ACCT1077 Critical Accounting Perspectives Assessment Task 3
Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit
ACCT1077 Critical Accounting Perspectives
Assessment Task 3
Critical Accounting Perspectives is designed to enable you to apply financial accounting theories to a contemporary workplace situation. In this assessment, your knowledge and skills will be applied and assessed in a simulated workplace context.
Background Information
You are currently undertaking a student placement at ‘Aquarius’, a top-tier accounting firm, in their Advisory Services area. The Advisory Services area of Aquarius provides services to a diverse range of clients from all sectors of industry. One of Aquarius’ clients has requested a report on a specific ‘Topic of Investigation’. You are to write this report and submit to the Advisory Services Manager, who will send it directly to the client. The report should be of an appropriate professional standard to send to the client.
What you need to do
1. Submit a written individual report which addresses a specific topic of investigation. Each team has a particular topic of investigation. Team members will write their report on the same topic of investigation; however, you must submit your own, individually written report. Each student report should reflect independent research investigation. The topic of investigation for your group can be found in the ‘Topic Allocation’ sheet in Canvas>Assignments>Assessment Task 3: Final Report.
Assessment Overview
The assessment for this component of the course comprises the following:
|
Assessment Task |
Due Date |
Weighting |
|
Assessment Task 3 Individual Report |
Friday Oct 21, 2022 @ 5:00 pm
|
45% |
Assessment Details
Individual Report
Each individual team member is required to undertake research to address the question posed for your team’s particular topic of investigation and individually submit a complete and thoroughly investigated report using your own research. The initial reference is related to the topic of investigation. The initial reference can be used in your report, but you must go beyond the initial reference, and include at least another 10 recent academic references in your report.
You should read through the rubric to better understand the expectations of this assessment. There you will see that you are expected to engage with an accounting theory/theories to explain your topic of investigation. Choose the theory/theories which are relevant and can be applied to explain your topic and try to link the theory/theories throughout your whole report. It is advised that one of your sections is dedicated to defining and explaining these theory/theories. Your other sections can be used to explain key aspects of your topic.
Report format: The Individual Report must be in a professional report format. The report should include a cover page, table of contents, and page numbers. The report contents should be split into several logical sections and/or sub-sections. The sections of the report should comprise: an executive summary, introduction, main section of the report, conclusion and reference list. One of the sections in your report should include discussion of the relevant theory/theories. A typical report structure is:
Executive Summary
Introduction
Section 1
Section 2
Section 3
Section 4…
Conclusion
References
Appendices (optional)
Length: Maximum of 2,500 words (excluding table of contents, references, tables, figures and appendices). Refer also to the section on penalties for exceeding the word limit on page 4.
Due date: Friday 21 October 2022 @ 5:00 pm
Assessment weighting: 45%
Rubric: The key criteria are specified in the rubric on page 3.
Submission: Submit in Canvas via Turnitin. Turnitin settings will allow you to resubmit up to 3 times before the due date. After the due date & time, it will not allow resubmissions (but will allow initial submissions after the due date & time). If you are unable to submit late through Canvas, please email the course coordinator ([email protected]) for further instruction.
Individual Report Rubric
|
Criteria |
High Distinction |
Distinction |
Credit |
Pass |
Fail |
|
|
Depth and quality of research undertaken 10 marks |
Materials referred to are relevant; at least 8 references support the positions presented; Sources referred to are current and from a reliable source. The topic has been critically engaged with 8-10 marks |
Most of the materials referred to are relevant; at least 6 references generally support the positions presented; sources referred to are mostly current and from a reliable source 7-8 marks |
Many of the materials referred to are relevant; at least 5 references generally support the positions presented; some of the sources referred to are from a reliable source. 6-7 marks |
Some of the materials referred to are relevant; there is a lack of cohesion between the references cited and the topic being discussed; sources referred to are not current but are from a reliable source 5-6 marks |
There is a lack of evidence of relevant research; the research presented does not support the topic; sources referred to are not current or from a reliable source 0-4 marks |
|
|
Ability to identify the issue(s) relating to the research task 10 marks |
The report discussion clearly addresses the topic of investigation and assessment instructions; the report is highly relevant to the needs of the client; the report clearly outlines the links between the literature and the topic of investigation 8-10 marks |
The report discussion addresses the topic of investigation and assessment instructions; the report is mostly relevant to the topic; the report outlines the links between the literature and the topic of investigation 7-8 marks |
The report addresses some of the issues raised in the topic of investigation; the report is somewhat relevant to the topic; some links between topic and literature are made. 6-7 marks |
The discussion addresses most of the issues raised in the research task but lacks some clarity; the report at times lacks relevance and/or some of the claims made are erroneous; the report doesn’t clearly outline the link between the literature and the topic of investigation 5-6 marks |
The report discussion fails to address most of the issues rasied in the research task and the discussion lacks clarity; the report discussion lacks relevance and/or most of the claims make are erroneous; the report does not outline the links between the literature and topic of investigation 0-4 marks |
|
|
Ability to apply appropriate accounting theory to the context 10 marks |
The report makes clear links between the topic of investigation and one current accounting theory; the report explains these links with clarity throughout 8-10 marks |
The report makes links between the topic of investigation and one current accounting theory but these links are not always clear; the report mostly manages to explain these links 7-8 marks |
Some links are made between the topic and one accounting theory, but these links are not clear and are unexplained. 6-7 marks |
Very limited attempt has been made to link accounting theory to the topic of investigation, these links lack clarity; theory/ies were discussed but not linked to the topic. 5-6 marks |
Little or no attempt has been made to link accounting theory to the discussion or the links made are incorrect; multiple theories are discussed with no link to the topic 0-4 marks |
|
|
Ability to synthesise information into a coherent and engaging report 10 marks |
The report is professionally presented; all grammar and punctuation is correct; the report is highly engaging and easy to read; all sections of the report have been included and correctly structured 8-10 marks |
The report is professionally presented; most of the grammar and punctuation are correct; the report is engaging and fairly easy to read; all sections of the report have been included and correctly structured 7-8 marks |
The report is reasonably presented; there is an attempt at correct grammar and punctuation; the report is not very engaging; most sections of the report have been included. 6-7 marks |
Improvement is needed in the report presentation; there are some errors in grammar and punctuation; re report is not engaging and/or is not easy to read; sections of the report are missing and/or there are errors in the structure 5-6 marks |
The report is not presented professionally; there are many errors in grammar and punctuation; the report is not engaging and/or is not easy to read; the report is incorrectly structured and/or missing sections 0-4 marks |
|
|
Referencing 5 marks |
Sources acknowledged correctly with full reference details 4-5 marks |
Most sources acknowledged correctly with reference details 3.5-4 marks |
Some sources are acknowledged, but with a few errors 3-3.5 marks |
Few sources acknowledged; errors in reference list and referencing style 2.5-3 marks |
No sources acknowledged; major errors in reference list and referencing style 0-2 marks |
|
|
|
TOTAL MARK (maximum 45 marks) |
|
||||
Referencing guidelines
All sources of information must be acknowledged using the RMIT Business version of the Harvard (author-date) referencing system in written assessments. A reference list must also be included in your report.
Please refer to the Library Referencing Guidelines: http://www1.rmit.edu.au/library/referencing- guides
Academic Integrity and Plagiarism
Academic integrity is about honest presentation of your academic work. It means acknowledging the work of others while developing your own insights, knowledge and ideas. Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is your own. It is a form of cheating and is a very serious academic offence that may lead to expulsion from the University.
RMIT’s policy on Academic Integrity can be read at: http://www1.rmit.edu.au/students/academic-integrity
Penalties for Late Submission and Exceeding Word Limits
If you wish to apply for an extension of time for submission of any of the assessment items, you must apply in writing to the Course Coordinator before the stated submission date. Extensions to submission deadlines beyond 7 days are allowed only as a result of a successful application for Special Consideration.
Unless an extension has been granted, penalties will be applied. All assessment items will be marked as if submitted on time, then the mark awarded will be reduced by 10% of available marks for each day (or part of a day) it is late. For example, if an assessment item is awarded a mark of 20 marks and is submitted one day late, the penalty is 10% of 20 marks, which is 2 marks.
Assessment items overdue by 10 days or more will not be marked and will be awarded a mark of zero.
Assessment items that exceed the word limit by more than 10% (not including references, tables, figures, and appendices) will attract a marking penalty that is 5% of the total available marks. For example, an assessment item with a word limit of 2,500 words will incur a penalty of 5% if the submission has in excess of 2,750 words.
2022-09-25