communication and technology
Assignment 2a: ITech1001 Semester 1 2018
Specification – Group Report
· Due date: Week 9 Thursday 2018
· Total Marks: 100
· This assignment is 25% of the total assessment for this course
Group Report – Collaborative Writing
The group report contains two parts, these being the writing of a group literature review and a review of group processes.
1) Group task - The group is required to work collaboratively to produce a collated literature review on the selected topic. There are a number of tasks to complete and these are outlined below.
2) Individual task - Each member of the group is required write a report reviewing the performance of the group.
The group report is to be submitted via TurnItin. Further details regarding the use of TurnItIn will be provided during class.
Overview
1) The group is to meet on a regular basis, both within and outside of class. Brief details of these meetings should be recorded including date and time of meetings, who attended, and a short paragraph detailing what was discussed. This information is to be included in the appendix of your group report.
2) The group is required to use at least one form of groupware technology to assist in the sharing of information. For example: a discussion forum within Moodle, Facebook, Google Docs, Drop box, Trello or any other suitable form of groupware. A review of the groupware used (2-3 paragraphs) should be included in the appendix of your group report.
3) The group is required to redevelop the initial mind map that was developed for the annotated bibliography. The new mind map should take into account the readings of all of the group members. A copy of the final mind map is to be included in the final report.
4) The group is required to write a literature review on the topic that they have selected and should be structured according to the outline below. The report should read as if it was written by one person, ie the fonts, formatting and tone of voice of the writing should all be the same. In order to complete the report the following tasks are required to be undertaken:
a) Each student is to write a 1000 to 1500 word literature review on their section of the mind map. This piece of writing may be based upon the reading undertaken to complete the annotated bibliography and/or on any extra resources that have been sourced.
b) Each group member’s writing should be proof-read for use of reference material, typing, spelling and grammatical errors by another member of the group and the writing generally reviewed in a constructive manner. The review can take a number of forms including:
i) A marked-up copy of the commentary with suggested changes to be made; and/or
ii) Two to three paragraphs indicating the suggested changes and improvements.
iii) A review done by each member of the group is to be include in the final report.
c) Each student should revise their writing using the review provided by the group member. Note: only if the feedback is appropriate.
d) Each student should include a discussion of their selection, organisation and association or materials based on the S.O.A.R model.
i) Selection: why you selected those particular materials
ii) Organisation: how you organised the information from your resources in your report and why.
iii) Association: how your resources relate to each other and if there were gaps in the information you found
iv) Regulate: reflect on how using this methodology impacted on your research and writing experience.
e) Each student should review the time estimation exercise done for the second assignment as part of assignment 1 and write 1 -2 paragraphs on the impact of the exercise on your research and writing experience.
5) The group should collate their final pieces of writing into a single report. Each individual literature review should have a heading indicating the topic and author.
6) The group is to write an introduction and a conclusion for the report
Required Structure of Group Report
|
1. A Report Cover page – giving group members names, date and the title of assignment. 2. Table of Contents 3. List of Figures (if required) 4. List of Tables (if required) 5. Introduction of the overall topic 6. Individual literature reviews on the selected topics/branches of the mind map. 7. Conclusion to the overall topic 8. References (completed using APA format) 9. Appendices - · initial individual pieces of writing and reviews; · final version of the group mind map; · review of groupware used; and · meeting records. 10. INDIVIDUAL REPORT: · group processes and performance with reference to Tuckman’s group development theory. · discussion of S.O.A.R model · reflection on time estimation exercise
|
Notes:
1. The final group report should be completed using Word and then submitted as either a Word file or a pdf file. Any tables, figures or illustrations are to be appropriately captioned. The document is to include page numbers, a table of contents, a list of figures/tables/illustrations (if used), and should be formatted according to the University Guide for the Presentation of Academic Work.
2. The bibliography in the group report is only to contain all of the sources used by the group in completing their report. It is not an annotated bibliography.
Review of Group Processes – Individual Report
Each member of the group is to write a short report, using, among other things, Tuckman’s stages of group development that includes:
· an indication of the strengths and weaknesses in the performance of their group;
· what they have learnt the experience of working in a group;
· what could have been done to improve the performance of the group; and
· an indication of, in the opinion of the member, how well the final report used each individual contribution to the topic and how well the final report integrated the individual contributions
Submission Requirements:
1) The group is required to submit one copy of the group report via TurnitIn using the appropriate Moodle submission box.
2) Each group membe r is required to submit a single file via the appropriate Moodle submission box. The file should contain:
a) a copy of the group report; and
b) their individual report on the review of group processes.
Marking Guide – Group Report
Individual Mark /70 Group Mark /30 Total /100
Individual tasks
|
Tasks |
Marks |
|
Writing of commentary · English expression · Spelling and grammar · Development of discussion · Citations – APA · Paraphrasing |
/24 |
|
Relevance, suitability and currency of references |
/6 |
|
Discussion of S.O.A.R model |
/24 |
|
Reflection on time estimation exercise |
4 |
|
Review of another group members commentary |
/6 |
|
Group processes review |
/6 |
|
TOTAL |
/70 |
Group Tasks
|
Tasks |
Marks |
|
Mind Map · Mind map · Report based on mind map |
|
|
Report · Introduction · Writing style · English expression · Collaboration evidence · Conclusion · Meeting schedule |
/20 |
|
Presentation of report · Organisation · Includes required components · Structure · APA referencing |
/10 |
|
TOTAL |
/30 |
Marking Rubric for Group Report
|
Individual Tasks - English writing style |
6 |
0 Writing style very poor with incorrect grammar, spelling and expression mistakes throughout. |
1.5 English expression, grammar and spelling often incorrect. Poorly formed sentences and phrases |
3 Satisfactory English writing skills but some poorly formed sentences and phrases. Some spelling and grammatical mistakes |
4.5 Good English expression, spelling and grammar. Well-formed sentences and phrase for the most part. |
6 Excellent English skills. Well written with good sentence structure, grammar and spelling throughout. |
|
Individual Tasks - Development of discussion in report |
6 |
0 No logical development of discussion. No introduction or conclusion to section |
1.5 No introduction and/or conclusion for section, literature review consists of unrelated sentences or points. |
3 Some attempt at an introduction and /or conclusion. Some structure to literature review but no in depth linking of ideas |
1.5 Introduction and conclusion for section attempted. Some logical discussion of literature and links drawn between ideas. |
6 Excellent introduction and conclusion, with in depth discussion of literature. Good thread throughout with logical conclusions drawn. |
|
Individual Tasks - Paraphrasing |
6 |
0 Excessing use of quotes, little or no discussion outside of quotes |
1.5 Overuse of quotes. Some paraphrasing attempted but limited to switching out words or reordering phrases from original work |
3 Some fair attempts at paraphrasing. Some quotes would have been better paraphrased. |
4.5 Good use of paraphrasing. Limited number of quote and usually where technical terms or similar have been used. Some evidence of synthesising information |
6 Excellent use of paraphrasing. Evidence of synthesise information from a number of sources and presenting a concise summary. |
|
Individual Tasks - Referencing |
6 |
0 No references given in work |
1.5 Some references given, but incorrectly formatted. A great deal of information not acknowledged |
3 Many good attempts at referencing but some information not acknowledged. |
4.5 Most information correctly referenced and acknowledged. |
6 All information correctly referenced and acknowledged. |
|
Individual Tasks - Relevance and suitability of references |
6 |
0 No references given in work |
1.5 Limited references, mostly too old and/or from inappropriate sources such as web pages or blogs. |
3 A few good references, but some too old or from inappropriate sources such as un referenced web pages or blogs. |
4.5 Good references, some a little out of date. References a bit limited. |
6 Excellent references that show evidence of wide reading of current research. |
|
Individual Tasks - S.O.A.R Model: Selection |
6 |
0 No reflection on the choice of resources given |
1.5 Reasons for resource choices very shallow with no reflection on the use of each item |
3 Some reasons for choices of resources given but no in depth discussion of reasons. |
4.5 Good reasons for choice of resources with some in depth discussion |
6 Excellent reasoning given for resource choices with evidence of in depth consideration of each one. |
|
Individual Tasks - S.O.A.R Model: Organisation |
6 |
0 No discussion on organisation of resources |
1.5 Some discussion of organisation of resources in literature review |
3 Satisfactory discussion of organisation of resources, but no in depth consideration evidenced. |
4.5 Good discussion of resource organisation in work with some in depth considerations given |
6 Excellent discussion of organisation of work and resources. Discussion shows in depth consideration of placement and relevance. |
|
Individual Tasks - S.O.A.R Model: Association |
6 |
0 No links between resources given |
1.5 Minimal, shallow links between resources given |
3 Some links between resources given but lacking depth. |
4.5 Good links between resources given, with discussion of gaps in information being filled |
6 Excellent associations between resources with in depth reasoning given to direction of knowledge and current research. |
|
Individual Tasks - S.O.A.R Model: Regulation |
6 |
0 No reflection given |
1.5 Some reflection on effect of SOAR on work |
3 Satisfactory reflection on effect of using SOAR to organise resources and work, but no real discussion of changes to work flow given. |
4.5 Good reflection on using SOAR with some discussion and thought given to changes to work flow. |
6 Excellent reflection on use of SOAR for assignment. Critical thought shown in assessment of changes and uses of model. |
|
Individual Tasks - Critical review of others work |
6 |
0 Not supplied |
1.5 Brief review, but no critical feedback given |
3 Attempted review, but feedback too brief. |
4.5 Good review with some positive critique as well as points that need to be addressed |
6 Excellent critique of others work with well-balanced and informative feedback |
|
Individual Tasks - Critical review of group processes and performance |
6 |
0 Not supplied |
1.5 Review of group practices very shallow with no evidence of critical thought and/or reference to Tuckman |
3 Review of group practice fair with some evidence of critical thought and/or reference to Tuckman |
4.5 Good review of group practices with evidence of critical thought and reference to Tuckman |
6 Excellent review of group process with strong evidence of critical thought and insightful reference to Tuckman |
|
R Individual Tasks - Reflection on Time Estimation Exercise |
4 |
0 Not supplied |
1 Some reflection on time estimation exercise but no critical thought shown |
2 Reflection on time estimation exercise shows some critical thought and some discussion of effect on work. |
3 Good reflection on time management exercise with evidence of critical though and discussion of effect. |
4 Excellent reflection on time estimation exercise with in depth critical thought shown in discussion of effect of exercise and changes to work flow. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Individual Marks |
70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group Tasks – Amended Mind Map |
3 |
0 Not supplied |
1 No changes to mind map |
2 Some changes to mind map to reflect new information |
3 Excellent mindmap showing development of group knowledge. |
|
|
Group Tasks - Introduction |
4 |
0 Not supplied |
1 Introduction attempted but does not give overview or plan of work |
2 Introduction gives some overview but no real plan of work. |
3 Good introduction with some overview and plan of work |
4 Excellent introduction that give interesting lead in with good overview and plan of work. |
|
Group Tasks - Conclusion |
4 |
0 Not supplied |
1 Conclusion does not summarise work and/or introduces new material |
2 Conclusion gives some summary of work but introduces some new information |
3 Good =conclusion that gives summary of work but no final comment |
4 Excellent conclusion that gives interesting summary of work and leave reader with a thought provoking final comment. |
|
Group Tasks – Writing Style |
4 |
0 Report appears to be written by different people with no collaboration between them |
1 Report has many different styles and formats but some collaboration has been shown. |
2 Report has some differences in styles but is reasonably coherent. |
3 Report has an overall uniform appearance with evidence of collaboration between authors |
4 Report has no variation in styles with complete uniformity throughout. Strong evidence of collaboration between authors. |
|
Group Tasks - Meeting Records |
1 |
0 Not supplied |
1 Supplied |
|
|
|
|
Group Tasks – Organisation of Report |
3 |
0 Report is very difficult to follow with no table of contents or page numbers. |
1 Report poorly organised. Table of contents not complete and/or page numbers missing |
2 Report well organised with good table of contents and page numbers. |
3 Report has excellent organisation with informative table of contents and page numbers clearly visible throughout report. |
|
|
Group Tasks - Required Components |
3 |
0 Report missing a large number of required components |
1 Report missing some components |
2 Report contains most required components |
3 Report contains all required components. |
|
|
Group Tasks - References |
4 |
0 No references supplied |
1 References not in APA format, and/or not in one place at end of literature review |
2 Most references in APA format but some missing and /or references not combined at the end of the report. |
3 References in APA style but not in alphabetical order and/or not combined at end of literature review. |
4 References all in APA format and correctly listed at the end of the literature review. |
|
Group Tasks - Groupware Review |
4 |
0 Not supplied |
1 Very shallow comments on groupware |
2 Some comments on groupware used but lacking critical thought. |
3 Good comments on groupware with some critical though. |
4 Excellent discussion of groupware used with evidence of critical thought in discussion of pros and cons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Group Tasks Marks |
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Marks for Assignment 2 |
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D |
Insert file name here |
Page 1 of 9
|
|
CRICOS Provider No. 00103D |
Insert file name here |
Page 3 of 9
|