and well-integrated.	Reasonable knowledge of empirical literature. Clear effort towards critical analysis. Arguments are linked clearly and correctly.	Has given a factual account of the empirical literature. Some evidence of critical analysis. Some arguments are correct and linked.	Evidence of limited knowledge of the empirical literature. Limited critical analysis. Weak / incorrect arguments.	Lacks evidence of knowledge relevant to empirical literature. No critical analysis. No / incorrect arguments.
Referencing (5%)	All cited works, both text and visual, are done in the correct format (Harvard) with no errors. Presents compelling evidence from professionally legitimate sources; attribution is clear and accurate; references are primarily peer-reviewed professional journals or other approved sources	Some cited works, both text and visual, are done in the correct format. Inconsistencies evident in place Professionally legitimate references are generally used; clear and fair citations are presented in most cases; most of the information/content/evidence comes from sources that are reliable	Completed in the correct format with some errors. Professionally legitimate references are mostly used; clear and fair citations are presented in some cases; most of the information/content/evidence comes from sources that are reliable but there is some over reliance one non-academic sources.	Few cited works, both text and visual, are done in the correct format. There is some uncertainty in the reliability; few if any appropriate citations are provided; reader doubts the validity of much of the material. Has used websites such as Wikipedia, , UKessays or other known plagiarism websites as an academic source (Automatic fail or minimum pass depending on how much they have been used)	Absent or the only sites are internet site Majority of the cited works are incorrect Sources which have been used are largely irrelevant and do not add anything to the report. There are no citations or research The majority of cited sources (>50%) are non-academic.
Formatting and Organisation (5%)	There are no formatting errors with appropriate headings, font, citations, text size and paragraphing	There are one or two formatting errors with appropriate headings, font, citations, text size and paragraphing.	There frequent formatting errors with appropriate headings, font, citations, text size and paragraphing. These do not take away from the overall clarity of the report.	There are multiple formatting errors with appropriate headings, font, citations, text size and paragraphing. This cause some strain to the reader.	Only a weak attempt at creating an appropriate standard document and following formatting instructions. There are no clear paragraphs It does not follow an academic essay structure (Automatic fail).

Attachments:

ch6010-cif-as....docx