H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 1
2018
| 08 |
AssignmentTutorOnline
| Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines | |
| Trimester | T1 2022 |
| Unit Code | HI6036 |
| Unit Title | IS Strategy and Innovation |
| Assessment Type | Individual Assignment |
| Assessment Title | Assessment 1, Weekly Reading Critique, Class Contribution |
| Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) |
Students who successfully complete this Unit will be able to: 1. Critically evaluate and apply models and techniques to analyze the strategic contribution of Information Systems to an organization. 2. Critically appraise the business value of Information Systems and formulate strategies and plans to meet business requirements. 3. Analyze internal and external dimensions of Information Systems strategic planning by applying appropriate theories and models. |
| Weight | 25% of the total assessments |
| Total Marks | 25% |
| Word limit | NA |
| Due Date | Weekly, from Session 2 – Session 11 |
| Submission Guidelines |
• AllworkmustbesubmittedonBlackboardbytheduedatealongwith acompleted Assignment Cover Page. • TheassignmentmustbeinMSWordformat,1.5spacing,11-ptCalibri(Body)font and2cm marginsonallfoursidesofyourpagewithappropriatesectionheadings. • Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style. |
| HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM |
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 2
Academic Integrity
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic Integrity is integral
to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks
need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of Academic Integrity
breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please
consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources
can also be found through the Study Sills link on Blackboard.
Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from deduction of
marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course
enrolment.
Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches
| Plagiarism | Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is known as self-plagiarism. |
| Collusion | Working with one or more other individuals to complete an assignment, in a way that is not authorised. |
| Copying | Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied, this may also be considered an offence. |
| Impersonation | Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as oneself, in an in-person examination. |
| Contract cheating | Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task, generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment. |
| Data fabrication and falsification |
Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false conclusions, including manipulating images. |
Source: INQAAHE, 2020
| HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM |
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 3
Assignment Description:
A set of readings and/or videos are available to students in Assessment 1 folder for each session. Each
student is required to complete a one-page overview of some aspect of the reading. This could be a
summary or a general discussion of key points. The ‘one-pager’ should be submitted by the end of
each week. Every report has 2.5 mark and the total will be 10 reports with the total of 25 marks. Late
submissions penalties will apply for overdue submissions.
REPORT STRUCTURE:
1. Introduction – State an introduction of the case.
2. Discussion – A summary or a general discussion of key points and the reading’s
highlights.
3. Conclusion – Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the
main points of the report.
4. References. (cite here the references you have used in your report)
PLEASE NOTE:
• All assignments must be submitted electronically ONLY, uploaded to Blackboard
and Submission of SafeAssign. Submission deadlines are strictly enforced and a late
submission incurs penalties.
• DO NOT SHARE YOUR ASSIGNMENT WITH OTHER STUDENTS under no
circumstances even after the deadline and after you submitted it in the Blackboard or
even after you have marked. If there will be any similarity detected by SafeAssign or
the marker, it is an academic misconduct case and BOTH of the students will get
ZERO and will be reported to the institution for further investigation.
| HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM |
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 4
Marking Rubrics
| Grades | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
| Presentation %10 |
Professional presentation with excellent writing skills- 8-10 |
Professional presentation with good writing skills 6 – 8 |
Professional presentation and well written 4-6 |
Poor presentation 0 – 4 |
| Evaluation Quality %10 |
Assessed critically in depth and suggested excellent strategies logically and presented in very convincing manner 8-10 |
Assessed well and suggested strategies logically and presented in well 6 – 8 |
Assessed and suggested strategies 4-6 |
Argument is confused and disjointed. 0 – 4 |
| Discussion %60 |
Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately 50- 60 |
Demonstrate d ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately 40 – 50 |
Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately 30 – 40 |
Did not demonstrate ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately 0 – 30 |
| Conclusion %10 |
Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments 8-10 |
Mostly consistent logical and convincing 6 – 8 |
Adequate cohesion and conviction 4-6 |
Argument is confused and disjointed 0 – 4 |
| Harvard or IEEE Reference style %10 |
Clear styles with excellent source of references. 8-10 |
Generally good referencing style 6 – 8 |
Sometimes clear referencing style 0 – 4 |
Lacks consistency with many errors 0 – 4 |
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 5
- 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
