H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 1
| 2018 |
| 08 Assessment Type: |
Individual Assignment | % of total: | 15% |
| Assessment Date: | Weekly, from Session 2 – Session 11 | Learning Outcomes: | 1,2, |
| Summative: | Yes | Duration/Word Length: | One page |
| Assessment Title: Assessment 1, Weekly Reading Critique, Class Contribution. Submission Guidelines: • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page. • The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings. • 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. Assessment Design – Adapted Harvard Referencing: Holmes will be implementing as a pilot program a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following guidelines apply: 1. Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources which provide full text access to the source’s content for lecturers and markers. 2. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled: References. 3. It should include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged alphabetically A-Z by author surname. In addition, it MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source. For example; P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf 4. All assignments will require additional in-text reference details which will consist of the surname of the author/authors or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of contents, paragraph where the content can be found. For example; “The company decided to implement a enterprise wide data warehouse business intelligence strategies (Hawking et al, 2004, p3(4)).” Non-Adherence to Referencing Guidelines Where students do not follow the above guidelines: 1. Students who submit assignments which do not comply with the guidelines will be asked to resubmit their assignments. 2. Late penalties will apply, as per the Student Handbook each day, after the student/s have been notified of the resubmission requirements. 3. Students who comply with guidelines and the citations are “fake” will be reported for academic misconduct. |
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 2
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 1.5 mark and the total will be 10 report with the total of 15 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.
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 3
Marking Rubrics
| Grades | Excellent 8-10 |
Good 6 – 8 |
Satisfactory 4-6 |
Unsatisfactory 0 – 4 |
| Presentation %10 |
Professional presentation with excellent writing skills |
Professional presentation with good writing skills |
Professional presentation and well written |
Poor presentation |
| Evaluation Quality %10 |
Assessed critically in depth and suggested excellent strategies logically and presented in very convincing manner |
Assessed well and suggested strategies logically and presented in well |
Assessed and suggested strategies |
Argument is confused and disjointed. |
| Grades | Excellent 50- 60 |
Good 40 – 50 |
Satisfactory 30 – 40 |
Unsatisfactory 0 – 30 |
| Discussion %60 |
Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately |
Demonstrate d ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately |
Demonstrated ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately |
Did not demonstrate ability to think critically and did not source reference material appropriately |
| Grades | Excellent 8-10 |
Good 6 – 8 |
Satisfactory 4-6 |
Unsatisfactory 0 – 4 |
| Conclusion %10 |
Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments |
Mostly consistent logical and convincing |
Adequate cohesion and conviction |
Argument is confused and disjointed |
| Harvard or IEEE Reference style %10 |
Clear styles with excellent source of references. |
Generally good referencing style |
Sometimes clear referencing style |
Lacks consistency with many errors |
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 4
PLEASE NOTE
Your submission document should be a single word or pdf document containing your report.
All submissions are to be submitted through the safeAssign facility in Blackboard. Submission boxes linked to SafeAssign
will be set up in the Units Blackboard Shell. Assignments not submitted through these submission links will not be
considered.
Submissions must be made by the due date and time (which will be in the session detailed above) and determined by
your unit coordinator. Submissions made after the due date and time will be penalized per day late (including weekend
days) according to Holmes Institute policies.
The SafeAssign similarity score will be used in determining the level, if any, of plagiarism. SafeAssign will check
conference web-sites, Journal articles, the Web and your own class members submissions for plagiarism. You can see
your SafeAssign similarity score (or match) when you submit your assignment to the appropriate drop-box. If this is a
concern you will have a chance to change your assignment and resubmit. However, resubmission is only allowed prior to
the submission due date and time. After the due date and time have elapsed your assignment will be graded as late.
Submitted assignments that indicate a high level of plagiarism will be penalized according to the Holmes Academic
Misconduct policy, there will be no exceptions. Thus, plan early and submit early to take advantage of the resubmission
feature. You can make multiple submissions, but please remember we only see the last submission, and the date and
time you submitted will be taken from that submission.
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.
H5031 Professional Issues in IS, Ethics & Practice 5
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