| Assessment tasks | Learning Outcome Mapping | ||||
| Assessment ID | Assessment Item | When due | Weighting | ULO# | CLO# for MITS |
| 1 | Tutorial Exercises (Individual) | Week 7 & 10 | 2 * 10% = 20% | 2, 3, 5 | 1, 2, 4 |
| 2 | Critique (Individual) | Week 6 | 20% | 2 | 1, 2 |
| 3* | Case Study PartA – Design
Part B – Implementation (Group) | Part A – Week9 Part B – Week13 (Study Week) | Part A- 20% Part B- 40% | 2, 3, 4 | 1, 2, 3 |
Note: * denotes ‘Hurdle Assessment Item’ that students must achieve at least 40% in this item to pass the unit.
Referencing guides
You must reference all the sources of information you have used in your assessments. Please use the IEEE referencing style when referencing in your assessments in this unit. Refer to the library’s referencing guides for more information.
Academic misconduct
VIT enforces that the integrity of its students’ academic studies follows an acceptable level of excellence. VIT will adhere to its VIT Policies, Procedures and Forms where it explains the importance of staff and student honesty in relation to academic work. It outlines the kinds of behaviours that are "academic misconduct", including plagiarism.
Late submissions
In cases where there are no accepted mitigating circumstances as determined through VIT Policies, Procedures and Forms, late submission of assessments will lead automatically to the imposition of a penalty. Penalties will be applied as soon as the deadline is reached.
Short extensions and special consideration
Special Consideration is a request for:
Students wishing to request Special Consideration in relation to an assessment the due date of which has not yet passed must engage in written emails to the teaching team to Request for Special Consideration as early as possible and prior to start time of the assessment due date, along with any accompanying documents, such as medical certificates.
For more information, visit VIT Policies, Procedures and Forms.
Inclusive and equitable assessment
Reasonable adjustment in assessment methods will be made to accommodate students with a documented disability or impairment. Contact the unit teaching team for more information.
Contract Cheating
Contract cheating usually involves the purchase of an assignment or piece of research from another party. This may be facilitated by a fellow student, friend or purchased on a website. Other forms of contract cheating include paying another person to sit an exam in the student's place.
Contract cheating warning:
By paying someone else to complete your academic work, you don’t learn as much as you
could have if you did the work yourself.
Many of for pay contract cheating companies recycle assignments despite guarantees of
“original, plagiarism-free work” so similarity is easily detected by TurnitIn.
Grades
We determine your grades to the following Grading Scheme:
| Grade | Percentage |
| A | 80% – 100% |
| B | 70% – 79% |
| C | 60% – 69% |
| D | 50% – 59% |
| F | 0% – 49% |
Overview
| Assessment tasks | Learning Outcome Mapping | ||||
| Assessment ID | Assessment Item | When due | Weighting | ULO# | CLO# for MITS |
| 1 | TutorialExercises (Individual) | Week 7 & 10 | 2 * 10% = 20% | 2, 3, 5 | 1, 2, 4 |
Introduction
You will submit work in tutorial activities during the study period. This is an individual assessment. The following are laboratory activities that you are to perform and submit.
Tutorial Exercise 1: Wireshark
In this lab, we’ll investigate the behavior of a NAT router. This lab will be different from our other Wireshark labs, where we’ve captured a trace file at a single Wireshark measurement point. Because we’re interested in capturing packets at both the input and output sides of the NAT device, we’ll need to capture packets at two locations. Also, because many students don’t have easy access to a NAT device or to two computers on which to take Wireshark measurements, this isn’t a lab that is easily done “live” by a student. So, in this lab, you’ll use Wireshark trace files that we’ve captured for you. This should be a relatively short and easy lab since the concepts behind NAT aren’t difficult, but it’ll be good nonetheless to observe NAT in action. Before beginning this lab, you’ll probably want to review the material on NAT in section 4.3.3 in the text1.
Tutorial Exercise 2:Cisco Packet Tracer
 |
Submission Instructions
All submissions are to be submitted through Turnitin. Drop-boxes linked to Turnitin will be set up in Moodle. Assessments not submitted through these drop- boxes will not be considered. Submissions must be made by the end of session 7 and 10.
The Turnitin similarity score will be used to determine any plagiarism of your submitted assessment. Turnitin will check conference websites, Journal articles, online resources, and your peer’s submissions for plagiarism. You can see your Turnitin similarity score when you submit your assessments to the appropriate drop-box. If your similarity score is of concern, you can change your assessment and resubmit. However, re-submission is only allowed before the submission due date and time. You cannot make re-submissions after the due date and time have elapsed.
Note: All work is due by the due date and time. Late submissions will be penalized at 20% of the assessment final grade per day, including weekends.
You will be assessed on the following marking criteria/Rubric:
| Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% - 69% | Acceptable 50% - 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49 | ||||||||||
Tutorial Exercise 1 10 Marks |
All questions were answered and justified with the screenshots. |
Ten questions were answered and justified with the screenshots. |
Nine questions were answeredand justified with the screenshots. |
Eight questions were answered and justified with the screenshots. |
Seven questions were answered and justified with the screenshots. |
Six questions were answered and justified with the screenshots. |
F i v e q u e s ti o n s |
F o u r q u e s ti o n s | T h r e e q u e s ti o n s |
T w o q u e s ti o ns |
F ir s t q u e s ti o n | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. | |||
Tutorial Exercise 2 10 Marks | |||||||||||||||
| Part A (2 Marks) | Excellent: Course completion Badge submitted with valid credentials. | Not Submitted. Or Totally Inaccurate Or Academic Misconduct. | |||||||||||||
Part B (8 Marks) | Excellent: Totally accurate and complete lab report; all tasks relevant screenshots are providedwith necessary headings/explanations. | Good: Mostly accurate and complete. All required screenshots are available for given tasks. | Acceptable: Somewhat accurateand complete; more than a few inconsistencies, errors or screenshots of all tasks are not provided. | Unacceptable: Inaccurate and incomplete; many inconsistencies. | Not Submitted. Or Totally Inaccurate Or Academic Misconduct. | ||||||||||
Overview
| Assessment tasks | Learning Outcome Mapping | ||||
| Assessment ID | Assessment Item | When due | Weighting | ULO# | CLO# for MITS |
| 2 | Critique (Individual) | Week 6 | 20% | 2 | 1,2 |
Introduction
You will submit work in assignment activities during the study period. This is an individual assessment.
In this assessment you are required to prepare a 1000-1500 words abstract in IEEE Style. To prepare the abstract you need to select an article published in 2020 and later. The selected article needs to include networking and communication. The article needs to be on one of the areas given below.
The report must follow the marking guide. Please note that citation of sources is mandatory and must be in the IEEE style.
Submission Instructions
All submissions are to be submitted through Turnitin. Drop-boxes linked to Turnitin will be set up in Moodle. Assessments not submitted through these drop- boxes will not be considered. Submissions must be made by the end of session 6.
The Turnitin similarity score will be used to determine any plagiarism of your submitted assessment. Turnitin will check conference websites, Journal articles, online resources, and your peer’s submissions for plagiarism. You can see your Turnitin similarity score when you submit your assessments to the appropriate drop-box. If your similarity score is of concern, you can change your assessment and resubmit. However, re-submission is only allowed before the submission due date and time. You cannot make re-submissions after the due date and time have elapsed.
Note: All work is due by the due date and time. Late submissions will be penalized at 20% of the assessment final grade per day, including weekends.
Marking Criteria/Rubric
You will be assessed on the following marking criteria/Rubric:
| Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% - 69% | Acceptable 50% - 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49 | |
Report Layout 2 Marks |
Extremely well structured and organized report; use of professional language; followed the guidelines. |
Well-structured and organized report; use of professional language; followedthe guidelines. |
Structured and organised report; use of language is appropriate; followed the guidelines. |
Structured and organised report;use of language could be improved; guideline has been followed partially. | Choppy and confusing; format was difficult to follow; language needs to be proofread plenty of errors; guideline has not been followed. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
| Abstract 2 Marks |
The abstract provides an insight of the article; the abstract is crisp; written extremely well. | The abstract provides an insight of the article; the abstractis crisp; written very well. |
The abstract provides an insightof the article; writtenwell. |
The abstract provides an insight of the article. | The abstract is vague and difficult to follow; the abstract is not writtenwell at all. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
Introduction 2 Marks |
The introduction is well rounded and provides a brief description of the assessment; the introduction sets an excellent flow for the report. |
The introduction provides a brief description of the assessment; the introduction sets a good flow for the report. | The introduction provides a brief description of the assessment; the introduction sets the flow for thereport. |
The introduction could relate more to the assessment. |
The introduction does not relate to the assessment and does not set theflow for the assessment. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
Literature Review 6 Marks |
The literature review provides an in-depth analysis of 5 published articles/conference papers in the area; the literature review is extremely well written and provides a clear insight of the area. | The literature review provides an in-depth analysis of 5 published articles/conference papers in the area; the literature review is well written and provides a clear insightof the area. |
The literature review provides an in-depth analysis of the published literature in the area; the literature provides an insight of the area. |
The literature review providesan analysis of the published literature. |
The literature review lacks depth and detail; the literature review fails to provide a critique. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
| Evaluate 4 Marks |
The section provides an excellent evaluation of the performance; a well-rounded evaluation against the existing techniques. | The section provides a good evaluation of the performance; a good evaluation against the existing techniques. | The sectionprovides a good evaluation of the performance; an evaluation againstthe existing techniques. |
An evaluation of the performance is somewhat provided. |
The evaluation of the performance has not been carried out; very little analysis is provided. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
| Conclusion 2 Marks |
Provided an excellent summary of the assessment, covering all aspects of the assessment. |
Provided a good summary of the assessment, coveringmost aspects of the assessment. | Provided a summary of the assessment; somewhatcovered the aspects of the assessment. |
Provided a summary of the assessment. |
The conclusion failed to summarise the assessment. | Not submitted or Totally inaccurate or Academic Misconduct. |
| References 2 Marks |
The references followed IEEE Style;the references were cited and complete. |
The references followed IEEE Style; most the references were cited and complete. | Most references followed IEEE Style; some of the references were cited and complete. |
Most references followed IEEE Style; the references were not cited. |
The references did not followIEEE Style andwere notcited and incomplete. | |
Overview
| Assessment tasks | Learning Outcome Mapping | ||||
| Assessment ID | Assessment Item | When due | Weighting | ULO# | CLO# for MITS |
| 3* | Part A- Design | Week 9 | 20% | 2,3,4 | 1,2,3 |
| Part B- Implementation | Week 13 | 40% | 2,3,4 | 1,2,3 | |
Note: * denotes ‘Hurdle Assessment Item’ that students must achieve at least 40% in this item to pass the unit.
Introduction
This is a Group assessment comprised of 3~5 Students. All group members must present their part in the demonstration/presentation.
Part A (Detailed Design): In this group assignment, you will assess the given case study to design a multi-level subnetting and provide a subnetted IP design plan. You must create a network topology using a network simulator (Cisco Packet Tracer) with the necessary labels and write a report on the design rationale. Each group must submit a report with the IP design plan, network topology screenshot and network design rationales.
Case Study: NetworkDesign andSecurity Assessmentfor GreenfieldMemorial Hospital Background
Greenfield Memorial Hospital is expanding, and its network infrastructure needs a redesign to support increased device load, enhanced security, and departmental segmentation. The current LAN setup is inefficient and struggles with slow speeds and security vulnerabilities. Departments—Administration, Patient Care, Pharmacy, Guest Services, and Research—require reliable connectivity, network security, and scalability for future growth.
Objective
Design a secure, efficient network for Greenfield Memorial Hospital that addresses current performance issues and supports future expansion. Your team will
troubleshoot existing problems, create a subnetting plan, and propose security measures to protect data and ensure efficient communication between departments.
Requirements Analysis
Design Task
Deliverables
Requirement Analysis: Brief assessment of the hospital’s networking needs.
IP Design Plan: Subnetting scheme tailored to each department.
Topology Screenshot: Visual of the network in Cisco Packet Tracer with key labels.
Design Justification: Explanation of security and bandwidth configurations. Constraints and Limitations: Identify any challenges with proposed solutions. Conclusion: Summary of how the design meets Greenfield Memorial’s goals.
NOTE: The report must follow the marking guide. Please note that citation of sources is mandatory and must be in the IEEE style.
| Task | Description | Marks |
| Report Layout | The reportlayout, language and structure shouldbe appropriate. Thereport should include title, table of contents, tableof figures, sections and subsections heading and numbering, figuresand tables numbers, citing tables, figures and references in the body text. The reference section will add the references in IEEE format. | 2 |
| Requirement Analysis | Detailed Requirement analysis with justification. | 2 |
| Network Design | Detailed Network design considering all the questions/directives. | 8 |
| Critical Analysis | Critical analysis witha focus on the designof the network. | 2 |
| Constraints and Limitations | The constraints and limitations are explained exceptionally well, and a workaround is provided. | 2 |
| Conclusion | Provided an excellent summary of the assessment. | 2 |
| References | Follow the IEEEStyle. | 2 |
Marking criteria/Rubric
You will be assessed on the following marking criteria/Rubric:
| Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% - 69% | Acceptable 50% - 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49% |
| Report Layout 2 points | Extremely well-structured and organized report; use of professional language; guidelines have been followed. | Well-structured and organized report; use of professional language; guidelines have been followed. | Structured and organised report; use of language is appropriate; guidelines have been followed. | Structured and organised report; use of language could be improved; guidelines have been followed partially. | Choppy and confusing; the format was difficult to follow; language needs to be proofread; Plenty of errors; guidelines have not been followed. or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
| Requirement Analysis 2 points | The requirement analysis is in-depth and detailed. All of the hospital’s requirements have been considered, and the functional and non- functional requirements are explained exceptionally well. | The requirement analysis is in-depth and detailed. Most hospital requirements have been considered, and the functional and non- functional requirements are explained well. | The requirement analysis is provided; most of the hospital's requirements have been considered, and the functional and non-functional requirements are explained. | A requirement analysis has been carried out; some functional and non- functional requirements have been discussed. | A requirement analysis has not been carried out; the requirements have been briefly discussed or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
| Network Design 8 points | The network design covers all hospital areas, is straightforward to understand, and is exceptionally well- designed. | The network design covers all areas of the hospital; the network design is straightforward; the network is well designed. | The network design covers most hospital areas; the network is well- designed. | The network design covers most hospital areas. | The network design seems incomplete and does not cover all areas or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
| Critical Analysis 2 points | Provided an excellent critical analysis focusing on the network's design; the critical analysis provided great reasoning for the selection of thenetworking devices and the design. | It provided a good critical analysis, focusing on the network's design; the critical analysis provided reasonable reasoning for the selection of the networking devices and the design. | The critical analysis focused on the network's design and provided reasonable reasoning for the selection of the networking devices and the design. | The critical analysis focused on the design of the network; some reasoning was provided. | The critical analysis lacks depth and detail and does not cover the limitations of the proposed wireless devices or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Constraints and Limitations 2 points | The constraints and limitations are explained extremely well. A workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided, and the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | The constraints and limitations are explained very well; a workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided; the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | An explanation of the constraints and limitations is provided, a workaround for the constraints and limitations is provided, and the effect of the constraints and limitations is discussed. | An explanation of the constraints and limitations is provided, and a brief workaround is discussed. | The constraints and limitations are hardly explained, a workaround is not discussed, and the effects have not been highlighted or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
| Conclusion 2 points | Provided an excellent summary of the assessment, covering all aspects of the assessment. | Provided a good summary of the assessment, covering most aspects of the assessment. | Provided a summary of the assessment; somewhat covered the aspects of the assessment. | Provided a summary of the assessment. | The conclusions failed to summarise the assessment or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
| References 2 points | The references followed IEEE Style; the references were cited and complete. | The references followed IEEE Style; most of the references were citedand complete. | Most references followed IEEE Style; some were cited and complete. | Most references followed IEEE Style; the references were not cited. | The references did not follow IEEE Style and were not cited and incomplete or Not Submitted or Academic Misconduct. |
Marking Guide (Part B): 40 Marks
| Assessment criteria | Exceptional >=80% | Admirable 70% – 79% | Creditable 60% - 69% | Acceptable 50% - 59% | Unsatisfactory <=49 |
Network Topology 5 marks | It comprehensively explainsthe physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network—including switches and routers— are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Thoroughly explain the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network— including switches and routers—are placedand interconnected and how data flows. | Mostly, it explains the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network-- including switches and routers-- are placed and interconnected and how data flows. | Provide some explanation of how the physical and logical structure of a network. It maps how different nodes on a network-- including switches and routers-- areplaced and interconnected and how data flows. |
Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
| Network design configurations and testing of features 15 marks | Comprehensively explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Thoroughly explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Mostly explain how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and | Some explanations of how your network is configured, including what the configurations are doing and alternative options. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
| alternative options. | |||||
| Discussion 5 marks | Comprehensive discussion, evaluation, results and conclusion. | Very good discussion, evaluation, resultsand conclusion. | Average discussion evaluation, results and conclusion. | Limited discussion, evaluation, resultsand conclusions. | Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited findings. |
Explain what you learned in this assignment. 5 marks |
Comprehensively explain what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. |
Sufficiently explain what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools,routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. | Some explanation of what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, some routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. |
Limited explanation of what you learned from this assessment, ranging from new tools, some routing, switching, addressing, encryption techniques and implementation. |
Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
Demonstrate/prese nt your network design and be able to defend your configuration. 10 marks | Comprehensively explained and successfully demonstrated the implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/portio n per groupmember. | Thorough explanation and successful demonstration of implementing at least his/her contribution/part/portio n per group member. | Good explanation and some successfully demonstrated implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/p ortion per group member. | Some explanations and limited success in the demonstration of the implementation of at least his/her contribution/part/portio n per group member. |
Misconduct. Not submitted Poor or limited implementation. |
Punjab Assignment Help delivers top-quality, plagiarism-free academic solutions to help you score higher with ease and confidence!
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
