AUDITING PRACTICE | My Assignment Tutor

ACC5218 AUDITING PRACTICE S1 2021 Assignment 1 (Weighting 25%) ASSIGNMENT MARKING RUBRIC Student Name. Deepika Subedi Student number 0061123448 CriteriaUnsatisfactory (0 – 49.9%)Pass (50 – 64.9%)Above Average (65 – 74.9%)Very Good (75 – 84.9%)Excellent (85-100%)MarksProblem Solving, Critical Thinking Judgement and AnalysisProvided information from the case. Relevant information is not considered or analysed. There is little demonstration of a satisfactory understanding of the issue/problem. No logical argument/finding was presented leading to a satisfactory conclusion.Identified relevant information from the case. Few relevant information is considered or analysed. Some understanding is demonstrated from considering the relevant information Demonstrates some ability to identify and construct an argument There was some evidence of logical argument/finding leading to a conclusion.Identified and analysed relevant information from the case. Some relevant information is not considered or analysed so as to gain a full understanding Demonstrates an ability to identify and construct a clear argument There was good evidence of logical argument/finding leading to and supporting a conclusion.Relevant information from the case was identified and very well analysed Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and construct a clear argument Issue/problem is well analysed and contains most relevant information so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. There was a very good evidence of logical argument/finding leading to and supporting a conclusion.Relevant information from the case was identified and analysed comprehensively. Demonstrates a very sound ability to identify and construct a clear and insightful argument; Clear evidence of all relevant contextual factors; issue/problem is well analysed and contains all relevant information necessary for full understanding Strong evidence was shown of a logical argument/finding that led to and supported a conclusion.44/80CommunicationFailed to submit a report to an adequate standard. Wrote in an unclear and unstructured manner with unsatisfactory spelling, punctuation, and grammar. No or very limited in-text referencing provided.Submitted a report and wrote in a structured manner with satisfactory spelling, punctuation, and grammar. An adequate attempt is made to cite evidence. Minimum of 3 references provided. Reference list is incomplete and/or has inconsistenciesSubmitted a report with an appropriate structure including an overall summary and conclusion. Wrote in a clear, cohesive, logical and structured manner with good spelling, punctuation, and grammar. 4 References provided, Adequate in-text referencing provided with minor problems with completeness and format of citations.Submitted a report with a clear structure and very good summary and conclusion. Wrote in a clear, cohesive, logical and structured manner with very good spelling, punctuation, and grammar. 5 References provided. All evidence is referenced using in-text references Reference list is complete and generally consistent.Submitted a report with a very good structure and excellent overall summary and conclusion. Wrote in a clear, cohesive, logical and structured manner with correct spelling, punctuation, and grammar. 5+ references provided. All evidence is properly referenced using in-text references. Reference list is complete and consistent.14/20General Comments: Could have referred to specific auditing (ASA) standards. Restating of facts but need for more critical analysis and application of these to One Tel. ‘Lack of careful control’ does not identify the type of control weaknesses such as segregation of duties, training, monitoring controls to name a few. Could have made referenced to the fraud triangle and its application to One TelTOTAL MARKS58/100

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

Leave a Reply

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