这是一篇来自澳洲的关于业务报告的assessment代写
| Style and Format | This assessment builds on the skills developed in Assessment 3 and requires students to incorporate feedback received on Assessment 3 into this report.
Structure of Assessment 4 1. INTRODUCTION 2. An overview of the paper 3. 100 words 4. [The examiner will assess this section to see how well it introduces the paper, and whether it highlights the central argument/findings] 5. MEDIA ARTICLE 6. Summary of the media article selected 7. 150 words 8. [The examiner will assess this section to see how well it provides an overview of the central points raised in the media article] 9. JOURNAL ARTICLE 10. Summary/overview of the journal article selected 11. 150 words 12. [The examiner will assess this section to see how well it provides an overview of the main findings/contribution of the journal article, as it associates with the media article] 13. DISCUSSION 14. Discussion of the theory/concept discussed in the lecture and its application to the journal and media article used here, and its use to illustrate and explain and issue or provide a solution 15. 700 words 16. [This is the most important part of your paper. The examiner will assess this section looking for strong and well-supported arguments. The examiner will want to see how well you introduce and utilise the 6+ journal articles to create a strong argument to support or solve the issues raised in the media article] 17. CONCLUSION 18. What valuable findings and discussion have you made using the media article, the journal article and the theory/concept. 19. 100 words 20. [The examiner will assess this section to see how well it summarises the main points that you have raised – through argument – in your paper] 21. REFLECTION 22. Reflect on your how you have developed your work and your insight based on the feedback that you received from Assessment 3. 23. 300 words 24. [The examiner will assess this section to see how you have reflected on your feedback, and how you have addressed any issues. You may also use this reflection section to reflect on your experiences around the issues and theories discussed in the paper] 25. REFERENCES i. You must correctly reference: ii. the journal article you have selected and used, iii. the media article you have selected and used, iv. All other sources and materials you have used – at least 6 additional academic journal articles are expected. You must correctly reference: (i) the journal article you have selected and used, (ii) the media article you have selected and used, (iii) All other sources and materials you have used – at least 6 additional academic journal articles are expected. This assessment builds on the skills developed in Assessment 3. Feedback from Assessment 3 must be incorporated into this report. |
| Assessment Submission | Online Via Moodle
This assessment has been set up to be checked by Turnitin, a tool which helps you check whether you have referenced correctly. You can submit your assessment task to Turnitin prior to the due date and Turnitin will give you an originality report. You may then make any changes that may be required and resubmit your final version by the due date. |
| Assessment Return | Qualitative (written and Quickmark comments) feedback via Moodle.
Release of final results. |
| REFER TO THE SUBJECT OUTLINE FOR MORE INFORMATION | |
Marking rubric:
| Criterion | Fail – 0% | Marginal Fail – 40% | Pass – 60% | Credit – 70% | Distinction – 80% | High Distinction – 100% |
| Structure (including references)
1 mark |
You did not follow the instructions communicated to you for this assessment. | Your structure was not correct, but it made sense and was logical. | Your structure was correct, but the word counts were not correct. | The structure was intact, and correct with required headings and word counts. | As per Credit, but the structure was very well done. | As per Credit, but the structure was extremely well done. |
| Introduction
2 marks |
There was no introduction. | The intro was poor, it did not discuss the paper sufficiently. | The intro was ok, but it was a little vague. | The intro provided enough information for the reader to comprehend what the paper was about. | As per Credit, but the intro was very well done. | As per Credit, but the intro was extremely well done. |
| Media Item
5 marks |
The media item was incorrect, not approved, or not relevant. | The correct media item was used, but it was not summarised effectively. | The media item was summarised well. | The media item was summarised well. A fair degree of detail and insight was included. | The media item was summarised very well. A good degree of detail and insight was included. | The media item was summarised extremely well. A high degree of detail and insight was included. |
| Journal Article
5 marks |
The journal article was not taken from the list provided. | The correct journal article was used, but it was not summarised effectively. | The journal article was summarised well. | The journal article was summarised well. A fair degree of detail and insight was included. | The journal article was summarised very well. A good degree of detail and insight was included. | The journal article was summarised extremely well. A high degree of detail and insight was included. |
| Discussion
15 marks |
The discussion was not related to the task set forth for this assessment. | The discussion was vague and/or confusing. | There was a decent discussion, but it was not strong and/or convincing. | The discussion was reasonable. It contained a few strong and convincing arguments which were well supported by literature which were cited and referenced. | The discussion was very good. It contained several strong and convincing arguments which were well supported by a good range of literature which were all correctly cited and referenced. | The discussion was excellent. It contained several strong and convincing arguments which were well supported by a good range of literature which were all correctly cited and referenced. |
| Conclusion
2 marks |
The conclusion was missing or did not relate well to this paper. | The conclusion was vague and/or confusing. | There was a decent conclusion, but it did not highlight any of the insights or contributions made in the paper. | The conclusion was good. It highlighted some of the contributions of the paper. | The conclusion was good. It highlighted many of the contributions of the paper. | The conclusion was excellent. It highlighted all of the contributions of the paper. |
| Reflection
10 marks |
There was no reflection, or the content of this section was not reflective. | There was a reflection, but it was disconnected from personal experience, and/or did not build on the feedback from Assessment 3. | The reflection was weak and/or vague and it did not provide any insight to the personal experience and/or growth. | The reflection provided some insight OR it did build on the feedback from Assessment 3. | The reflection provided good insight AND it built well on the feedback from Assessment 3. | The reflection was excellent. It provided good insight AND it built well on the feedback from Assessment 3. |