|Unit Title:||Webpage Design and Development|
|Type of Assessment:||Assessment 4 – Content Analysis (Reflective Journal)|
|Submission Date:||Week 14|
|Assessment Task:||Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and create concise content analysis summaries of the theoretical and technical concepts contained in the course lecture slides.|
|Total Mark:||40 marks|
|Weighting:||40% of the unit total marks|
|This is a final exam replacement assessment hence no extension is permitted. More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy & Procedures – Student Login Required)|
Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and create concise content analysis summaries of the theoretical and technical concepts contained in the course lecture slides.
Where the lab content or information contained in technical articles from the Internet or books helps to fully describe the lecture slide content, discussion of such theoretical articles or discussion of the lab material should be included in the content analysis.
The document structure is as follows (2500 Words):
- Title Page
- Introduction (125 words)
- Background (125 words)
- Content analysis (reflective journals) for each week from 1 to 11 (2200 words; 200 words per week):
- Theoretical Discussion
- Important topics covered
- Interpretations of the contents
- What are the most important/useful/relevant information about the content?
- What have I learned from this?
- Theoretical Discussion
- Conclusion (50 words)
Your report must include:
- At least five references, out of which, three references must be from academic resources.
- Harvard Australian referencing for any sources you use.
- Refer to the Academic Learning Skills student guide on Referencing.
This assignment should be submitted online in Moodle through Turnitin.
The assignment MUST be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word format. Other formats may not be readable by markers. Please be aware that any assessments submitted in other formats will be considered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented in Word.
For assistance please speak to our Academic Learning Skills Coordinators, in Sydney (firstname.lastname@example.org) or in Melbourne (email@example.com). They can help you with understanding the task, draft checking, structure, referencing and other assignment-related matters.
MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC):
|Content precisely presented based on references||30 Marks|
|Presentation (Layout, no grammatical errors, reads well, etc.)||5 Marks|
|Cited references||5 Marks|
|Total marks for content analysis assignment||40 Marks|
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS
Content for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion.
Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality work presented by a student must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kent strongly recommends you refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available on the Kent Learning Management System (Moodle). For details please click the link http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
and download the file titled “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks and information that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of each Trimester.
Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unless otherwise specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specific Assessment Task, any paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting a satisfactory standard and possibly be failed.
Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the “Harvard Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.
Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for the Assessment Task in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance to the word count in that it is generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than the stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
References are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such as books, chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as a reference, but not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capable of conducting their own research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’s understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before preparing your Assessment Task or own contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism through Referencing) by clicking on the following link: link: http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles can be located in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage. Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about a topic, but should not be over-used – these should constitute no more than 10% of your total list of references/sources. Additional information and literature can be used where these are produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes such as the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), or international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departments produce peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly very current. The content of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non-peer reviewed websites (Why can’t I just Google?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39mnu1PkgwNo Fields Found.