Assesment 3 Debate

SBM3204_Assessment3Debate.pdf

Home >Information Systems homework help >Assesment 3 Debate

Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: 23/03/2020, Version 2

Unit Code and Title: SBM3204 Sustainability and Ethics

Assessment Overview

Assessment Task

Weighting Due Length ULO

Assessment 1: Quiz Online quiz of key content areas to identify further support needs

10% Week 3 30 mins

ULO-1

Assessment 2: Critical review (Individual) Students need to provide a written constructive criticism or judgement on a given topic by the lecturer

30% Week 6 2000 words ULO-1 ULO-2

Assessment 3: Report (Individual) Students will provide a written report based on one of topics provided by the lecturer

30% Week 9

1500 words

ULO-1 ULO-2 ULO-3 ULO-4

Assessment 4: Case Study Analysis (Individual) Students will provide a case study report comprising answers to four Case Study questions

30% Week 11

1500 words ULO-1 ULO-2 ULO-3 ULO-5

Assessment Brief

Assessment 1: Quiz

Due date: Week 3

Group/individual: Individual assessment

Word count / Time provided: 30 minutes

Weighting: 10%

Unit learning outcomes: ULO-1

Graduate Attributes: GA-2

Assignment Details:

This online quiz will assess your knowledge of key content areas (Week 1 & 2 content) and to identify

further support needs. For successful completion of the quiz, you are required to study the material

provided (lecture slides, tutorials, and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, and in the

discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommended

reading material.

Marking Information: The quiz will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 10% of the total

unit mark.

Assessment 2: Critical review

Due date: Week 6

Group/individual: Individual assessment

Word count: 2,000

Weighting: 30%

Unit learning outcomes: [ULO1], [ULO2]

Course Learning Outcomes: [CLO1], [CLO4], [CLO7]

Graduate Attributes: GA-3, GA-4, GA-5

Assessment Details:

Students are required to provide a written constructive criticism or judgement on a given topic

selected by students themselves. The assessment includes the following key components:

1. Conduct literature review around the business ethics and corporate social responsibility of

small or multinational businesses.

2. Critically evaluate the ethics and corporate social responsibility practices of the case

organisation selected by the lecturer.

3. Analyse the ethics issues and utilise the relevant theories (e.g. Decision Making Model,

Stakeholder Theory) to improve decision making for the chosen organisation.

The business report format is required for the individual assignment. The headings and subheadings

are strongly recommended to structure the business report. The Harvard Referencing Style is

required. For detailed requirement, please refer to the guidelines of how to write Business Report

and academic writing style. It is strongly recommended to review SLS learning Enhancement Section

in APIC Canvas. The link of Business Report Guideline was provided in the assessment section of this

subject in the Canvas.

Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100% and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark

Marking Criteria

Not satisfactory

(0-49%) of the

criterion

mark)

Satisfactory

(50-64%) of

the criterion

mark

Good

(65-74%) of

the criterion

mark

Very Good

(75-84%) of the

criterion mark

Excellent

(85-100%) of the

criterion mark

Demonstrate relevancy of ethics for business decisions – literature review and discussion (30%)

Inadequate understanding of ethics for business decisions – literature review and discussion

Basic knowledge of ethics for business decisions – literature review and discussion

Exhibits

breadth and

depth of

understanding

of ethics for

business

decisions –

literature

review and

discussion

Exhibits accurate and detailed breadth and depth of understanding of ethics for

business

decisions –

literature

review and

discussion

Displays exceptional ability in and understanding of

ethics for business

decisions – literature

review and

discussion

Demonstrate how ethics is relevant for business decisions in a chosen case organisation (30%)

Inadequate understanding of ethics for business decisions – literature review and discussion

Basic knowledge of ethics for business decisions – literature review and discussion

Exhibits

breadth and

depth of

understanding

of ethics for

business

decisions –

literature

review and

discussion

Exhibits accurate and detailed breadth and depth of understanding g of ethics

for business

decisions –

literature

review and

discussion

Displays exceptional ability in and understanding of

ethics for business

decisions – literature

review and

discussion

Demonstrate an understanding of ethics issues and capability of apply theories into practices (30%)

Inadequate understanding of ethics issues

and incapable

of applying

theories into

practices

Basic knowledge of understanding of ethics

issues and lack

of theory

application

Exhibits breadth

and depth of

understanding

of ethics issues

and capable of

applying some

basic theories

into practices

Exhibits accurate

and detailed

breadth and

depth of

understanding of

ethics issues and

capable of

applying theories

into practices

sufficiently

Displays exceptional

ability in and

understanding of

ethics issues and

high capability of

applying theories

into practices

Demonstrate

capability of

academic writing

skills (grammar,

spelling,

presentation and

referencing)

(10%)

Poor academic writing skills with grammar and spelling errors. Poor presentation structure and failed to follow Harvard referencing style

Satisfactory

writing skills

with grammar

and spelling

errors. Poor

presentation

structure and

failed to

follow Harvard

referencing

style

Good academic

writing skills

with minor

grammar and

spelling errors.

Clear

presentation

structure

following

Harvard

referencing style

Excellent writing

skills without

grammar and

spelling errors.

Excellent

presentation

structure

following Harvard

referencing style.

Exceptional academic

writing skills.

Professional

presentation

structure following

Harvard referencing

style

Assessment 3: Debate

Due date: Week 9

Group/individual: Individual assessment

Word count: 1500 words

Weighting: 30%

Unit learning outcomes: [ULO1], [ULO2], [ULO3], [ULO4]

Course Learning Outcomes: [CLO1], [CLO4], [CLO6]

Graduate Attributes: GA-3, GA-5

Assessment Details:

Student will be required to write up a debate based on one of debate topics provided by the

Lecturer. The assessment includes the following key components:

1. Introduction

2. Proposition 1 (support the resolution):

- Logical arguments for Proposition 1

- Gathered supporting evidence and examples for position taken

- Relevant theories learnt to support the arguments

3. Proposition 2 (against the resolution)

- Logical arguments for Proposition 2

- Gathered supporting evidence and examples for position taken

- Relevant theories learnt to support the argument

4. Conclusion

- Your final thoughts and opinions

The business report format is required for the individual assignment. The headings and subheadings

are strongly recommended to structure the business report. The Harvard Referencing Style is

required. For detailed requirement, please refer to the guidelines of how to write Business Report

and academic writing style. It is strongly recommended to review SLS learning Enhancement Section

in APIC Canvas. The link of Business Report Guideline was provided in the assessment section of this

subject in the Canvas.

Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100% and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark

Marking Criteria

Not satisfactory

(0-49%) of the criterion mark)

Satisfactory

(50-64%) of the criterion mark

Good

(65-74%) of the criterion

mark

Very Good

(75-84%) of the criterion

mark

Excellent

(85-100%) of the criterion

mark

Demonstrate an understanding

of the

importance of

ethical

considerations

(40%)

Inadequate understanding of the importance of ethical considerations

Basic knowledge of the importance of ethical considerations

Exhibits breadth and depth of understanding of the importance of ethical considerations

Exhibits accurate and detailed breadth and depth of understanding of the importance of ethical considerations

Displays exceptional ability in and understanding of the importance of ethical considerations

Clear and

convincing

Poorly articulated, unconvincing argument

Basic communication of some facts in

Evidence of both presenting an argument and refuting an

Above average use of evidence to support a position and

Sophisticated use of evidence to support a position and

argument

(40%)

support of one side of the argument

alternative position

refute the alternative.

Report

presentation

and

referencing

(20%)

Poor presentation report format. Poor writing skills with grammar and spelling errors. Fail to follow Harvard referencing style.

Satisfactory presentation format and writing skills with some grammar and spelling errors. Fail to follow Harvard referencing style.

Good presentation format and writing skills with spelling errors. Follow Harvard referencing style.

Excellent presentation format and writing skills without spelling errors. Follow Harvard referencing style

Distinguished presentation format and writing skills. Following Harvard referencing style completely.

Assessment 4: Case Study Analysis

Due date: Week 11

Group/individual: Individual assessment

Word count: 1500 words

Weighting: 30%

Unit learning outcomes: [ULO1], [ULO2], [ULO3], [ULO5]

Course Learning Outcomes: [CLO1], [CLO2], [CLO6], [CLO8]

Graduate Attributes: GA-2, GA-3, GA-4, GA-5

Assessment Details:

A Case study report will be provided comprising answers to four case study analysis questions. The

business report format is required for the submission.

The business report format is required for the individual assignment. The headings and subheadings

are strongly recommended to structure the business report. The Harvard Referencing Style is

required. For detailed requirement, please refer to the guidelines of how to write Business Report

and academic writing style. It is strongly recommended to review SLS learning Enhancement Section

in APIC Canvas. The link of Business Report Guideline was provided in the assessment section of this

subject in the Canvas.

Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100% and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark

Marking Criteria

Not satisfactory

(0-49%) of the criterion mark)

Satisfactory

(50-64%) of the criterion mark

Good

(65-74%) of the criterion

mark

Very Good

(75-84%) of the criterion

mark

Excellent

(85-100%) of the criterion

mark

Demonstrate an understanding

of the case

questions (40%)

Inadequate understanding of the case questions and major issues are not identified

Basic understanding of the case questions and major issues were identified partially

Exhibits breadth and depth of understanding of the case questions and major issues were identified clearly

Exhibits accurate and detailed breadth and depth of understanding of the case questions and major issues were discussed well

Displays exceptional ability in and understanding of the case questions and major issues were discussed critically.

Demonstrate

analytical and

critical

thinking skills

(40%)

Poorly articulated, unconvincing evidences provided. Lack of theories application

Basic communication of some facts in support of case solution. Lack of theory application

Evidence of clear convincing facts and evidences provided. Some theories applied for the analysis

Above average use of evidence to support the case analysis. Good theory application

Sophisticated use of evidence to support the case analysis. Excellent theory application

Report

presentation

and

referencing

(20%)

Poor presentation including report format. Poor writing skills with grammar and spelling errors. Fail to follow Harvard referencing style.

Satisfactory presentation format and writing skills with some grammar and spelling errors. Fail to follow Harvard referencing style.

Good presentation format and writing skills with spelling errors. Fail to follow Harvard referencing style.

Excellent presentation format and writing skills without spelling errors. Follow Harvard referencing style

Distinguished presentation format and writing skills. Following Harvard referencing style completely.