Assessment 3 Guide for Students
Winter Semester 2016
Knowledge Management Systems PG (6688)
Knowledge Management Systems UG (8570)
The assignments for this unit have been designed to allow you to acquire and use the concepts in the unit as a way to better understand knowledge and the systems we use to manage it. There are many possible designs for the unit - if you wish to propose some different work, covering the same intellectual territory, I'd be delighted to work something out with you!
Assessment Item 3: A Knowledge Management Solution
Due Date: 24 July
Weighting Percentage: 40%
Addresses learning outcome(s):
On successful completion of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Analyse personal and organisational situations in terms of theories of knowledge;
2. Analyse the knowledge needs of an organisational situation;
3. Select and apply appropriate systems components and design a knowledge management system;
4. Critique different forms of knowledge in light of current research (PG only).
6688 (PG) Task: To design an intervention to improve the situation described in the case study for Assessment 2 using KM principles, practices and tools and describe an approach to implementing the solution. This assignment builds on the analysis undertaken in assignment 2 and should describe the architectural model/approach used for the design and the reasons for that selection. Students in an appropriate work situation may alternatively examine the prospects for (or of) a KMS in their workplace with approval from the Lecturer. Case studies on organisations you do not have first-hand experience of or were not used in Assignment 2, will not be accepted.
This should be presented as a discussion paper of 2000 - 3000 words.
8570 (UG) Task:
To design an intervention to improve the situation described in the case study for Assessment 2 using KM principles, practices and tools. This assignment builds on the analysis undertaken in assignment 2. It should also identify the architectural model/approach used for the design. Students in an appropriate work situation may alternatively examine the prospects for (or of) a KMS in their workplace with approval from the Lecturer. Case studies on organisations you do not have first-hand experience of or were not used in Assignment 2, will not be accepted.
This should be presented as a discussion paper of 1500 - 2500 words.
The sorts of questions you should seek to answer are:
1. How would the knowledge flow through your designed solution?
2. Are there any existing knowledge assets or solutions that may be part of the system?
3. What are the candidate techniques that can be used?
4. What is the proposed KMS? – give it a name.
5. What functions or processes are required to enable the system?
6. Who would manage the KMS?
7. What infrastructure, tools, equipment or techniques are required to address the problem?
8. What are changes required to policy, procedures, attitudes, organisational structure or physical location to be made to improve the way the organisation operates? (PG only)
9. How would the organisation know if the intervention produced benefits and what they were? (PG only)
(nb. this list is not a contents page for your assignment!)
There are several alternative options for this assignment. Students may:
1. review the knowledge used (misused or hidden) in public debate;
2. write a report on the claims of KMS vendors with particular attention being given to the means of evaluation of their products;
3. build a prototype ICT artefact that embodies knowledge representation.
Submission of an alternate option must have the prior approval of the Lecturer
Submission: via the Unit Moodle website - see unit outline.
Format: Essay or presentation
Assessment Criteria: This essay requires the critical analysis of a knowledge management a concept, model, definition, theory or technique of knowledge management. This requires students to research the topic sufficiently to gain a working understanding of the topic.
We are looking for you to demonstrate your ability to:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the models and techniques of KMS and how they interrelate
2. Demonstrate an understanding the case study situation
3. Describe how the organisation will work in a different (better) way
4. Show how the Knowledge in the organisation could be systemised
5. Justify your analysis by what you’ve researched
6. Articulate your proposal in a cogent and presentable report.
Approach:
Be imaginative! You are free to speculate about (or to invent) systems that don't exist but that would be wonderful to have.
Students who do well in this assignment pick a very discrete aspect of knowledge management and provide a comprehensive design. Students who attempt to design an enterprise-wide system usually fail to provide sufficient detail or fail to address all of the design areas.
Step Activity
1. Review The Study Guide on Moodle, the introductory lecture for this assignment and key references in the unit Resources.
2. Select ONE case study of those presented on the site and start your analysis and design. Alternatively you can do a case study of your own, but you'll need approval from work - send a brief description of the case to the Lecturer.
3. Research The material in step 1, with a view to finding material on KMS components and on analysing and designing knowledge systems. Find an architectural/design model that is appropriate to your case study, justify your choice and use that as a basis for your design.
4. Share Your observations, thoughts and ideas on the Moodle forum for Assignment 3. You can contact the lecturer to see that you are on the right track.
5. Write A simple but cogent design of a KM system to manage the human and/or social capital of an organisation.
6. Review Your paper to ensure it meets the assessment criteria - refine an redevelop weak sections.
7. Submit You assignment on time!
Grading
Credit grade, (7 out of 10), is the 'expected' grade for this unit and is a good solid result. Some students think that 100% is normal and they have done something wrong if they don't get it. Not so. 70% is a ‘very good’ grade and normal- it recognises 'Credit where credit is due'. A Credit grade is work of good quality showing more than satisfactory achievement on the learning outcomes, or work of superior quality on a majority of the learning outcomes.
Distinction grade fully meets the requirements showing additional creativity, research, argument or insight beyond that expected for a credit. Work of superior quality on the learning outcomes.
High Distinction strongly meets the requirements, is highly perceptive, well-argued and researched, effectively structured and well presented. Work of outstanding quality on the learning outcomes recognising particular originality or creativity.
Pass grade is considered ‘fair’ - flawed in some way. It may only partially meet the requirements or show little research or weaker argument.
Unacceptable assignments are given a grade of Fail.
-All my own work-
Warning: be very aware of plagiarism – always correctly cite the sources of your writing. If you don't understand this message, see the unit outline for more details and places you can go to learn more about plagiarism. If you are unsure of the rules for sourcing material, the Academic Integrity Module (AIM) teaches you how to refer to sources ethically and appropriately in your studies at the University of Canberra. This is essential knowledge for success at university.
To Access The Academic Integrity Module Click Here
The university takes a very dim view of students attempting to defraud and deceive by passing off others' work as their own. All assignment are subject to electronic text matching to detect and report on plagiarism.