Assessment (No. 2): Case Study Report – Part A: Oral Presentation
Outcomes to be assessed:
Type:
|
Oral Presentation
|
|
|
Word Limit:
|
N/A
|
Weight:
|
20%
|
Due Date:
|
Week 5
|
Due Time:
|
In-class
|
You will prepare and deliver a presentation that demonstrates an understanding of how IS systems are used to help organisations gain a strategic or competitive advantage in the industry.
Part i:
• Identify a contemporary business (assigned by teacher) and prepare a PowerPoint presentation describing the MIS profile of the organisation.
Part ii:
• Oral presentation that evaluates the MIS used in the organisation or enterprise.
Task Description:
Students will describe the MIS profile of a contemporary business. They will then evaluate the MIS used in the organisation or enterprise. Each 12 minute presentation will be expected to apply appropriate information system methodologies.
• You need to work equally in all parts of this assessment.
• The assessment will be marked for the group and for individuals.
Presentation Tips
Make sure you:
• Shape your presentation with an
introduction,
body
and
conclusion. Tell the audience what you are going to cover in your presentation, then deliver that message then conclude with perhaps a
new idea
for your audience to take away.
• Try to speak naturally and with energy. It might help to gesture with your hands to give life to your voice.
• Speak clearly and emphasise key words. Underline the key ideas in your
script
(if you use one) and say these words with extra force.
Marking Criteria:
• Must be submitted through Turnitin.
The purpose of the performance descriptors is as follows:
1. Based on the viewing of the entire presentation, the marker determines if the student meets Communicative Competence.
2. If the task does not meet Communicative Competence, the marker provides feedback to the student based on the descriptors below. The marker refers the student to the Academic Development Office for further support.
3. If the student does meet Communicative Competence, the task can be graded based on academic discourse. Note the task could still earn a fail if it does not address the requirements outlined in the rubric below.
To qualify for a pass, you must first demonstrate basic communicative competence as outlined in part 1 below.
To then earn a pass or higher, you must also meet the academic discourse criteria in part 2 below.
1.
Communicative Competence
These descriptors represent the fundamental skills for presentations.
Questions to ask yourself:
• Are the ideas effectively communicated? (communicative competence achieved)
• Are the ideas difficult to discern? (communicative competence not achieved)
Literacy Feature
|
Quality
|
Structure
|
• Presents material clearly and communicates straightforward ideas.
• Ideas are grouped logically.
• Main ideas are elaborated on.
|
Vocabulary
|
Predominantly appropriate word choices to suit the purpose of the task and the audience.
|
Spelling
|
Predominantly correct spelling on visual aids.
|
Grammar
|
• Consistent use of tense.
• Consistent use of subject-verb agreement and noun-pronoun agreement.
|
Intelligibility
|
Able to verbally convey a basic, coherent message.
|
2.
Academic Discourse
To earn a pass (P), you must meet the following minimum criteria:
Literacy Feature
|
Quality
|
Content and evidence
|
• Identifies knowledge relevant to the issue.
• Does not contain any errors in theoretical or conceptual knowledge.
• Evaluation of the applications of IT to the business environment.
• Reasoning skills that provide a simple analysis.
• Supported by only a few relevant academic publications.
|
Organisation and structure
|
• Introduction – clearly states the topic, previews the structure of the presentation and provides background information that highlights the importance of the issue.
• Body – logically organised, addresses each main idea listed in the introduction.
• Conclusion – summarises major points of presentation and makes an overall statement on the importance of each of the positions.
• References – contains a full list of academic sources referred to.
• Sections are organised using:
|
|
|
o Information system theories, and o evidence from academic or reputable sources.
|
Academic style
|
|
Formal and objective tone.
Use of vocabulary and syntax suitable to the purpose of the task.
Transition words used to show relationships between ideas.
Arguments logically progressed throughout most of the presentation.
|
|
|
Design of presentation contained only a few audio-visual design errors.
|
|
|
Accurate APA referencing.
|
To earn a grade higher than a pass, the above criteria must be met plus the following in sequence, to achieve the specified grade:
Credit
•
Content and evidence:
o Demonstrated ability to understand and assess knowledge relevant to the issues. o Information system theories grounded as the basis for the different viewpoints. o Clear reasoning that added some detailed supporting argument to the main ideas.
o Small range of relevant academic publications.
•
Academic style:
o Style of presentation contained no audio-visual design errors. o Arguments logically progressed throughout the entire presentation. o Dialogue with audience was effective. o Occasional use of notes.
|
Distinction
•
Content and evidence: o A largely critical and evaluative knowledge of the issues. o Information system theories consistently remain as the basis and focus for the different viewpoints. o Higher-level reasoning that thoughtfully explored various aspects to each viewpoint, equally.
o Several highly relevant academic publications.
•
Academic style: o Dialogue with audience was confident and competent. o Rarely used notes.
|
High Distinction
•
Content and evidence:
o An extensive and thoroughly evaluative, critical knowledge of the issues.
o Higher-level reasoning that fully explored all relevant aspects to each viewpoint, equally.
o A wide range of highly relevant academic publications.
•
Academic style: o Arguments logically progressed with total clarity throughout the entire presentation. o Did not use notes.
|
A fail grade would be applied
if any
of the following criteria were met:
Fail
•
Content and evidence:
o Little to no understanding of the issues, demonstrated through errors in theoretical or conceptual knowledge.
o Inaccurate or inability to use information system theories in the support of any viewpoint, which includes the verbatim repetition of theory with little or no linkage to the topic.
o Imbalanced or superficial argument, or opinion, evidenced by poor ability to reason objectively.
o Little or no reference to academic publications.
•
Academic style:
o Style of presentation contained several audio-visual design errors. o Presentation was a series of separate ideas that showed little or no logical progression. o Muddled communication. o Comprehensive use of notes.
|
Marking Rubric:
Grade
|
Accessing research data
|
Logic and power of argument
|
Clarity of expression
|
Presentation
|
High
Distinction
/
Distinction
|
The assignment showed evidence of accessing, interpreting and incorporating primary or secondary research
data
|
The arguments presented were well structured, carefully organized, logically
argued and convincing
|
The verbal and/or written skills
demonstrated were of a high order and effectively
communicated the message
|
The style of presentation and/or the techniques used were appropriate, relevant and well suited to the task
|
Credit
/
Pass
|
The assignment reported on research data that was relevant to this study
|
The arguments presented were clear and
logically structured
|
The verbal and/or written skills
demonstrated were of a sound standard
|
The style of presentation and/or techniques used were appropriate for the task
|
Fail
|
There was little or no research data included
in this study
|
The arguments were poorly structured and not clear
|
The verbal and/or written skills
demonstrated were poor and not of an acceptable standard
|
The style of presentation and/or techniques used were not appropriate or adequate to the task set.
|