Leveraging IT for Business Advantage (HI6032) Assignment Help
Group Assessment Cover page
Unit Details |
Name |
Leveraging IT for Business Advantage |
Code |
HI6032/HM6032 (Block Mode 2) |
|
Year, Trimester |
2024, Trimester 1 |
Assessment Details |
Name |
Research Proposal |
Due Date and Week |
1. Group Presentation (15%): Week 11 Friday 11.59 pm 2. Group Case Study Report (35%): Week 11 Friday 11.59 pm |
Group Student Details |
Student ID |
First Name |
Family Name |
Work Contribution |
Group Submission Declaration |
Integrity Declaration |
Student ID |
Full Name |
Submission Date |
We have read and understand academic integrity policies and practices and our assessment does not violate these. |
||||
Instructions
Objectives |
This assessment item relates to the unit learning outcomes as in the Unit of Study Guide. This assessment is designed to enhance students’ skills on critically analyzing and evaluating key issues and challenges in recent IS technologies and how they can be acquired and contribute to business core processes. The assessment helps develop presentation and problem-solving skills. |
Instructions |
For this assignment students will be divided into small groups (the size will depend on class size), and each group will select a specific technology/ topic to research. The research topic you select must be directly relevant to IT in Business. A list of possible topics is provided in the attachment (for reference purposes only). A set of research groups have been created in the Blackboard. Students are required to join a research group on their campus by Week 2. Group members must only be from the same campus. Each group can have maximum 4 members. Each group will be required to prepare a presentation on the selected research topic. The video presentation must be in Microsoft Powerpoint only. No other file formats are accepted. Both “presentation slide” and “the face of presenter” should be in the recorded video. Each group should prepare a cohesive presentation that succinctly summarizes the studies related to the selected research topic. Each member should present the part of the work they are most involved with, ensuring a balanced distribution of speaking time. Each group will then be required to research a real-life company and write a case study report. The case study must be directly relevant to the selected research topic. The key elements of the case study report From a broad perspective, a case study is an in-depth analysis of a particular subject. Generally, the study covers a problem-solution-results format. When applied to this unit, a case study examines how a real-life company had a problem, found a solution using a particular information technology, and shares the results of the solution. The following eight elements must be included in your case study report: 1. Executive Summary/Synopsis 2. Introduction o introduce the selected company, including the background and any previous studies of the issue (literature review); briefly describe the key problem and its significance 3. Challenges o explain the challenge the selected company faced before using the presented technology; 4. Discussion o discuss how the selected company found the presented technology; discuss the selected company’s decision process and the steps they went through before discovering the solution 5. Implementation o explain how the solution was implemented; discuss if the implementation meets the expectations, and who was involved in the implementation process |
6. Conclusion o conclude your case study with the end results; sum up the main points from the challenges, discussion and recommendations 7. Recommendations o provide proposals for future action to solve the problem or improve the situation 8. References Points to Note: • The assignment is worth 50% of the assessment divided into the two components o The group video presentation: 15% o The group case study: 35%; word limit: 2500 • Each member of the group should take part in the presentation • The presentation should be for approximately 20 minutes • Students should be prepared to answer questions • If a group member makes no contribution, he/she will receive zero mark. |
Academic Integrity Information |
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessment must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Important academic integrity breaches include plagiarism, collusion, copying, impersonation, contract cheating, data fabrication and falsification. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment. |
Format Instructions |
• Most assessments must be in MS Word format with no spacing, 11-pt Calibri font and at least 2cm margins on all four sides with appropriate section headings and page numbers. • You must name your file with the Unit Code and Student ID (e.g. “HI5003GWA1995”). • Check that you submit the correct document as special consideration is not granted if you make a mistake. • Student ID needs to be indicated on the cover page. |
Penalties |
• All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time along with a completed Assessment Cover Page. Late penalties apply. • Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing. Penalties are associated with incorrect citation and referencing. |
Presentation Marking Scheme (15%)
Presentation Marking Scheme |
|||||
Exemplary (75-100) |
Accomplished (50-74) |
Developing (40-49) |
Missing or Unacceptable (0-39) |
Mark |
|
Visual Appeal (3%) |
There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Visually appealing/engaging. |
There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on two or more slides. Significant visual appeal. |
There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information was contained on many slides. Minimal effort made to make slides appealing or too much going on. |
There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. The slides were difficult to read and too much information had been copied onto them. No visual appeal. |
|
Comprehension (3%) |
Extensive knowledge of topic. Members showed complete understanding of assignment. Accurately answered all questions posed. |
Most showed a good understanding of topic. All members able to answer most of audience questions. |
Few members showed good understanding of some parts of topic. Only some members accurately answered questions. |
Presenters didn’t understand topic. Majority of questions answered by only one member or majority of information incorrect. |
|
Presentation Skills (3%) |
Regular/constant eye contact, the audience was engaged, and presenters held the audience’s attention. Appropriate speaking volume & body language. |
Most members spoke to majority of audience; steady eye contact. The audience was engaged by the presentation. Majority of presenters spoke at a suitable volume. Some fidgeting by member(s). |
Members focused on only part of audience. Sporadic eye contact by more than one presenter. The audience was distracted. Speakers could be heard by only half of the audience. Body language was distracting. |
Minimal eye contact by more than one member focusing on small part of audience. The audience was not engaged. Majority of presenters spoke too quickly or quietly making it difficult to understand. Inappropriate/disinterested body language. |
|
Content (3%) |
The presentation was a concise summary of the topic with all questions answered. Comprehensive and complete coverage of information. |
The presentation was a good summary of the topic. Most important information covered; little irrelevant info. |
The presentation was informative but several elements went unanswered. Much of the information irrelevant; coverage of some of major points. |
The presentation was a brief look at the topic but many questions were left unanswered. Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out. |
|
Preparedness/ Participation/ Dynamics (3%) |
All presenters knew the information, participated equally, and helped each other as needed. Extremely prepared and rehearsed. |
Slight domination of one presenter. Members helped each other. Very well prepared. |
Significant controlling by some members with one minimally contributing. Primarily prepared but with some dependence on just reading off slides. |
Unbalanced presentation or tension resulting from over-helping. Multiple members not participating. Evident lack of preparation/rehearsal. Dependence on slides. |
Case Study Marking Scheme (35%)
Criteria |
Missing or Unacceptable (0-39) |
Developing (40-49) |
Accomplished (50-74) |
Exemplary (75-100) |
Introduction: background, literature review, references (5.83 %) |
Incomplete research and associations between the problems or questions and key course concepts and no use of corroborating sources. |
Limited research and associations between the problems or questions and key course concepts and little (1 or more) use of corroborating sources. |
Good research and documented associations between problems or questions and key course concepts and some (2 or more) use of corroborating sources. |
Excellent research with clearly documented associations between problems or questions and key course concepts and good (3 or more) use of corroborating sources. |
Challenges: identification of the main issues and/or problems (5.83%) |
Identifies and understands few of the main issues in the case study. |
Identifies and understands some of the main issues in the case study. |
Identifies and understands most of the main issues in the case study. |
Identifies and understands all the main issues in the case study. |
Discussion: analysis of the key issues. (5.85%) |
Incomplete analysis of the key issues. |
Insightful and thorough analysis of some of the key issues. |
Insightful and thorough analysis of most of the key issues. |
Insightful and thorough analysis of all the key issues. |
Implementation (5.83%) |
Limited description of the implementation |
Adequate description of the implementation |
Clear description of the implementation |
Detailed description of the implementation. |
Recommendations and conclusion (5.83%) |
Superficial observations and recommendations on effective solutions to a few of the problems/issues. Limited conclusion |
Shallow observations and recommendations on effective solutions to some of the problems/issues. Adequate conclusion |
Solid, well-thought out observations and recommendations on effective solutions to many of the problems/issues. Appropriate conclusions |
Well-reasoned, logical, relevant observations and recommendations on effective solutions to most of the problems/issues. Detailed and appropriate conclusions |
Writing Skills (5.83%) |
There are many spelling errors and grammatical mistakes. Ideas are hard to follow. References are not used. |
There are several spelling or grammatical errors. Some ideas are clearly presented. References are sporadic or not used. |
There are few spelling or grammatical errors. Most ideas are clearly presented and references are used. |
Writing is totally free of grammar and spelling errors. Clear, concise and creative presentation of ideas and properly referenced. |
Leave A Comment