Recent Question/Assignment

What(that something something) causes some firms to reduce carbon better than others?
It's a 1500 words
Use stakeholders theory and salience.
Use around 5 to 7 reasons
ACC620 Contemporary Issues in Accounting
Semester 2 2018
Research Proposal
Student Name:
Submission Date:
(Note that the due date is Friday Week 6, 5pm via SafeAssign)
I certify that I have carefully reviewed the university’s academic misconduct policy. I understand that the source of ideas must be referenced and that quotation marks and a reference are required when directly quoting anyone else’s words.

Clearly and concisely define your issue. Capture the reader’s attention, why the research is important and the theoretical basis that you have adopted. Work on the introduction every week but complete it last.
Length: one paragraph.
Practical Motivation:
Demonstrate, with references where possible, why the issue is important to practice (e.g., to accountants, managers, regulators, the general public). References here may be to academic journal articles, but may also be to newspapers etc.
Length: one paragraph
Theoretical Motivation:
Provide an overview of the contribution that the research will make to theory (e.g., replicating existing research, testing theory, addressing gaps in existing research, reconciling conflicting results from prior research…)
Length: one or two paragraphs
Literature Review:
Build a logical argument for a specific relationship between two variables (i.e., a theoretical framework), using established research published in academic journals. Start by identifying your theoretical framework, naming the theory and referencing the seminal article(s), identify the key theoretical constructs that you will be considering and the predicted relationship based on the theory.
Carefully review the empirical research, the proxy measures that have been tested in previous studies, and the results. Highlight the extent to which previous research has been consistent or if there have been differences (which you might have mentioned in the theoretical motivation).
Remember you are building an argument for a specific relationship between two variables: clearly define the two variables; explain how these two variables are understood to be linked; and outline the reasons given for why there is a relationship between these two variables. Critically discuss the strengths and limitations of the existing research and use this to justify the argument for a modification to the theory or a new application of the theory. Then draw your conclusion about the predicted relationship for the variables that you plan to test. The argument must lead to a specific prediction (to be stated in the next section) that can be tested.
Length: this is the longest part of your proposal, similar to the ‘body’ of other assignments.
Clearly state your testable and falsifiable predictions. A single hypothesis is sufficient, however, sometimes your argument might lead to two hypotheses. Express your hypothesis in the alternative form where appropriate (i.e., the relationship that you predict based on the theory).
Length: one sentence only.

Complete summaries for five of your most important journal articles in the following Table (not included in the word count).
Table – Annotated Bibliography for Selected Articles
Author Date Title Journal Type of Paper (Theoretical or Empirical) If empirical, research method and sample If empirical, dependent and independent variables 100 word summary of contribution to the research question

ACC620 Research Proposal Marking Rubric
The breakdown of the marks is as follows (Note that the marks allocated are not indicative of the proportion of total words):
• Issue: is clearly defined, specific and demonstrates a clear grasp of the literature /5
• Motivation: the importance of the issue, from a theoretical and practical perspective /15
• Literature Review – Selected annotated bibliography – completing the Table for 5 key articles /20
• Literature Review – Argument: Theory and previous research findings are used to support a logical argument that leads to a specific prediction (hypothesis). Theoretical constructs are clearly identified. /30
• Hypothesis: clearly and appropriately specified hypothesis that follows from the previous discussion. Theoretical constructs are appropriately operationalised and hypotheses are testable. /10
• Spelling and Grammar : flawless spelling and grammar /10
• Referencing: Correct and consistent referencing /10
Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Excellent
Issue Issue is vague and poorly identified. Inconsistent with the literature review. 0-1 Issue is identified
2-3 Clearly and concisely defined.
Motivation Important aspects of motivation are missing
Both practical and theoretical motivation is mentioned, but not convincingly communicated.
6-10 Importance of the research proposed is demonstrated based on the practical and theoretical. That is, the effect on people and/or organisations and how it contributes to the building of theory. 11-15
Literature Review – Annotated Bibliography for key articles Incomplete or incorrect completion of the table
0-10 Table completed and correct.
10-14 Table completed without error and insightful summaries and contributions.
Literature Review - Argument The argument is unconvincing or poorly supported with appropriate references
0-10 The argument is convincing and has references to support the assertions.
11-20 The logic and support for the hypotheses are flawless.
Hypotheses Hypotheses do not flow from the literature review or are not clearly stated
0-3 Hypotheses make sense
4-6 Hypotheses are clearly stated and falsifiable
Spelling, Grammar Many mistakes, difficult to understand, inconsistencies in referencing style
0-3 Few mistakes, easy to understand, consistent referencing style applied
5-7 No mistakes, clear and convincing expression
Referencing Numerous inconsistencies in referencing 0-3 Mostly correct and consistent referencing
4-6 Correct and consistent referencing
Plagiarism Using ANYONE else’s words without quotation marks and a reference is plagiarism and may lead to a 0 for the entire Task and further academic penalty

Looking for answers ?