Compare and Contrast Codes of Ethics and Professional Conduct – a Written Report

ICT2902 Career and Professional Development II T2 2014

ICT2902 Career and Professional Development II

Module assignment:

Compare and Contrast Codes of Ethics and

Professional Conduct – a Written Report

In this assessment task you are required to work individually to analyse a code of conduct that is currently

used by an ICT company, either locally or globally. The analysis shall be with reference to the Code of Ethics

and Professional Conduct of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM).

The analysis and recommendation shall be presented in a written report of 1300 to 1800 words in length,

contain a logical structure (headings and sub headings) and be written in professional business English. This

assessment task, on its own is worth fifteen percent of your final grade in this module.

In addition, you will be required to review and provide feedback to a fellow student for their submission,

based on a provided marking scheme and another student will offer you feedback on your report. The

feedback you provide to your peer shall be of 300 to 600 words and is worth ten percent of your final grade

in this module. You are encouraged to improve your report based on the provided feedback prior to a final

submission for assessment.

Finally, you are required to reflect upon and assess your own submission. Your self-assessment is worth five

percent of your final grade in this module.

Learning Objectives

After successfully completing this assessment task, you should be able to:

 Conduct independent research

 Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of Ethics in ICT

 Make and justify recommendations based on detailed analysis

 Communicate using professional business language in written format

 Critique and evaluate a written report

Requirements

You are to write a report of 1300 to 1800 words in length (excluding the list of references and appendices),

and provide a list of references for all resources cited in the report. The code of conduct selected for the

analysis must be provided with the report as an appendix.

The report structure should include an introduction that describes the context of the report and an overview

of its content.

ICT2902 Career and Professional Development II T2 2014

You are expected to provide background information about the company on which you chose to report,

providing a brief review of the history of the company, the company’s current product or services, general

structure and size and other information that may be relevant for the analysis of the code of conduct of the

company.

You must provide a detailed analysis of your selected Code of Conduct. You should compare and contrast

it with the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (available online and on the Learning Management

System). Identify what your selected Code is missing or has that the ACM Code doesn’t. Make

recommendations based on your analysis. What should your selected code include? Should any points be

omitted? Be sure to justify your recommendations and connect them clearly to your analysis and the

background information. The report must finish with a conclusion that summarises key points from your

analysis and reiterates your key recommendations.

You should aim to paraphrase sources where possible, writing the report on your own, in your own words and

including citations and corresponding reference list entries to demonstrate research. The submitted report

will be check in Turnitin for similarities with other resources. Please seek advice from your lecturer and the

Centre for Communication Skills, if Turnitin highlights similarity outside of quotations from either Code or your

copy of the entire Code (included in an appendix) on submission to Turnitin. Note that you can resubmit your

report up until the submission deadline. Please note that the similarity report may take a few hours to be

reproduced for resubmissions.

Submission

Stage 1: The initial submission of the report should be completely blind – not including any information that

may identify the author, in a Microsoft Word format or a compatible format. This submission will be sent for

peer review and should be kept anonymous.

Stage 2: The final submission of the report, produced after receiving the feedback from a fellow student

should identify the author clearly and be in a PDF format. It should include the report itself, the feedback

provided from a peer and the self-assessment.

Submission deadlines for the initial report, the feedback and the final report with the self-assessment will be

published separately over the LMS.

ICT2902 Career and Professional Development II T2 2014

Assessment Criteria POOR ATTEMPTED GOOD EXCELLENT

INTRODUCTION

e.g. opening

paragraph describes

why the report has

been written and

what it contains

0.5-2.5

The introduction was

unclear, invalid,

omitted key

information

2.5-5

The introduction was

unclear or invalid in

part or omitted some

information

5-7.5

The introduction was

generally clear and

included key

information

7.5-10

The introduction was

very clear and

included all key

information

BACKGROUND

e.g. Provide a one to

two paragraph

summary of the

business – what their

core business is,

when they were

established, how

many employees

they have, and the

major divisions within

the business

0.5-5

The sequence and

structure of

background lacks

clarity, key

information is omitted

and references are

omitted

5-10

The sequence and

structure of

background was

unclear in parts,

some key information

is omitted and

references are

incomplete

10-15

The sequence and

structure of

background was

generally clear and

valid, most key points

are covered with

citations and

corresponding

references

15-20

The sequence and

structure of

background was very

clear and all relevant

information is

presented with

citations and

corresponding

references

ANALYSIS

e.g. Provide a clear,

structured

comparison of the

selected Code with

that of the ACM and

resulting

recommended

revisions

0.5-10

Little evidence of

analysis and

understanding

communicated,

recommendations

not articulated

10-20

Some evidence of

analysis and

understanding

communicated,

recommendations

unclear in part

20-30

Depth of analysis and

understanding meets

expectations and

recommendations

are generally clear

30-40

Depth of analysis and

understanding

exceeds

expectations

recommendations

are clear and

relevant

CONCLUSION

e.g. Closing

paragraph/s

summarise the key

points presented in

the report and

reiterate

recommendations

0.5-5

The conclusion was

unclear, invalid ,

omitted key

information

5-10

The conclusion was

unclear, invalid in

part omitted some

information

10-15

The conclusion was

generally clear and

included key

information

15-20

Conclusion was very

clear and included

all key information

PRESENTATION

e.g. Professional,

consistent format

that is free of errors –

a copy of the code

is included in an

appendix and

references are

provided in Harvard

format

0.5-2.5

There are major issues

with length,

consistency, layout,

use of font, spacing,

citations, references,

appendix or structure

2.5-5

There are some issues

with presentation in

terms of length,

consistency, layout,

use of font, spacing,

citations, referencing,

appendix or structure

5-7.5

The presentation is

mostly consistent with

only minor issues

evident. The work is

mostly consistent with

only one or two minor

issues in terms of

layout, use of font,

spacing, citations,

referencing,

appendix and

structure

7.5-10

The Presentation is

exceptional. The

work is consistent and

professional in length,

layout, use of font,

spacing, citations,

referencing,

appendix and

structure

Note that performance indicator descriptions are indicative only and are provided as a general guide for self and peer assessment.