TACC606 NA_2022T3 Assignment information
Value: 30% of overall assessment
Due date: Saturday 10 July 2022
Word limit (excluding references): 3000 words
Assignment Requirements:
1) Structure:
Use report structure which must contain the following: report cover page, table of
contents, executive summary, introduction, body, conclusion, recommendations and
bibliography.
2) Formatting and referencing:
The assignment must be word-processed, 1.5 line spacing, and the word size should be
12 with ‘Times new roman’ font type. Harvard style reference preferred.
You are required to obtain the annual reports of two ASX Top 200 companies in the same industry and
write a business research report to address the following questions related to the items included in
property, plant and equipment.
1. Review and evaluate the PPE disclosure of your selected companies which may include:
• What range of measures is used to determine amounts for these items in the reports of
the individual companies?
• Do you think it is valid to add the items, given the measures used?
• How would you interpret the total amount for property, plant and equipment in the
financial statements?
• Compare the measures used by the different companies for similar items. Are there any
inconsistencies in how similar items are measured by the different companies?
2. Discuss the factors that accountants should consider when setting up company accounting
policy relating to PPE.
3. Detail your view on the subsequent measurement of PPE and provide recommendations to
accounting standard setters.
Please refer to the marking rubric for marking criteriea
TACC606 Assignment Marking Rubric (30 marks)
| Q 1 Relevance & analysis |
/10 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 |
| Not attempted. |
Includes totally irrelevant and inappropriate details with very poor analysis. |
Includes some appropriate and relevant details with poor analysis. |
Includes reasonably appropriate and relevant details with reasonable analysis. |
Includes mostly appropriate and relevant details with good analysis. |
Includes all relevant details with excellent analysis |
||
| Q2 Analysis & synthesis |
/7 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 | 4 | 5.5 | 7 |
| Not attempted. |
Analysis is incomplete or faulty in one or more aspects with very poor synthesis. |
Analysis is not very detailed with some incorrect information and poor synthesis. |
Provide reasonably complete and detailed analysis, reasonable synthesis. |
Provide mostly complete and detailed analysis, good synthesis. |
Provide thorough analysis and excellent synthesis. |
||
| Q3 Critical thinking & analysis |
/7 | 0 | 1 | 2.5 | 4 | 5.5 | 7 |
| Not attempted. |
The review is inadequate and insufficient. Very poor recommendations. |
The review is generally adequate but with little evidence of critical thinking and analysis. Poor recommendations. |
The review is reasonably adequate. Fairly sufficient and relevant analysis is provided, demonstrating some critical thinking skills. Reasonable recommendations. |
The review is good and comprehensive. Mostly sufficient and relevant analysis is provided, demonstrating good critical thinking skills. Good recommendations. |
The review is excellent and sophisticated. Highly sufficient and relevant analysis is provided, demonstrating excellent critical thinking skills. Excellent recommendations. |
||
| Writing skills (including structure, grammar, spelling, referencing style, etc.) |
/6 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3.5 | 5 | 6 |
| Not attempted. |
Very poor structure, No clear executive summary, introduction, conclusion and recommendations provided, Very poor grammatical expression and spelling errors, None or few references and citations. |
Poor structure, Brief executive summary, introduction, conclusion and recommendations provided but not particularly clear, Low levels of writing ability evident, simple expression with many spelling and grammatical errors, Some references but lacking in proper use of a referencing style. |
Clear structure, Executive summary, introduction, conclusion and recommendations provided but could be more concise and clear, Average levels of writing ability with some spelling and grammatical errors, Appropriate references with some inaccuracies in the use of a referencing style. |
Good structure, Clear executive summary, introduction, conclusion and recommendations provided, High level of writing ability – clear concise expression with few grammatical or spelling inaccuracies, Appropriate references with few inaccuracies in the use of a referencing style. |
Excellent structure, Clear, concise and well expressed executive summary, introduction, conclusion and recommendations provided, Very high level of writing ability with no grammatical or spelling errors, References accurate without any inaccuracies. |
AssignmentTutorOnline
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS
