Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines | |
Trimester | T1 2023 |
Unit Code | HI5029 |
Unit Title | IS Project Management |
Assessment Type | Individual Assignment |
Assessment Title | Assessment 3, Individual Research Paper |
Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) | This assessment item relates to the unit learning outcomes as in the unit descriptor. This assessment is designed to improve student research and writing skills and to give students experience in researching the literature on a topic relevant to the Unit of Study subject matter, critically analyzing current academic papers then presenting results and findings in a referenced written report.
Students will be able to: interpret user requirements and project management related data and make appropriate recommendations within a project context; analyse and evaluate the role of the modern project manager including ethical, social and cultural issues in the context of IT projects; |
Weight | 40% of the total assessments |
Total Marks | 40% |
Word limit | 2500-3000 words |
Due Date | 3a Draft week 8 3b Research Paper week 13 |
Submission Guidelines | All workmust be submitted on Blackboard by the due date alongwith a completed Assignment Cover Page. Theassignmentmust be in MS Wordformat, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your pagewithappropriatesectionheadings. 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. |
HI5029 IS Project Management 1
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
Assignment Description:
You are expected to complete a critique and conduct a literature review to discuss a contemporary issue which an IS professional may experience and identify appropriate approaches to address this issue. The topic is “Adapting Project Management Concepts to Agile Software Development Projects” You need to search in the literature and find at least ten (10) academic research papers (references) related to this topic. (Academic papers can be found in ProQuest. ProQuest instruction can be found in below. Please contact Liberian if you have further question).
A draft of the research paper (key points/headings) will be submitted in session 8 whereby students can receive feedback. Then students should submit the final research paper in the Blackboard by session 13.
ProQuest login:
Go to: http://www.holmes.edu.au/ > Login > Proquest
USERNAME: holmes2004
PASSWORD: holmes
The Draft report submission structure is as follow:
What you need to submit for Draft submission:
DRAFT STRUCTURE:
Introduction: State the purpose and objectives of the report.
Discussion: Site the references, and the reason you have selected that reference:
.
.
.
10. Reference No 10: <Cite it thoroughly> Why it is relevant to the topic
Conclusion: Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the main points of the report.
Referencing: 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 has been implementing as a pilot program using a revised/adapted Harvard approach to referencing. The following guidelines apply:
P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
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:
The final report submission structure is as follow:
What you need to submit for final submission:
1. Assignment File: You need to submit the final version of your assignment in session 13. The final submission must comply with the draft structure and draw heavily from the key references. The structure of the final submission is headings and in discussion critically analyse each reference and discuss how these references reflecting the proposed topic.
REPORT STRUCTURE:
Introduction: State the purpose and objectives of the report.
Discussion: Discuss the references, and critically analyse them and discuss how they reflect the proposed topic.
Conclusion: Summarise your findings, consolidating and drawing attention to the main points of the report.
Referencing: 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.
Marking Criteria | Weighting |
Draft | 5 marks |
Presentation quality | 5 marks |
Report structure, Layout, Grammar and spelling, Written style and expression | 5 marks |
Quality of evaluation and critically exploring the references | 15 marks |
Recommendations and justification | 5 marks |
Referencing | 5 marks |
TOTAL Weight for this assignment marking | 40 marks |
Grades | Excellent | Very Good | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
Presentation | Professional presentation with excellent writing skills | Professional presentation with very good writing skills | Professional presentation with good writing skills | Professional presentation and well written | Poor presentation |
Evaluation Quality | Assessed critically in depth and suggested excellent strategies logically and presented in very convincing manner | Assessed critically and suggested strategies logically and presented in convincing manner | Assessed well and suggested strategies logically and presented in well | Assessed and suggested strategies | Argument is confused and disjointed. |
Discussion | Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced reference material appropriately | Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically but did not source 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 |
Conclusion | Logic is clear and easy to follow with strong arguments | Consistency logical and convincing | Mostly consistent logical and convincing | Adequate cohesion and conviction | Argument is confused and disjointed |
Referencing | Clear styles with excellent source of references. | Clear referencing style | Generally good referencing style | Sometimes clear referencing style | Lacks consistency with many errors |