research assignmnet
ASSESSMENT 3 BUS707– Applied Business Research T3 2019 ASSESSMENT 3: Structured Literature Review –25% TOPIC : ASSESING THE IMPACT OF ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE IN PROCESSINGOF ACCOUNTING INFORMATION SYSTEM IN AUSTRALIA. This assessment is designed to allow students to identify relevant sources for their research and undertake review on a theoretical concepts/constructs that has real world business implications. This assessment relates to Learning Outcomes a, b and d This article collections and structured review set a basis for literature review section of Research Proposal in Assessment 4. Following consultation with the lecturer or tutor, the students research the field to find four academic articles relating to the research topic as proposed in Assessment 2. The articles must be from 2010 onwards, and all articles must be full papers (not research note or book reviews) sourced from refereed academic journals. Note: Other than in exceptional circumstances, Assessment 3 will set the foundation for literature reviewof Assessment 4. PRIOR to its inclusion in Assessment 4 Research Proposal, students will be expectedto make appropriate adjustments if recommended in feedback. The structured literature review should addresses the following information: 1. Brief summary of the theory and progression in the field (i.ehowhasthetheorydeveloped) 2. Common themes/findings across the four articles 3. Different themes/findings across the four articles 4. Managerial implication of the four articles 5. Study limitations and future research direction proposed in the four articles. Submission Details · IndividualAssessment · Word limit: 1500 words (±10%) (excluding referencelist) · Youneedtostatethewordcountoftheassessmentonthecoverpage. · Thereviewshouldbeprofessionallypresentedusingproperheadingsandsub-headings,in Arial10pt or Times New Roman 12pt, single space. Harvard (Anglia) style referencing. Marks out of 20will be awarded based on how well the following criteria is addressed: Criteria % Marks Present brief summary of the theory and discussion of progression in the field 20% Identify and discuss common and different themes across the four articles 20% Identify and discuss managerial implication of the four articles 20% Discuss the limitation of each of articles and how the limitation differ across the four articles, as well as identify future research direction suggested by the articles. 20% Apply relevant skills and knowledge of research, the wider context of the problem and the inter-relationships between them; 10 % Present the information in a professional manner with correct referencing 10 % MarkingRubricfor BUS707 Applied Business Research Assessment3:Structured Literature Review–25 Criteria Fail (0 – 49%) Pass (50–64%) Credit (65–74%) Distinction (75 – 84%) High Distinction (85 – 100%) Summary of the articles (30 marks) The summary is presented as individual summary of the articles not as summary of the field and there is no discussion on progression of the field. The summary is presented as individual summary of the article not as summary of the field, the progression of the field discussion also done as individual discussion rather than progression based on the four articles. The summary has incorporated the information from 2-3 articles, however, the progression of the field discussion is done as individual discussion rather than progression based on the four articles. The summary has incorporated the information from the all of the four articles, however, the progression of the field discussion is done as individual discussion rather than progression based on the four articles. The summary has incorporated the information from the all of the four articles, and the progression of the field discussion has also incorporated discussion based on the four articles. Common and different themes (30 marks) There no discussion on common and differences themes from the four articles, they are done on individual article basis. There is discussion on common and differences, however it is only based on the themes from only two articles. Whereas the other two articles are discussed individually There is discussion on common and differences, however it is only based on the themes from only three articles. Whereas the other article is discussed separately There is discussion on common and differences based in the four articles however, the detail presented is insufficient There is discussion on common and differences based in the four articles with comprehensive details provided in the discussion. Managerial Implication (10marks) There no discussion on managerial implication from the four articles, they are done on individual article basis. There is discussion on managerial implication, however it is only based two articles. Whereas the other two articles are discussed individually There is discussion managerial implication, however it is only based on three articles. Whereas the other article is discussed separately There is discussion managerial implication based in the four articles however, the detail presented is insufficient There is discussion on managerial implication based in the four articles with comprehensive details provided in the discussion. Research Limitation and Recommendation (10 marks) There no discussion on research limitation and recommendation from the four articles, they are done on individual article basis. There is discussion on research limitation and recommendation, however it is only based two articles. Whereas the other two articles are discussed individually There is discussion research limitation and recommendation, however it is only based on three articles. Whereas the other article is discussed separately There is discussion research limitation and recommendation, based in the four articles however, the detail presented is insufficient There is discussion on research limitation and recommendation based in the four articles with comprehensive details provided in the discussion. References (20 marks) The literature review has less than four references and/or more than four references and they do not meet the minimum requirement (2010 onward peer-reviewed articles) and has no in-text citations The literature has four references but some of them do not meet the minimum requirement (2010 onward peer-reviewed articles) and has less than four in-text citation The literature has four references and most them meet the minimum requirement (2010 onward peer-reviewed articles), however, less than four in-text citation are used. The literature review has four references and most them meet the minimum requirement (2010 onward peer-reviewed articles), and four in-text citation are used. The literature review four references and all of them meet the minimum requirement (2010 onward peer-reviewed articles), and four in-text citation are used. Total mark out of 100 Total Assessment mark: /25 Comment ( 5 | P a g e ) Page 6 of 6 Page 7 of 7