Enterprise Social Networks | My Assignment Tutor

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051ASSESSMENT BRIEF COURSE: Bachelor of IT / Bachelor of Accounting / Bachelor of BusinessUnit:Enterprise Social NetworksUnit Code:ENSN201Type of Assessment:Assessment 3 – Content Analysis (Reflective Journal)Length/Duration:2,500 wordsUnit LearningOutcomes addressed:Upon successful completion of this unit students should be able to:1. Define electronic commerce and describe emerging online technologies and trendsand their influence on the electronic commerce marketplace2. Recognise how knowledge sharing and creation is becoming an essential part ofmodern business processes and the kind of work carried out by knowledge workers3. Critically analyse the use of enterprise social networks for organisational knowledgesharing and innovation to understand the rapid technological changes taking place,their advantages and disadvantages, and especially, the security aspects of modernonline technologiesSubmission Date:Week 14Assessment Task:Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 andcreate concise content analysis summaries of the theoretical concepts containedin the course lecture slides.Total Mark:40 marksWeighting:40% of the unit total marksStudents are advised that submission of an Assessment Task past the due date without a formallysigned approved Assignment Extension Form (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> FORM – AssignmentExtension Application Form – Student Login Required) or previously approved application for otherextenuating circumstances impacting course of study, incurs a 5% penalty per calendar day,calculated by deduction from the total mark.For example. An Assessment Task marked out of 40 will incur a 2 mark penalty for each calendar day.More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy &Procedures – Student Login Required) Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and create concisecontent analysis summaries of the theoretical concepts contained in the course lecture slides.Where the lab content or information contained in technical articles from the Internet or books helpsto fully describe the lecture slide content, discussion of such theoretical articles or discussion of thelab material should be included in the content analysis.The document structure is as follows (2500 Words):1. Title Page2. Introduction (125 words)3. Background (125 words)4. Content analysis (reflective journals) for each week from 1 to 11 (2200 words; 200 words perweek):a. Theoretical Discussioni. Important topics coveredii. Definitionsb. Interpretations of the contentsi. What are the most important/useful/relevant information about the content?c. Outcomei. What have I learned from this?5. Conclusion (50 words)Your report must include: At least five references, out of which, three references must be from academic resources. Harvard Australian referencing for any sources you use. Refer to the Academic Learning Skills student guide on Referencing.ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION:This assignment should be submitted online in Moodle through Turnitin.The assignment MUST be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word format. Other formats may notbe readable by markers. Please be aware that any assessments submitted in other formats will beconsidered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented in Word.For assistance please speak to our Academic Learning Skills Coordinators, in Sydney([email protected]) or in Melbourne ([email protected]). They can help you withunderstanding the task, draft checking, structure, referencing and other assignment-related matters.GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKSContent for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points andconclusion.Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must developand demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality work presentedby a student must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kentstrongly recommends you refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available onthe Kent Learning Management System (Moodle). For details please click the linkhttp://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606 and download the file titled“Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks and informationKent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of eachTrimester.Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unlessotherwise specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specificAssessment Task, any paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting asatisfactory standard and possibly be failed.Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the“Harvard Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for theAssessment Task in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance tothe word count in that it is generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than thestated length.GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCINGReferences are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such asbooks, chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as areference, but not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capableof conducting their own research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’sunderstanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include thespecific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before preparing your Assessment Task or owncontribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism through Referencing) by clickingon the following link: link: http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles canbe located in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage.Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gainknowledge about a topic, but should not be over-used – these should constitute no more than 10% ofyour total list of references/sources. Additional information and literature can be used where theseare produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes such as theNational Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), or international organisations such as theWorld Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departments producepeer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly very current. The contentof the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non-peer reviewed websites (Why can’t Ijust Google?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39mnu1Pkgw(Thank you to La Trobe University for access to this video).Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC):Your answers for the final examination questions will be assessed as per the following marking criteria.Please read carefully each section/level and marks weightage. Fail(0-49%)Pass(50-64%)Credit(65-74%)Distinction(75-84%)High Distinction(>85%)Research3/40Little evidence ofresearch.Sources aremissing.Inappropriate,poorly integratedor lackingcredibility. Lacksclear link ofsources withessay. No in textcitations.A minimum of 5academic sources.Basic use of sourcesto support ideas,generally wellintegrated, mostsources are credible.May be weaknesseswith paraphrasing orintegration/application.Research isgenerally thorough.Good use ofsources to supportideas, mostly wellintegrated, sourcesare credible. Maybe weaknesseswith paraphrasingor integration/application.Thorough research isindicated. Very gooduse of sources tosupport ideas, wellintegrated, sourcesare credible. May beminor weaknesseswith paraphrasing orintegration/application.Thorough research isindicated. Professionaluse of sources tosupport ideas, wellintegrated, sources arecredible. Very minor, ifany, weaknesses withparaphrasing orIntegration/application.ContentInformationand Content30/402 marks perweek, 8 marksfor intro (3),background (3)and conclusion(2)Report lackscoherence; topicis poorlyaddressed; littleanalysis.No reflectiveComponent, noproper summaryof contentlearned everyweekReport is generallycoherent; topic isaddressed; analysesin reasonable depthwith somedescription. There aresome inconsistenciesand weaknesses withflow. Has basiccontent summary forall weeks, and verybasic reflectivesummary.Report is coherentand flows well;topic is addressedquite thoroughly;analyses inconsiderable depth.There may besomeinconsistencies andweaknesses withflow. Decentsummary of allweeks’ content andbasic reflectivesummary.Report is verycoherent and flowswell; topic isaddressedthoroughly; analysesin depth. There maybe minorinconsistencies andweakness with flow.All weeks content issummarised in depthwith detailedreflective summaryand analysis.Professional work.Report is very coherentand flows well; topic isaddressed thoroughly;analyses in great depth.Very minor, if any,inconsistencies andweaknesses with flow.All weeks content issummarised in detailwith detailed reflectivesummary with goodexamples.Structure3/40Topic, conceptsare not clear inintroduction.Material in thebody is generallypoorlysequenced. Nodiscernibleconclusion; nolinks tointroduction.Topic, concepts arestated with someclarity in introduction.Material in body isgenerally logicallysequenced; someweaknesses.Conclusion does notclearly summariseessay; links tointroduction are notclear.Topic, concepts areclearly conveyed inintroduction.Material in body islogically and clearlysequenced; few orminor weaknesses.Conclusionsummarises essay;may be someweaknesses;generally clear linksto intro.Topic, concepts areclearly outlined inintroduction. Materialin body is logicallyand clearlysequenced; very fewor minor weaknesses.Conclusion mostlyeffectivelysummarises essay;withrecommendationsand clear links tointroduction.Topic, concepts areclearly outlined inintroduction. Material inbody is logically andclearly sequenced; veryminor, if any,weaknesses.Conclusion effectivelysummarises essay; withrecommendations andclear links tointroduction.Language2/40Poor standard ofwriting. Word limitmay not beadhered to.Incorrect format(e.g. includesTable ofcontents; bulletpoints; graphsetc.)A minimum of 1000words. Basic andsound standard ofwriting; some errorsin punctuation,grammar andspelling.Inconsistencies withthe formatting.Good standard ofwriting; few errorsin punctuation,grammar andspelling. Almostcorrect format.Very good standard ofwriting; very few orminor errors inpunctuation, grammarand spelling. Correctformatting.Professional standard ofwriting; no errors inpunctuation, grammarand spelling. Correctformatting.Referencing2/40No referencing isevident or, ifdone, isinconsistent andtechnicallyincorrect. No orminimalreference list,mixed styles. Noin text citationsBasic and soundattempt to referencesources; may besome inconsistenciesand technical errorsin style. Reference listis generally completewith 1 or 2 referencesmissing.Good attempt toreference sources;inconsistencies andtechnical errors instyle. Fewinaccuracies inreference list andall referenceslisted.Very good attempt toreference sources;very minorinconsistencies andtechnical errors instyle. Thorough andconsistent referencelist and all referenceslisted.Professional level ofreferencing andacknowledgment; noerrors of style evident.Thorough andconsistent reference listand all references listed


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *