7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment

7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine

Assessment Brief 2020-21

Semester 2

Assignment title (and number, if more than one)Coursework 2 Laboratory notebook and report
Module Leader(s) and Module Team
Module learning outcomes aligned to this assessmentCritically review current knowledge and understanding of the molecular and cellular basis of tissue regeneration, selected inherited diseases and cancers.
3. Conduct, analyse, report and critically reflect on a series of laboratory experiments in the field of stem cell biology. 
Course learning outcomes assessed mapped to this assessmentCS1: Critically analyse, evaluate and interpret knowledge and practice with regard to Biomedical Science.   CS2: Collect, analyse and present data using appropriate methods.   CS3: Apply scientific methods to the critical analysis of literature, reflection, and information searching in areas of Biomedical Science  TS7: Innovative and problem-solving capabilities: the ability to apply transferable skills to the execution of individual and group projects involving the definition, analysis and resolution of complex problems.  PS1: Undertake laboratory skills: the ability to work safely in the laboratory, undergoing progressively more advanced laboratory-based investigations based on competence in techniques appropriate to Biomedical Science   PS2: Undertake Laboratory skills: Carry out appropriate measurements / audits aligned to the translation of information from basic to clinical science.   PS3: Work effectively in a team: the ability to operate, to lead and collaborate in a team in order to solve problems of a practical (experimental) nature and to provide appropriate solutions.
Task details and instructionsYou must produce a 2000-word laboratory book which is a suitable record of your activities in the laboratory, data analysis, critical analysis and reflections made over two laboratory sessions. 
Due to the nature of the assessment, and the Learning Outcomes that are linked to this, it is a requirement that you attend on site laboratory classes in order to complete this assessment. The assessment requires you to plan, conduct, record and reflect on the results obtained from a series of laboratory practical sessions. If you have any problems in attending any of the sessions then you must contact the module leader Dr Steven Foster as soon as possible (and in advance of the session). Non-attendance at a lab session without a valid reason will result in a mark penalty (deduction of 10% of final mark for each session missed).
Students should produce a laboratory book using the layout provided below (layout also provided in the template document). Students should also consult the lab schedule for further information and hints and tips.

LAYOUT TO USE FOR LABORATORY BOOK
(Sub-headings that should be included in final laboratory book in bold; hints and tips that should be removed from final laboratory book in italics)
Overall aim Given what is known about the macrophage-derived exosomes and their potential effects on cancer cells, outline what you think the overall aim of the set of experiments was (i.e. can you suggest a hypothesis or scientific questions being tested).
Session 1 Objective(s): summarise what the goal of each procedure was this session (i.e. what you did and why).
Procedures: explain the principles behind each procedure/approach (i.e. explain how they work). Critically analyse the techniques/schedule/plan and discuss if there are any modifications you would make to the protocols or session if you were to repeat it. And/or, are there alternative or additional procedures/approaches that could have been used to achieve the objectives, and if so, compare them to those used.
Reflection and planning for the next session: For example, you could discuss: which aspects of the session went well and why; if any aspects did not go well and what you would you do differently next time; if what happened this week altered your plans for the following week; etc. Do not simply repeat the procedures you did in the lab.
Session 2 Objective(s): summarise what the goal of each procedure was this week (i.e. what you did and why).
Procedures: explain the principles behind each procedure/approach (i.e. explain how they work). Critically analyse the techniques/schedule/plan and discuss if there are any modifications you would make to the protocols or session if you were to repeat it. And/or, are there alternative or additional procedures/approaches that could have been used to achieve the objectives, and if so, compare them to those used.
Results: present your data in an appropriate format and provide accompanying text throughout introducing the figures and describing the data.
Data analysis and discussion: discuss what your data indicates and whether your goals were achieved. Offer possible explanations for any deviation from predicted results. Note- you will not be assessed on whether your experiments worked or not, you will be assessed on your critical analysis of what was expected and what the data indicates.
Reflection: For example, you could discuss: which aspects of the session went well and why; if any aspects did not go well and what you would you do differently next time. Do not simply repeat the procedures you did in the lab.
Overall discussion Discuss if the findings have helped address the overall aim/hypothesis/scientific question. Elaborate on how the findings fit (or not) with previously published studies and whether they could advance knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of liver cancer progression. Also comment on future experiments that could be performed to further confirm findings or move the project forward (think about further work you might need to do if you wanted to publish a paper on this work).
Task- typeThis assessment task allows you to continue to further develop your laboratory and critical analysis skills following on from the 7027BMS skills module. The nature of the required critical analysis approach promotes independence and provides other skills often utilised in the research lab environment, adding further authenticity to the activities undertaken. 
Deadline and Submission InstructionsThe submission deadline date and time in semester 2 is Monday 2nd August 2021 by 18:00hrs. Each student should upload a copy of their lab book as a single PDF file to the relevant Turnitin link on the 7029BMS Aula site. Please convert your final submission to a PDF format as these suffer less from formatting changes. There will be two Turnitin links labelled DRAFT and FINAL available in the Assessments area of the Aula site for this module.
The DRAFT link is provided for you to be able to check your similarity score prior to making your final submission. You may submit multiple times to this link, but do remember that obtaining a similarity report may take up to 24 hours.
The FINAL link is for submission of your work for assessment. You may submit only ONCE to this link. Remember that submission make take some time to complete, so aim to submit several hours before the deadline. The TurnitinUK system will record the date and time of your submission and cannot be over-written.
If you experience any technical problems when trying to submit your work, please consult Aula help via the question mark link. If these problems are experienced at the time of the submission deadline and cannot be quickly resolved, please capture screenshots as evidence and email these and your completed assessment to the module leader immediately.
Task schedulingThis assessment deadline will provide the maximum possible time after the final session to complete the write-up and attend coursework support sessions.
Support and guidanceThe marking rubric and criteria is available later in this document. These will be used to help guide students, along with instructions and hints and tips provided within the template document and lab schedule (documents provided in the Assessment folder on Aula).
Students will also have the opportunity to speak with the module leader during timetabled online sessions and weekly academic surgeries.
If you have a special requirement such as a variation of assessment need please contact the disabilities team.
Guidance on size/word limit
The word limit for this assignment is 2000 words (+/-10%) 
The following are included in your word allowance:  The text of your written work  Reference citations and reference to Figures and Tables within the text  Figure/Table legends
The following are excluded from your word allowance:  The title  Figure/Table headings Your name Student ID number, course, module name/code etc. Reference list  The word count details 
Penalties for overlong submissionsIf you exceed the word limit by more than 10% (i.e. if you exceed 2200 words), then you will be penalised by deduction of 10% of your final mark. You should state your word count at the end of your work. Work that is more than 30% above the allocated word limit (i.e. 2600 words or more) will only be read up to the allocated limit.
ReferencingUniversity now uses the APA Referencing Style. If you started your course before 1st September 2020, you may continue to use the University Guide to Referencing in Harvard Style until you graduate. For support and advice on how to reference appropriately please see the online referencing guidance or contact your Academic Liaison Librarian.
Extensions / DeferralsThe University’s normal policy on extensions and deferrals is given below. Please note that if you are unable to submit coursework or attend an assessment e.g. test, examination, presentation or assessed laboratory session you may be eligible to apply for an extension or a deferral. Please refer to the Extenuating Circumstances guidance on the Student Portal. Deferral or Extension requests must be made before the due date of the assignment and must be accompanied by appropriate evidence. Please be aware that deferral of an assessment may affect your ability to progress into the next academic year of study, please seek advice if you are considering deferring an assessment.

For THIS assessment: This normal policy applies.
Late or non-submissionsThe University’s policy on late or non-submission of assessment is given below: Work that is submitted late, without an extension or deferral having been granted, will receive a mark of ZERO (students will normally be eligible for a resit attempt). For assessments that are submitted through Turnitin, the University allows a 24 hour grace period for receipt of submission. This should not be viewed as extra time to complete the assessment but is provided to allow for any unforeseen technical issues that may occur around the submission deadline, especially when Turnitin is handling large numbers of submissions. Work that is not submitted or tests etc not attended, without an extension or deferral having been granted, will be recorded as Absent (ABS) (in these cases it is at the discretion of the Assessment Board as to whether you will be permitted a resit attempt).
For this assessment: Normal penalties for late or non-submission apply.
Plagiarism and CheatingAcademic dishonesty hurts everyone in the community. It not only damages your personal reputation, but also the reputation of the entire university, and it will not be tolerated at University. It is in the best interest of all students for the University to maintain the good reputation of its awards. Your co-operation is expected in actively protecting the integrity of the assessment process. It is your duty to observe high personal standards of academic honesty in your studies and to report any instances of malpractice you become aware of, without fail.
We expect students to act with academic integrity, which means that they will study and produce work in an open, honest and responsible manner. It is important, therefore, that you understand fully how to avoid academic misconduct and where to obtain support. Academic dishonesty covers any attempt by a student to gain unfair advantage (e.g. extra marks) for her/himself, or for another student, in ways that are not allowed.
Examples of such dishonesty include: Collusion includes the knowing collaboration, without approval, between two or more students, or between a student(s) and another person, in the preparation and production of work which is then submitted as individual work. In cases where one (or more) student has copied from another, both (all) students involved may be penalised. Falsification includes the presentation of false or deliberately misleading data in, for example, laboratory work, surveys or projects. It also includes citing references that do not exist. Deceit includes the misrepresentation or non-disclosure of relevant information, including the failure to reveal when work being submitted for assessment has been or will be used for other academic purposes. Plagiarism is the act of using other people’s words, images etc. (whether published or unpublished) as if they were your own. In order to make clear to readers the difference between your words, images etc. and the work of others, you must reference your work correctly Self-Plagiarism is the reuse of significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of your own work without acknowledging that you are doing so or without citing the original work, and without the written authorisation of the module leader. Re-presentation is the submission of work presented previously or simultaneously for assessment at this or any other institution, unless authorised in writing by the module leader and referenced appropriately. Exam Misconduct is any attempt to gain an unfair advantage in an assessment (including exams) or assisting another student to do so. It includes: taking unauthorised materials into exams, copying from other candidates, collusion, impersonation, plagiarism, and unauthorised access to unseen exam papers. In the event of an allegation of exam misconduct you are advised to contact the Student Union Advice Centre immediately after the incident.
For more details (including misconduct investigations and penalties) please consult the Faculty of Health and Life Sciences Student Handbook.
For resit assessments in which you are asked to improve an original submission, taking into account feedback provided, the rules on self plagiarism do not apply.
However, if you were alerted to plagiarism detection in your first submission you must ensure that this is NOT repeated in your resubmission.
Moderation and MarkingThis assignment brief has been moderated by a member of academic staff outside the module team and the external examiner.
Marking will be completed by the module team, which may include hourly paid staff. The marking will then be moderated by a member of the module team and reviewed by an academic staff member outside the team. The module feedback and marks will then be moderated by the external examiner.
Your mark will be reported as a banded mark according to the School’s banded marking guidelines. This banded marking approach recognises that marking cannot be exact and avoids students being awarded marks that lie close to a grade boundary. The banded marks that may be awarded are shown in the rubric below.
Anonymous markingAll work will be marked anonymously – please do not include your name on the submitted work or in file name.
Feedback policyAll marks released are subject to final Assessment Board decisions and are therefore provisional until after the Assessment Board sits. Feedback and provisional marks will be released on 30th April 2021 via the Aula site in the Student Success App.
For work submitted through Turnitin, feedback comments can be accessed by clicking on your submission and selecting the comments icon. The completed marks rubric can be accessed through the rubric icon.
Following the Assessment Board, your marks will be confirmed and you will be able to view your final grades through SOLAR together with any resit or deferral arrangements.

Indicative Marking Criteria

The criteria detailed below will be used to assess your coursework at MSc level. You should read through the whole document carefully to gain an appreciation of the level of performance that is required to achieve each grade. This document should also be used alongside the provided coursework support documents and support sessions. In addition, you should also independently research the background related to your coursework and find other sources of material in addition to those provided by this module.  


High distinction (100 – 95 – 90 – 88 – 85 – 82)
Distinction (78 – 75 – 72)
Merit (68 – 65 – 62)
High Pass (58 – 55 – 52)
Low Pass (48 – 45 – 42)
Fail (35 – 30 – 20 – 10 – 0)
Overall aim 5%
Overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is excellently introduced and explained. Particularly easy to follow logic and arguments. Highly relevant literature used to support statements.
The overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is excellently introduced and explained. Very easy to follow logic and arguments. Very relevant literature used to support statements.The overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is very well introduced and explained. Easy to follow logic and arguments. Mainly relevant literature used to support statements.
The overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is introduced and explained, though some explanations may be lacking or there may be some poorly expressed ideas. Quite easy to follow logic and arguments, though there may be some minor flaws in logic or understanding. Some relevant literature used to support statements.The overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is reasonably well introduced and explained, though several explanations may be lacking or ideas may be poorly expressed. Difficult to follow logic and arguments in places, and there may be some flaws in logic or understanding. Literature used to support statements could be more directly relevant.
The overall aim or hypothesis of the set of experiments is not introduced and explained. Explanations lack clarity or are very confused. Ideas are very poorly expressed. Section poorly constructed with some major flaws in logic or understanding. May be lacking use of relevant literature.
Objectives and procedures 20%
Very focussed and concise introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week. Rationale for methodology discussed, with very clear links between method and theory highlighted. Include cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers). Include a combination of sources, which are combined to construct academic level critical analysis. Full consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design as well as excellent suggestions for improvements based on evidence.
Highly relevant and concise introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week. Rationale for methodology discussed, with very clear links between method and theory highlighted. Include cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers). Include a combination of sources, which are combined to construct excellent critical analysis. Near-full consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design as well as excellent suggestions for improvements based on evidence.
Very relevant and concise introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week, but contains minor omissions or misconceptions. Rationale for methodology discussed, with good links between method and theory highlighted. Include cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers). Include a combination of sources which are combined to construct a very good critical analysis of aspects. Some consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design as well as very good suggestions for improvements based on evidence.Relevant introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week, but may contain some omissions or misconceptions. Rationale for methodology discussed, with some links between method and theory highlighted. Include some cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers). Use different sources, which are combined to construct a good critical analysis of some aspects. Some consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design, though there may be some omissions or flaws in understanding. Some suggestions for improvements largely based on evidence.Poor introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week, with several omissions or misconceptions. Rationale for methodology poorly explained, with few links between method and theory highlighted. Poor cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers). Critical analysis provided but lacks depth. There may be several errors. Consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design may contain omissions or flaws in understanding. Suggestions for improvements may be brief or lack supporting evidence.
Very poor introduction to concepts that underpin the work that week, with several major omissions or misconceptions. Rationale for methodology very poorly explained, with no links between method and theory highlighted. Cross referencing to methods that have been followed (e.g. course material/research papers) may be lacking. No or minimal critical analysis. There may be numerous errors. Minimal or no consideration of shortcomings and limitations of present design or flaws in understanding. May be lacking consideration of possible improvements.
Results 15% 
Data presented in a highly appropriate format. Concise accompanying text provided throughout that very clearly introduces figures and describes the data. Has an particularly clear narrative that is very easy to follow and understand.
Data presented in a very appropriate format. Concise accompanying text provided throughout that very clearly introduces figures and describes the data. Has a very clear narrative that is easy to follow and understand.Data presented in an appropriate format. Largely concise accompanying text provided that clearly introduces figures and describes the data. May be some minor omissions or errors. Has a clear narrative that can be followed and understood.Most data presented in a largely appropriate format. Provide accompanying text to introduce figures and describe the data, but may contain some errors or omissions. Has a narrative, but is difficult to follow flow of information in places.
Most data presented, though there may be issues with presentation and formatting. Some accompanying text provided to introduce figures and describe the data, but may contain major errors or omissions. Largely difficult to follow flow of information.Most data missing or very poorly presented, making it very difficult or impossible to understand the data collected. There may be major issues with presentation and formatting. Minimal or no accompanying text to introduce figures and describe the data. May contain several major errors or omissions. Very difficult to follow flow of information.
Data analysis and discussions 30%
Demonstrates an outstanding level of thought and analysis, which is supported with independently derived, original and highly relevant discussions. An extremely thorough critical analysis of the data to highlight main findings. An academic level critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit into the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Arguments are excellently constructed. Full consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Very relevant conclusions with highly original analysis in relation to literature.  
Demonstrates an excellent level of thought and analysis, which is supported with independently derived, original and highly relevant discussions. A thorough critical analysis of the data to highlight the main findings. A high-level critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit in to the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Near-full consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Arguments are very well constructed. Very relevant conclusions with original analysis in relation to literature. Demonstrates a high level of thought and analysis which is supported with independently derived, original and relevant discussions. A very good critical analysis of the data to highlight the main findings. A good critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit in to the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Some consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Arguments are well constructed. Some relevant conclusions with original analysis in relation to literature.  
Demonstrates a good level of thought and analysis which is supported with some relevant discussions. Some critical analysis of the data to highlight the main findings. Provide some critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit in to the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Some consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Arguments are reasonably constructed. Some relevant conclusions with original analysis in relation to literature. May be some omissions or poorly expressed ideas.Demonstrates some level of thought and analysis, but largely poor critical analysis of the data. Poor critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit in to the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Minimal consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Arguments are poorly constructed. Conclusions lack coherence. Several omissions and poorly expressed ideas.Lack of sufficient thought and analysis. Lacking critical evaluation of how the initial research question(s) and resulting data fit in to the wider scientific literature and whether the literature supports or opposes the data and/or initial research question. Minimal or no consideration of the impact i.e. practical implications of experimental findings which includes directions for future work and potential clinical relevance. Conclusions lack coherence or are missing. Several omissions or evidence of lack of understanding of main aspects. Ideas are very poorly expressed.
Reflections and planning 15%
Clear evidence of reflective practise. Reflections explained extremely well, and used very effectively to direct subsequent work.
elaborate on highly relevant possible future work.
Clear evidence of reflective practise. Reflections explained very well, and used effectively to direct subsequent work.Good evidence of reflective practise. Reflections explained well, and used quite effectively to direct subsequent work.
Some evidence of reflective practise. Reflections explained quite well, but may lack depth and analysis. Some indications reflections used to direct subsequent work.Minimal evidence of reflective practise. Some reflections provided, but these lack sufficient depth. Reflections not sufficiently used to direct subsequent work.Insufficient or no evidence of reflective practise. Reflections not suitable used to direct subsequent work.
Overall discussion 10%
Excellent linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Clearly demonstrate an outstanding knowledge of how the findings link with published work and the wider field. Demonstrate a full understanding of the topic and project. Excellently discuss and elaborate on relevant possible future work
Excellent linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Clearly demonstrate an excellent knowledge of how the findings link with published work and the wider field. Demonstrate an excellent understanding of the topic and project. Very clearly discuss and elaborate on relevant possible future work.Very good linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Clearly demonstrate an very good knowledge of how the findings link with published work and the wider field. Demonstrate a very good understanding of the topic and project. Discuss and elaborate on relevant possible future work.
Some good linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Demonstrate a good knowledge in places of how the findings link with published work and the wider field. Demonstrate a good understanding of the topic and project. Discuss and elaborate on relevant possible future work, though these discussions may be quite brief or lack depth.Some linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Demonstrate a little knowledge of how the findings link with published work and the wider field, though there may be flaws in understanding. Demonstrate a little understanding of aspects of the topic and project. Considerations on possible future work are very brief or lack sufficient depth.No linking of the project findings to published work and the initial overall hypothesis/aims. Demonstrate minimal knowledge of how the findings link with published work and the wider field with clear flaws in understanding. Demonstrate a lack of understanding of the topic and project. Considerations on possible future work are minimal or missing.
Presentation and referencing 5%
Outstanding presentation throughout. Report is particularly well written and contains concise and clear explanations. Flow of information is very logical and clear. There are no spelling or grammatical errors. All references are correctly cited, highly suitable and of a very high quality (e.g. peer-reviewed, relevant).
Excellent presentation throughout. Report is very well written and contains concise and clear explanations. Flow of information is very logical and clear. There are no spelling or grammatical errors. All references are correctly cited, highly suitable and of a high quality (e.g. peer-reviewed, relevant).Very good presentation. Report is well written and contains concise and clear explanations. Flow of information is logical and clear. May contain a few spelling or grammatical errors. Most references are correctly cited, suitable and of a high quality (e.g. peer-reviewed, relevant).Reasonable presentation. Report is quite well written and contains some clear explanations. May be difficult to follow in places. Flow of information is reasonably logical and clear. There are some spelling or grammatical errors. Most references are correctly cited and suitable, but there may be some missing citations or inappropriate references used.Poor presentation. Report is poorly written and contains some very unclear explanations and is difficult to follow. Flow of information is difficult to follow. There are several spelling or grammatical errors. Many references are incorrectly cited or not suitable. There may be several missing citations.Extremely poor presentation. Report is very poorly written and contains many unclear explanations and is very difficult to follow. There is no clear flow of information. There are numerous spelling or grammatical errors. Most references are incorrectly cited or not suitable. There may be numerous missing citations.
Order Now

Get professional help for the 7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment. Best assignment in Australia. Order Online Now!

No Fields Found.
Universal Assignment (September 27, 2022) 7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment. Retrieved from https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/.
"7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment." Universal Assignment - September 27, 2022, https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/
Universal Assignment June 17, 2022 7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment., viewed September 27, 2022,<https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/>
Universal Assignment - 7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment. [Internet]. [Accessed September 27, 2022]. Available from: https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/
"7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment." Universal Assignment - Accessed September 27, 2022. https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/
"7029BMS Genomic and Regenerative Medicine Assignment." Universal Assignment [Online]. Available: https://universalassignment.com/7029bms-genomic-and-regenerative-medicine-assignment/. [Accessed: September 27, 2022]

Please note along with our service, we will provide you with the following deliverables:

Please do not hesitate to put forward any queries regarding the service provision.

We look forward to having you on board with us.

Get 45%* OFF on Assignment Help

Popular Assignments

VU22977 – Practice in a Legal Environment

Advanced Diploma of Legal Practice – 22565VIC PORTFOLIO- CLIENT MATTER FILE Assessment task 1 Prepare a comprehensive portfolio of documents to create a Client Matter File which must include: Element 1 Area of law Cover sheet stating client name and short description of legal matter Client Instruction Sheet, Costs Agreement

Read More »

KIT714 ICT Research Principles: Assignment 1

Practical Qualitative Research Exercise                                                                                                                                         Type:                 In-Semester, Individual Assignment Task Length:   minimum 2,000 words Weighting:     20% of total assessment for this unit Due Date:       Friday 5 August 2022 – 11:55 pm (Week05) Submission:    electronic submission on MyLO (WORD or PDF) Description:    This practical exercise will engage students in a qualitative research

Read More »

MODULE 44-704463 Dissertation Help

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Dissertation (12,500 words) Deadline: JULY 29th 2022, 3pm Introduction and abstract  Situates the research question within the, theory, and concepts Explains the value of the study.  Relevance of the research question, to the field of study is fully justified. Leads logically into the Literature Review. Abstract of professional

Read More »

ITECH1103-Assignment: Assignment 2: Analytics Report

Overview The purpose of this task is to provide students with practical experience in writing a data analytical report to provide useful insights, patterns, and trends in a chosen dataset in the light of a set of tasks required within this document. This dataset will be chosen from the UC

Read More »

PBHL20001 Term 1, 2022 – Supplementary Assessment

PBHL20001 Term 1, 2022 Supplementary Assessment The influenza pandemic that followed World War I and took place over the period from 1918-1920 resulted in an estimated 100 million deaths worldwide and 500 million infections. In addition, this pandemic had a significant impact on public health practice throughout the 20th century

Read More »

Community Health Project 1 (HLTH 3058): Assessment 2: Portfolio Task 2

Community Health Project 1 (HLTH 3058) Assessment 2: Portfolio Task 2 – Evaluative Framework Marking Guide Weighting: 15% the total grade for the course   Criteria Outstanding performance (75-100%) Exceeds core requirements (65-74%) Meets core requirements (50-64%) Does not meet requirements (<50%) Comments Content (70%) Demonstrates adequate knowledge of integrating

Read More »

Community Health Project 1 (HLTH 3058): Assessment 2: Portfolio Task 1

Community Health Project 1 (HLTH 3058)Assessment 2: Portfolio Task 1 – Ethical Considerations Marking GuideWeighting of 15% the total grade for the course Criteria Outstanding performance (75-100%) Exceeds core requirements (65-74%)   Meets core requirements (50-64%) Does not meet requirements (<50%) Comments CONTENT (80%) Ethical Considerations   Demonstrates adequate knowledge

Read More »

SAM 11486/SAM G 6677: Assignment 1 – Individual

Assignment 1 – Individual (25%) Report Due: 11:59pm Sunday Week 5 04/09/2022 This assignment will be marked out of 25 marks and is worth 25% of the overall mark for the unit. Please check the unit outline for late penalties and restrictions on late submissions. This assignment is an individual

Read More »

11486 Systems Analysis and Modelling

Assignment Case Study C – Feed Me Now Disclaimer: The situation described in the following case study is fictional, and bears no resemblance to any persons, businesses, or organisations, living or dead. Any such resemblance, if exists, is merely co-incidental in nature, and is not intentional. Feed Me Now is

Read More »

MAA703 – Accounting for Management

Trimester 2 2022 Assessment Task 2 Part B – Teamwork Reflection (Individual) DUE DATE AND TIME:                        Wednesday, 7 September 2022 by 8:00pm (AEST) PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE:    10% WORD COUNT:                                   750 – 800 words Description Teamwork is one of the vital components of many workplaces and the ability to demonstrate

Read More »

Research project assessment proforma and marking schemes

BSc Biomedical Sciences with Health, Exercise and Nutrition (HEN6004) and BSc Biomedical Science (APS6022) Instructions for use All forms must be completed electronically and uploaded to the student submission point in  turnitin. Please note the literature review assessment will be completed in January whereas the assessment of the paper/poster and

Read More »

XERO and Spotlight reporting software Report Assignment

Case facts – Read me carefully please City Infrastructure Holdings Ltd (CIH) and Network Maintenance Services Ltd (NMS) City Infrastructure Holdings Ltd (CIH) acquired 100% of the 300,000 issued shares in Network Maintenance Services (NMS) on 1 July 2021.  The consideration provided to shareholders of NMS consisted of $1.20 in cash plus 1

Read More »

KIT103 Computational Science

School of Information and Communication Technology College of Sciences and Engineering Unit Outline KIT103 Computational Science Semester 2, 2022 Sandy Bay Campus, Hobart Newnham Campus, Launceston COVID-19 (Coronavirus Information) For information on how you can help keep us all safe, please review the Coronavirus updates page here: https://www.utas.edu.au/about/safety-security-and-wellbeing/coronavirus Sections that

Read More »

SEN725 Urban Stormwater Asset Design

Assessment Task -4 Final Report – Analysis of CoGG Stormwater Network Weight 50% This is an individual assessment task. Plagiarism and collusion is unacceptable practice at Deakin University. You must appropriately reference your work. Failure to do so will result in disciplinary action. For more information on plagiarism and collusion,

Read More »

PSY3PRP 2022 Assignment 2: Research Project Report

PSY3PRP 2022 Assignment 2: Research Project Report Guidelines and Marking Rubric Individual Research Report due Wednesday 19th October 11.59pm (50% of total grade) For this assignment—with support through structured tutorial work across much of the semester— you will produce an individually-written report on the broad topic of feeding difficulties in

Read More »

Increasing Demand for assignment help in Namibia

With the growing population, the demand for clean energy, advanced technology, new structures, and better healthcare is escalating day by day which makes engineering the most popular degree for the youth. As more people pursue engineering nowadays, it also makes it one of the most difficult and competitive degrees also.

Read More »

Online Assignment Help in Germany

How Could You Do Exam Preparation Effectively? Exam time is full of challenges and difficulties. You have to juggle exams even in high school, college, or higher education. It defines your knowledge of a specific subject and how well you know the curriculum. The exam also tests how much you

Read More »

Get Excellent Human Values Assignment Help Immediately

Get Excellent Human Values Assignment Help Immediately: Expert Solutions to all your Queries Instant Human Values Assignment Help Online Students can get Human Values assignment help online in a fast and simple way from the experts at Universal Assignment Help Service. Their team of over 172+ subject experts works every

Read More »

Get Top Modern History Assignment Help Online

Order Modern History Assignment Help immediately Students often need modern history assignment help for many reasons. Getting immediate online help for assignments helps students boost their academics in incredible ways. Sometimes, the pressure of studies is too much to take for students. This causes them to score poor grades and

Read More »

Get Instant Assignment Help in the United Arab Emirates

How Can Assignments Help Students? Whatever the definition of homework is, one thing is certain: it helps students thoroughly learn the concepts they have studied in class. The number of such assignments may cause stress or a burden. It means students and tutors are both correct in their type of

Read More »

Assignment Help in Mexico

How to Gain Awesome Grades in Your Chemistry Subject? Whether you are pursuing a technical degree or studying in the science stream, chemistry is always at the forefront. If you love to observe reactions, molecules, acids, condensation, evaporation, and dilution, chemistry will prove a resource for getting outstanding academic marks.

Read More »

Assignment Help in Kenya

How Could You Find the Best Biology Homework Website? Getting online homework help from an expert is neither embarrassing nor unauthentic. The vast majority of students around the world believe that doing online assignments and tutoring is beneficial. The Standard Graduate School of Education revealed that 56% of students suffer

Read More »

Assignment Help in Bangladesh

The Best 6 Hacks to Shortlist the Top Civil Engineering Assignment Tutor? Finding a homework expert for civil engineering assignments is a hectic task. As civil engineering has several fields, getting expertise is difficult for tutors. You may struggle to receive civil engineering assignment help in Bangladesh due to this

Read More »

Assignment Help in Pakistan

What Will Unethical Occur from Getting Homework? Homework looks like a mode of learning in most cases. But what happens to its quantity? Its quantity should be more than enough for students. Such circumstances may be detrimental to the health of the pupils. Sometimes, college faculties or teachers forget to

Read More »

Assignment Help in Malaysia

The Best 4 Skills You Should Learn For Making Your Career in 2022 As technological innovations leap forward daily, new skills are entering our market. Sticking to one skill set enables you to lose lucrative job opportunities. That is why it gives importance to having diverse skills, which should be

Read More »

MKT200 Marketing Principles: Infographic

Assessment 2 Information Subject Code: MKT200 Subject Name: Marketing Principles Assessment Title: Infographic Assessment Type: Individual infographic Length: Two pages Weighting: 30% Total Marks: 100 Submission: Online Due Date: Week 9 Your task Individually, you are required to create a two-page infographic outlining the communications process of two competitor brands.

Read More »

MMP-223, Property and Real Estate Law and Practice

MMP-223, Property and Real Estate Law and Practice, Trimester 2, 2022 Assignment 2, Client Report, Individual Assignment 25% of Unit Assessment (1,250 words*) Due Date: September 16, 2022, 8-pm AEST Assignment Brief: Clyde, being a real estate agent, loves property. With his share of the sale of the Sorrento property

Read More »

NUR1398 – Foundations of Nursing Practice Theory

Assessment: Care Plan Report Task overview Course NUR1398 – Foundations of Nursing Practice Theory Brief task description Written care plan addressing nursing care requirements for older patients with degenerative conditions. Rationale for assessment task Registered Nurses are required to think through the different aspects of patient care to arrive at

Read More »

MBA641 Project Strategy Framework

Assessment 1 Information Subject Code: MBA641 Subject Name: Strategic Project Management Assessment Title: Project Strategy Framework Assessment Type: Length: Individual video recording and supporting Infographic Video: 10-minute (no more) Supporting infographic: 1 page (no more) Weighting: 30% Total Marks: Submission: 100 Online Due Date: Week 4 Your task You are

Read More »

SEJ201 Structural Design Assessment

SEJ201 Structural Design Assessment Task 5 FINAL PROJECT REPORT Summary The Final Project Report is an individual task which builds on teamwork completed earlier in the trimester. This report shall clearly explain and justify the design solution proposed. In this report students you should identify project scope, inputs and constraints,

Read More »

42907 Design for Durability

Introduction Overall, explain what readers will find in the report, general information about the structure, location, climatic conditions, detail which specific parts of the structure will be designed according to which Australian standard. Which type of foundation, why? You can use figures in this section. Provide the scope of the

Read More »

Can't Find Your Assignment?

Open chat
1
Free Assistance
Universal Assignment
Hello 👋
How can we help you?