|
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
| Assessment Type: | Group Assignment | % of total: | 30% |
| Assessment Date: | Session 5– Session 12 | Learning Outcomes: | 2,3&4 |
| Summative: | Yes | Duration/Word Length: | 20 min Plus 10 min |
Assessment Title: Assessment 2, ClassFacilitation Submission Guidelines:
Assessment Design – Adapted Harvard Referencing: Holmes will be implementing as a program a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following guidelines apply: 2018
source’s content for lecturers and markers.
References.
For example; “The company decided to implement a enterprise wide data warehouse business intelligence strategies (Hawking et al, 2004,p3(4)).” 08
Non-Adherence to Referencing Guidelines Where students do not follow the above guidelines:
| |||
Assignment Description:
This assessment will be completed in groups of 4 students. Each week selected students will lead and facilitate discussions related to the selected readings. During the Fourth Week class of semester, each group will be selecting a reading topic from the materials presented in the previous week that they will facilitate during tutorial. Prior to the session, each group member needs to identify and prepare a list of issues and/or concepts relevant to the weekly materials that they can use to initiate discussion with the tutorial group. At the end of the discussion session, the facilitator will give a summary of the ideas or points covered in the discussion and identified by the participants.
The major challenge associated with this assessment involves being a facilitator and leading discussion amongst students. All students should search for techniques that demonstrate how to act as a facilitator so as to promote group interaction, dynamics and discussion. There are many techniques that can be used— students should adopt one or even a combination of several to assist them in performing this role.
As a guide, 20 minutes for Facilitation, plus 10 minutes for Q&A and transition between teams. The mark allocation for this assessment:
Engagement and active participation: Every session, students should attend the tutorial and have active participation into those students who are facilitating (asking at least 4 questions or participate in the discussions overall the teaching period). 10 marks
Further details will be discussed in tutorial.
| Marking Criteria | Weighting |
| Quality of Submitted Materials (Quality of PowerPoint Slides) | 10 marks |
| Facilitated Discussion (Presenting, not reading from the slides/handouts/mobiles) | 10 marks |
| Fluency & Voice (Confidence, Posture and Clarity) | 5 marks |
| Interactionwith Tutorial Attendees (Answering Questions) | 5 marks |
| TOTAL Weightfor this assignment marking | 30 marks |
Marking Rubrics
| Grades | Excellent | Good | Satisfactory | Unsatisfactory |
Quality of Submitted Materials (Quality of PowerPoint Slides) | Authentic materials, attractive, cleanand well organized. If using PPT, bullets used for text and images. | Materials authentic, not so attractive, but mostly clear & organized. If PPT is used, more than half of the screen has text. | Materials not veryauthentic, not attractive, & not very clear or organized. If using PPT, mostly paragraphs with few images | Did not create materials (or) Materials not attractive, clear, or organized. If PPT is used, thereare slides without imagesand most istext only. |
Facilitated Discussion (Presenting, not reading from the slides / handouts / mobiles) | Demonstrated excellent ability to think critically and sourced 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 |
Fluency & Voice (Confidence, Posture and Clarity) | Speaks fluently, beyond having memorized his/her participation. Strong and clearvoice | Sufficient fluency. Clearvoice. | Hesitates at times and uses many fillers. Shaky voice. | Not fluent. Unclear and weakvoice. |
Interaction with Tutorial Attendees (Answering Questions) | Very interactive presentation, engage other participants mostof the times | Interactive and fewparticipants were engaged. | Interactive and only one or twoparticipants engaged. | Not interactive and no one was engaged with the presentation. |
PLEASE NOTE
Your submission document should be a PPT file.
Submissions must be made by the due date and time (which will be in the session detailed above) and determined by your unit coordinator. Submissions made after the due date and time will be penalized per day late (including weekend days) according to Holmes Institute policies.
The Safe Assign similarity score will be used in determining the level, if any, of plagiarism. Safe Assign will check conference web-sites, Journal articles, the Web and your own class members submissions for plagiarism. You can see your Safe Assign similarity score (or match) when you submit your assignment to the appropriate drop-box. If this is a concern you will have a chance to change your assignment and resubmit. However, resubmission is only allowed prior to the submission due date and time. After the due date and time have elapsed your assignment will be graded as late. Submitted assignments that indicate a high level of plagiarism will be penalized according to the Holmes Academic Misconduct policy, there will be no exceptions. Thus, plan early and submit early to take advantage of the resubmission feature. You can make multiple submissions, but please remember we only see the last submission, and the date and time you submitted will be taken from that submission.
Academic Integrity
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 enrollment, or cancellation of course enrollment.
"Need extra help with your coursework? Our Punjab assignment Help is here to provide expert guidance and support, ensuring you stay on track and achieve your academic goals!"
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 authorized . |
| 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
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
