COIT20249 Assessment Details
Assessment item 3—Report
Due date: 11:55 pm AEST, Friday, Week 9 ASSESSMENT
Weighting: 30% 3
Length: 3000 words +/- 500 words (Note: Failure to submit within this range will result in a penalty of 5 marks)
Objectives
Please refer to the course profile to see how this assessment item relates to the course learning outcomes.
This assignment is designed to stimulate critical thinking outside of the classroom by requiring students to write a formal academic report. You will need to follow the ARE process described in chapters 2 and 3 of Your Business Degree 2 (prescribed textbook for COIT20249) to analyse the assessment task, research relevant information and evaluate the information you find. This information should be used to write an academic report in which you present your findings or outcomes and make recommendations for future practice Professional writing and writing reports are described in chapters 4 and 5 of Your Business Degree 2. This assessment task will assess your skills in critical thinking, researching information, forming an opinion, academic writing, logical ordering of ideas and your ability to support your arguments with quotes from literature. These objectives will be measured by the ‘closeness of fit’ to meeting the assessment task, assessment requirements and assessment criteria listed below.
Please note that there is a wealth of material available on the Moodle course website that you should use to help you through the process of searching for and gathering relevant information, evaluating that information and writing your report.
General Assessment Criteria
Assessments provide the opportunity for students to demonstrate their knowledge and skills to achieve the required standard. To do this, assessment responses need to be both clear and easy to understand. If not, the University cannot determine that students have demonstrated their knowledge and skills. Assessments will, therefore, be marked accordingly including the potential for 0 (zero) marks where relevant.
The report must focus on the case study scenario given in the Assessment Task section. Any assessment items that do not address the case study scenario may be awarded 0 (zero) marks.

If you use Track Changes when writing your report you must ensure that the submitted document is the final and correct version of the document. That is, if your submitted report contains Track Changes or Comments or any other editing marks it may be awarded 0 (zero) marks. It is your responsibility to submit the final and correct version of your report.
The length of the report must be within the recommended range. If the report exceeds the maximum word count the marker will stop marking after 3500 words.
Assessment task
Students are required to write an academic report as per the format outlined in chapter 5 of the textbook. The report must follow either the Harvard citation and referencing guidelines or APA referencing style. Please note that the prescribed textbook uses APA referencing guidelines but the School of Engineering and Technology recommends Harvard style. See also the Referencing Style subsection below.
The report is to be based on the following case study scenario about Bring Your Own Devices (BYOD).
BYOD refers to the situation where organisations allow their employees to bring their personal mobile devices (such as, laptop computers, tablet computers and smart phones) into the workplace and to use those devices to access the organisations’ Wi-Fi, intranet, organisational information and computer applications. The term BYOD is also used to describe the same practice being applied to students using their personal devices at school or university.
Staff who choose to BYOD argue that it is more convenient for them and makes them more productive in the workplace. Advantages for organisations include the potential for cost savings and increased morale of their employees.
However, BYOD also brings significant risks. To ensure that confidential organisational information does not end up with their competitors, organisations need to ensure that they have adequate security measures in place. BYOD increases the opportunities for security breaches to occur. For example, family or friends of employees may have access to the devices in the home environment which could allow non-employees to access confidential information. In addition devices may be lost, misplaced or sold (without first removing the sensitive information) which could result in unauthorised access to an organisations’ sensitive data.
Another issue with BYOD is the lack of standardisation. It is hard for technical staff to support a variety of BYODs that all have a range of software applications on them.
You are the ICT manager of a large software development company based in Sydney. Your organisation has a diversified business model that includes mobile application development as well as developing information systems applications for large organisations. The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) has asked you to research BYOD at your organisation. She is interested in finding out how the use of BYOD could be used to improve its business model both locally and globally over the next five years. She is also concerned about any possible negative impacts on your organisation. You are to write a report to be presented at the next executive meeting. The report should address the following tasks:
1. What are BYODs and how are they currently being used. You should explore a range of applications of BYOD, for example, in areas such as healthcare, education and other software companies.
2. Discuss at least three ways that BYODs could be used to enhance your organisation over the next five years. In particular the CEO would like you to explore ways BYODs could be used to provide opportunities to expand your business both locally and globally. Analyse potential options that could lead to recommendations at the end of your report.
3. Assess the advantages and disadvantages of using BYODs. Consider the current uses by various organisations and possibilities for your organisation (especially those you have considered in tasks 1 and 2 above). Explore the ethical, social and legal considerations, and the potential positive and negative impacts your organisation should consider. These should lead to some recommendations at the end of your report.
Your report should conclude with a list of recommendations for your organisation with respect to the current and future use of BYODs. Before making specific recommendations at the end of your report, you should evaluate the options as part of your report discussion.
Please note that you will need to make some assumptions about the organisation in order to write this report. These assumptions should be incorporated in the introduction to your report when you describe the organisation and outline the problem to be solved. Relevant assumptions should be incorporated when addressing tasks 2 and 3 above. Do not make assumptions that are not relevant or will not be used in your report discussion.
Specifically your report should include the following (word count details are approximate guidelines only):
1. Title page: student name, student number, email address, course code, assignment number, assignment due date, academic referencing style, campus lecturer/tutor, and course coordinator. Not counted in the word count. Note the title page must indicate which academic referencing style you have used: APA or Harvard.
2. Executive summary: should include the purpose of the report, the problem and how it was investigated, your findings and your recommendations. Should be approximately 300 words.
3. Table of Contents: should list the report topics using decimal notation. Needs to include the main headings and subheadings with corresponding page numbers, using a format that makes the hierarchy of topics clear Use MS Word’s ToC auto-generator rather than manually typing out the ToC. Instructions can be found here https://support.office.com/en-gb/article/Create-a-table-of-contents-or-update-a-table-of-contents-eb275189-b93e-4559-8dd9-c279457bfd72#__create_a_table. Not counted in the word count.
4. Introduction: provide a brief description of the organisation, a concise overview of the problem you have been asked to research, the objectives to be achieved by writing the report and how you investigated the problem. Provide an outline of the sections of the report. Note that you will have to make assumptions about what type of organisation you are working for in this case study. Should be approximately 400 words.
5. Body of the report (use appropriate headings in the body of the report.): Define key terms you will use in your report, such as what is meant by ‘BYOD’. Present your ideas on the topic and discuss the information you found in your research that was relevant to the report’s objectives. Provide an analysis of the information that you gathered. Ensure that you explore the three tasks listed in the case study scenario. You also need to discuss the ethical, social and legal aspects surrounding this issue. In your discussion, examine the issues from a global perspective as well as from the local perspective (of the fictional organisation that is the centre of this report).
Do NOT use ‘Body of the Report’ as a heading. Create meaningful headings that reflect the content of your report. Should be approximately 1500 words.
6. Conclusion: based on your research and analysis. Explain the significance of your findings and your discussion. State if your report has achieved its objectives. Should be approximately 400 words.
7. Recommendations: (must be based on your findings) what would your recommendations be to your CEO and the executive management team in this situation? Provide some guidelines for the organisation with respect to the implementation and use of BYODs. Should be approximately 400 words.
8. Reference list. Not counted in the word count.
9. Appendices if necessary. Not counted in the word count.
Note: Additional information regarding this assignment may be placed on the course website as required. Check the course website at least once a week for further information relating to the report. Regular access to the course website is a requirement of this course.
Assessment Requirements
Your response should be structured as a report (chapter 5 of textbook), written in accordance with standard academic writing principles (chapter 4 of textbook). The report must be written using your own words with any in text citations clearly marked (see Referencing Style subsection below). You may discuss the assessment task with other students and the lecturing staff but you must WRITE the report YOURSELF in your own words.
You will need to conduct research to support your arguments using at least ten (10) references. One of these could be your set textbook (if you reference the textbook you must include it in the reference list). You must have a minimum of ten (10) references in your reference list. At least six (6) of these references should be from refereed academic journals and books. All sources should be current that is, dated 2011 or later. You are encouraged to use more than the minimum requirements for a better quality outcome to your report.
The assignment should demonstrate a logical flow of discussion, be grammatically correct and free from typographical, spelling and grammatical errors. It should be prepared in MS-Word (or equivalent) using 12 point font, 1.5 line spacing and margins of 2.54 cm.
It is highly recommended that you submit your assignment to the Academic Learning Centre AT LEAST ONE WEEK before the due date so that it can be checked for spelling and grammatical errors.
Referencing Style
References must be cited (in text) and a reference list provided in accordance with either the Harvard (author-date) referencing style or the APA referencing style.
Helpful information on referencing techniques and styles can also be found on CQU’s referencing webpage:
https://www.cqu.edu.au/student-life/services-and-facilities/referencing
Marks will be deducted for poor referencing or having less than ten (10) references or going under or over the word length.
Use quotation marks for direct quotes and you must include the author, date and page number(s) with the quote as per the referencing standards.
ALL assignments will be checked for plagiarism (material copied from other students and/or material copied from other sources) using TurnItIn. If you are found to have plagiarised material or if you have used someone else’s words without appropriate referencing, you will be penalised for plagiarism which could result in zero marks for the whole assignment. In some circumstances a more severe penalty may be imposed.
Useful information about academic integrity (avoiding plagiarism) can be found at:
https://www.cqu.edu.au/student-life/services-and-facilities/referencing
https://www.cqu.edu.au/student-life/services-and-facilities/referencing/cquniversity-referencing-guides
Guidelines with respect to self-referencing are available on the COIT20249 Moodle course website.
Submission
The report has to be submitted using the COIT20249 Moodle course website on or before the due date. The submission link can be accessed through the Assessment block.
Before submitting your assignment you should check it against the detailed assessment criteria in the following table to ensure that you have satisfactorily addressed all the criteria that will be used to mark your report.
It is your responsibility to ensure that your report is submitted for grading. At the due date of the assessment Moodle will auto-submit files that have been uploaded and left as a draft. However, any files uploaded after the due date must be manually submitted. This means that if you have been granted an extension or are uploading a late assessment (after the due date) you must complete the Moodle submission process. Further details on completing the submission process are available via the ‘Moodle Help for Students’ link in the Support block of your Moodle website.
If your report is left as a draft in Moodle after the due date it will accrue a late penalty. Late submissions attract a penalty of 5% per day of the total available mark for the individual assessment item. See details in the Assessment of Coursework Procedure at policy.cqu.edu.au/Policy/policy_file.do?policyid=1242.

Assessment criteria
This assessment is criterion referenced which means your work is assessed against the criteria in the marking rubric below.
Criteria Quality
High Distinction
(2.75-3.0 marks) Distinction
(2.25-2.5 marks) Credit
(1.75-2 marks) Pass
(1.25-1.5 marks) Fail
(0-1 marks)
Executive summary The executive summary contained:
- a brief description of the purpose of the report
- the definition of the problem and how it was investigated
- a summary of what you found and what you concluded
- your recommendations The executive summary contained the proper sections but did not include enough detail. The executive summary had sections which were too brief or missing. Did not include enough detail. The executive summary lacked clarity and has incomplete or missing sections. It did not clearly explain the problem, how it was investigated and your recommendations. Entire sections of the executive summary are missing. There is a lack of detail and the problem is not well explained.
Table of contents Lists the report topics using decimal notation. Includes the main headings and subheadings with corresponding page numbers. Format makes the hierarchy of topics clear. Auto generated using MS Word. A few things missing from the table of contents. Some things missing from the table of contents Includes the main headings only. Table of contents missing.
Introduction Set the scene for the report; gave some background information for the topic. Included a brief description of the organisation.
Stated the objectives of the investigation. Include the problem you are addressing.
Explained the research method used to gather information.
Outlined the sections of the report. The introduction contained the proper parts but did not include enough detail. The introduction had parts which were too brief or missing. Did not include enough detail. The introduction lacked clarity and had incomplete or missing parts. It did not clearly introduce the report. The introduction was missing or was a repeat of the executive summary. It did not clearly introduce the report.
Body of report:
Selection and sequencing of subject material; including evidence. Selected exact amount of relevant material that supports argument with no contradictions.
Substantial, logical, & concrete development of ideas. Arguments were logical and clear.
Assumptions were made explicit.
Key terms were defined.
Details were germane, original, and convincingly interpreted. Selected large amount of relevant material.
Offered solid development of ideas but less original reasoning.
Assumptions were not always recognised or made explicit.
Contained some appropriate details or examples. Selected adequate amount of material.
Some development of ideas; not much original reasoning.
Assumptions are not always recognised or made explicit.
Contains some appropriate details or examples. Selected adequate amount of material not all of it relevant.
Not much development of ideas. Very little original reasoning.
Offered somewhat obvious support that may be too broad.
Details were too general, not interpreted, irrelevant to problem, or inappropriately repetitive. Selected too little material or material that is irrelevant.
No development of ideas or original reasoning.
Offered simplistic, undeveloped, or cryptic support for the ideas.
Inappropriate or off-topic generalisations, faulty assumptions, errors of fact.
Conclusion Problem restated clearly, main points and supporting arguments summarised.
Stated the significance of the findings and that the objectives of the report had been met.
No new material. The conclusion contained the proper parts but did not include enough detail.
No new material. The conclusion had parts which were too brief or missing. Did not include enough detail.
May have included some new material. The conclusion lacked clarity and had incomplete or missing parts. It did not clearly conclude the report.
May have included some new material. The conclusion is missing or was a repeat of the executive summary. It did not clearly conclude the report.
Included new material.
Recommendations Suggested actions to address the problem.
Actions were clearly based on the findings of the report. Most suggested actions were relevant to the problem.
Actions were based on the findings of the report. Suggested actions were somewhat relevant to the problem.
Not all actions were based on the findings of the report. Suggested some actions. Not all actions were relevant to the problem.
Not all actions were based on the findings of the report. Recommendations missing or irrelevant to the problem and/or did not relate to the findings.
Organisation: of ideas/main points; structure of sentences and paragraphs. Organisation fully supported the problem being addressed and the objectives of report.
Sequence of ideas was effective.
Excellent sentence structure. Well-constructed paragraphs; clear linkages between paragraphs. Organisation supported the problem being addressed and the objectives of report.
Sequence of ideas could be improved.
Good sentence structure. Linkages between paragraphs were mostly appropriate. Organisation supported the problem being addressed and the objectives of report.
Sequence of ideas did not always flow in a logical manner.
Some good sentence structure. Linkages between paragraphs could be improved. Some brief, undeveloped paragraphs.
Some signs of logical organisation.
May have had abrupt or illogical shifts and ineffective flow of ideas.
Some awkward sentences; paragraphs not well linked. Paragraph structure not well integrated; contained extraneous information. Unclear organisation or organisational plan was inappropriate to problem being addressed.
Poorly worded sentences. No linkages between paragraphs.
Showed minimal effort or lack of comprehension of the assignment.
Presentation:
• Title page
• Grammar, punctuation and spelling.
• Formatting Title page contained all necessary information: student name, student number, email address, course code, assignment number, assignment due date, academic referencing style, campus lecturer/tutor, and course coordinator.
Written expression was clear and correct; evidence of thorough proof-reading.
Observed professional conventions of written English and report format.
Grammar excellent; correct use of punctuation; minimal or no spelling errors.
Formatted using 12 point font, 1.5 line spacing and margins of 2.54 cm. Title page contained all necessary information.
A few errors in grammar (wrong verb tense, subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, apostrophe errors, singular/plural errors, article use, preposition use, split infinitives, etc.). Made occasional problematic word choices or syntax errors.
Observed professional conventions of written English and report format; made a few minor or technical errors.
Grammar strong despite occasional lapses; a few spelling or punctuation errors.
Formatted correctly. Title page contained all necessary information.
Some distracting grammatical errors (wrong verb tense, subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, apostrophe errors, singular/plural errors, article use, preposition use, split infinitives, etc.). Little evidence of proof-reading.
Needed to observe professional conventions of written English and report format; made numerous errors.
Grammar could be improved; errors in punctuation and spelling.
Some minor formatting errors. Some necessary information was missing from the title page.
Some major grammatical or proofreading errors (wrong verb tense, subject-verb agreement, pronoun agreement, apostrophe errors, singular/plural errors, article use, preposition use, split infinitives, sentence fragments, word form errors, etc.). Language frequently weakened by inexact word choices.
Needed to observe professional conventions of written English and report format; made repeated errors.
Frequent errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
Major errors in formatting. Title page missing or missing necessary information.
Numerous grammatical errors which seriously detracted from understanding the writing.
Evidence of poor planning and/or no serious revision of writing.
Did not meet professional conventions of written English and report format.
Frequent major errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling.
Formatted incorrectly.
References (1): Evidence of research and analysis of the references. Thorough research indicated; clear well-thought out analysis clearly integrated into discussion.
Analysed and evaluated information in great depth.
Used references to support, extend, and inform, but not substitute writer’s own development of ideas.
Combined material from a variety of sources.
Did not overuse quotes. Research was generally thorough; analysis was generally well done; integrated into discussion.
Analysed and evaluated information in considerable depth.
Used references to support, but not substitute writer’s own development of ideas.
Combined material from a variety of sources.
Did not overuse quotes. Some evidence of research; basic analysis; some integration into discussion.
Analysed and evaluated information in reasonable depth, some description.
Used references to support, but not substitute writer’s own development of ideas.
Combined material from a few sources.
Did not overuse quotes. Basic research; weaknesses evident in analysis.
Little evidence of analysis and evaluation of information; recounted and described. Details were too general, not interpreted, irrelevant to topic, or inappropriately repetitive.
Used relevant references but lacked in variety of references and/or the skilful combination of references.
Combined material from a few sources.
Quotations and paraphrases may be too long or not well integrated into the text. Little or no evidence of research and analysis of information.
Neglected important references.
Simplistic or undeveloped support for the ideas.
Inappropriate or off-topic generalisations, faulty assumptions, errors of fact.
Overused quotations or paraphrasing to substitute writer’s own ideas.
Possibly used source material without acknowledgement.
References (2):
In-text citations and reference list. At least ten current references.
Thorough referencing. Citations and reference list accurate and consistent with referencing style:
• Harvard style.
• APA. At least ten current references
A few inaccuracies with referencing style (Harvard or APA) for citations and/or reference list.
All references listed. At least ten current references
Generally complete. One or two references missing.
Some errors in referencing style (Harvard or APA) for citations and/or reference list. At least ten current references
Incomplete reference list. References not cited properly in text.
Errors with referencing style (Harvard or APA).
Less than ten references.
Problems with citations.
Inconsistent with referencing style:
• Harvard style.
• APA
Length Correct length (2500-3500 words) Correct length (2500-3500 words) Correct length (2500-3500 words) Correct length (2500-3500 words) Too long ( 3500 words) or too short ( 2500 words). Penalty of 5 marks.
Words in excess of 3500 will NOT be marked.
Comprehension If the content of the report is unable to be read and understood by the marker the report will be given 0 out of 30.