Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on ilearn
(The submission portal on ilearn will close at 14:00 UK time on the date of submission)
Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit an IS Governance report. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
Learning Outcomes:
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Critically assess the elements of IS Governance.
- Evaluate the effectiveness of IS Governance strategies within organisations.
- Analyse the link between IS Governance and business values and strategy.
- Apply IS Governance models within organisations.
- Effectively communicate the values, risks and opportunities derived from IS Strategy.
- Make recommendations for the development to existing IS strategies to better leverage existing resources.
- Understand global issues and their place in a globalised economy, ethical decision-making and accountability. Adopt self-awareness, openness and sensitivity to diversity in culture.
Guidance
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module name, the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document; the appendices if relevant; and a reference list in AU Harvard system.
You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 3,000 words
Please refer to the full word count policy which can be found in the Student Policies section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework
Please note the following:
Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in text citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. ALL other printed words ARE included in the word count.
Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a 10-percentage point deduction.
Assignment Task – Report
This report is worth 60% of the total marks for this module.
Good IS Governance is increasingly being discussed across the board as significant in view of adapting and responding to emerging changes as well as risks in the interconnected business environment where organisations today operate.
Good IS Governance is aligned, inclusive, educated, engaged, connected and informed and encompasses an organisation’s policies, plans, projects and priorities. In this assignment, you will audit and assess the existing IS Governance of your own organisation.
You are the IS Governance Auditor in charge of critically assessing the existing IS Governance system of your organisation.
Question 1
Critically assess the extent to which IS Governance is aligned, inclusive, educated, engaged, connected and informed in relation to the existing system in your organisation.
(25 marks)
(750 words)
(LO: 1)
Question 2
Evaluate the effectiveness of the existing IS Governance policies, plans, projects and priorities and identify any areas of improvement.
(25 marks)
(750 words)
(LO: 2)
Question 3
Analyse the link between IS Governance and the business strategy. Are there any discrepancies? How would you address them?
(25 marks)
(750 words)
(LO: 3)
Question 4
Identify the values, risks and opportunities to your organisation’s IS strategy derived from the modifications and revisions proposed to IS Governance in your audit.
(25 marks)
(750 words)
(LO: 5)
End of questions
Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit a first draft to receive formative feedback if you send your draft assignment on or two weeks prior to the submission deadline. This is to allow time for you to reflect on the feedback and draft your final submission.
The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop your skills as an independent learner.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work, by email, to your tutor, no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a blended learning student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback and further details.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date specified by your tutor – if a blended learning student.
Referencing Guidance
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard system.
Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Page 6 of 9
[313] – Part 1
Submission Guidance
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment can be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file, or, as multiple files.
If you chose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the question/part you are answering along with your student number ie Q1 Section A STUXXXX. If you wish to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions, you must ensure that your new submission is named exactly the same as the previous in order for the system to overwrite it.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook which is available on the A-Z key information on iLearn.)
Assessment Criteria (Learning objectives covered – all)
| Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students’ expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is potentially worthy of publication by Arden University. A clear appreciation of ethical considerations (as appropriate) is also a prerequisite. | ||
| Grade | Mark Bands | Generic Assessment Criteria. |
| Distinction | 80%+. | Outstanding analysis of key issues and concepts/ outstanding development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Outstanding research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive / professional skills, and outstanding creativity and originality. Outstanding academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and demonstrates an awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Work may be considered for publication by Arden University. |
| 70-79% | Excellent analysis of key issues and concepts/ excellent development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive / professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and demonstrates an awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Work may be considered for publication by Arden University. | |
| Merit | 60-69% | Very good level of competence demonstrated. High level of theory application. Very good analysis of key issues and concepts. Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Some evidence of original thought and a general awareness of relevant ethical considerations. |
| Pass | 55-59% | A good performance. A good knowledge of key issues and concepts. Fairly descriptive, with some analysis of existing scholarly material, and some argument development. Limited evidence of original thought. Some awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Good professional skills (where appropriate). |
| Pass | 50-54% | A satisfactory performance. Basic knowledge of key issues and concepts. Generally descriptive, with restricted analysis of existing scholarly material and little argument development. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent. The work lacks original thought. Limited awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Satisfactory professional skills (where appropriate). |
| Marginal fail | 40-49% | Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions. Errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. |
| Clear fail | 39% and below | A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/ accuracy in expression. Professional skills not present. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions. |
