Reflective Journal

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 13th July, 2020 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
ASSESSMENT BRIEF

COURSE: Bachelor of Information Technology
Unit: The IT Professional
Unit Code: TITP 105
Type of Assessment: Assessment 3 – Reflective Journal (Content Analysis) Report
Length/Duration: 3,500 words (+/- 10%)
Unit Learning
Outcomes addressed:
Upon successful completion of this unit students should be able to:
Submission Date: Week 14
Assessment Task: Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and
create concise content analysis summaries of the theoretical concepts contained
in the course lecture slides.
Total Mark: 60 marks
Weighting: 60% of the unit total marks
This is a final exam replacement assessment hence no extension is permitted.
More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy &
Procedures – Student Login Required)

 Describe a variety of roles for IT professionals and the personal, social,
ethical and legal impacts arising from their work
 Assess the relationship between IT professionals and the issues of ethics,
corporate citizenship and governance
 Describe the professional associations that are available to IT professionals
and the role that they play
 Critically review IT professional Codes of Ethics and Codes of Conduct, and
develop a personal ethical framework.

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 13th July, 2020 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:
Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and create concise
content analysis summaries (reflective journal report) of the theoretical concepts contained in the
course lecture slides.
Where the lab content or information contained in technical articles from the Internet or books helps
to fully describe the lecture slide content, discussion of such theoretical articles or discussion of the
lab material should be included in the content analysis.
The document structure is as follows (3500 Words):
1. Title Page
2. Introduction (100 words)
3. Background (100 words)
4. Content analysis (reflective journals) for each week from 1 to 11 (3200 words; approx. 300 words
per week):
a. Theoretical Discussion
i. Important topics covered
ii. Definitions
b. Interpretations of the contents
i. What are the most important/useful/relevant information about the content?
c. Outcome
i. What have I learned from this?
5. Conclusion (100 words)
Your report must include:
 At least five references, out of which, three references must be from academic resources.
 Harvard Australian referencing for any sources you use.
 Refer to the Academic Learning Skills student guide on Referencing.
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION:
This assignment should be submitted online in Moodle through Turnitin.
The assignment MUST be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word format. Other formats may not
be readable by markers. Please be aware that any assessments submitted in other formats will be
considered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented in Word.
For assistance please speak to our Academic Learning Skills Coordinators, in Sydney
(als_syd@kent.edu.au) or in Melbourne (als_mel@kent.edu.au). They can help you with
understanding the task, draft checking, structure, referencing and other assignment-related matters.
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS
Content for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points and
conclusion.
Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop
and demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality work presented
by a student must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kent
strongly recommends you refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available on
the Kent Learning Management System (Moodle). For details please click the link
http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606 and download the file titled
“Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks and information
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 13th July, 2020 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of each
Trimester.
Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unless
otherwise specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specific
Assessment Task, any paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting a
satisfactory standard and possibly be failed.
Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the
“Harvard Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.
Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for the
Assessment Task in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance to
the word count in that it is generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than the
stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
References are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such as
books, chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as a
reference, but not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capable
of conducting their own research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’s
understanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include the
specific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before preparing your Assessment Task or own
contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism through Referencing) by clicking
on the following link: link: http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles can
be located in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage.
Wikipedia, online dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain
knowledge about a topic, but should not be over-used – these should constitute no more than 10% of
your total list of references/sources. Additional information and literature can be used where these
are produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes such as the
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), or international organisations such as the
World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departments produce
peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly very current. The content
of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non-peer reviewed websites (Why can’t I
just Google?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39mnu1Pkgw
(Thank you to La Trobe University for access to this video).
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 13th July, 2020 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC):
Your answers for the final examination questions will be assessed as per the following marking criteria.
Please read carefully each section/level and marks weightage.

Fail
(0-49%)
Pass
(50-64%)
Credit
(65-74%)
Distinction
(75-84%)
High Distinction
(>85%)
Research
5/60
Little evidence of
research.
Sources are
missing.
Inappropriate,
poorly integrated
or lacking
credibility. Lacks
clear link of
sources with
essay. No in text
citations.
A minimum of 5
academic sources.
Basic use of sources
to support ideas,
generally well
integrated, most
sources are credible.
May be weaknesses
with paraphrasing or
integration
/application.
Research is
generally thorough.
Good use of
sources to support
ideas, mostly well
integrated, sources
are credible. May
be weaknesses
with paraphrasing
or integration/
application.
Thorough research is
indicated. Very good
use of sources to
support ideas, well
integrated, sources
are credible. May be
minor weaknesses
with paraphrasing or
integration/
application.
Thorough research is
indicated. Professional
use of sources to
support ideas, well
integrated, sources are
credible. Very minor, if
any, weaknesses with
paraphrasing or
Integration/application.
Content
Information
and Content
40/60
3 marks per
week, 7 marks
for intro (3),
background (2)
and conclusion
(2)
Report lacks
coherence; topic
is poorly
addressed; little
analysis.
No reflective
Component, no
proper summary
of content
learned every
week
Report is generally
coherent; topic is
addressed; analyses
in reasonable depth
with some
description. There are
some inconsistencies
and weaknesses with
flow. Has basic
content summary for
all weeks, and very
basic reflective
summary.
Report is coherent
and flows well;
topic is addressed
quite thoroughly;
analyses in
considerable depth.
There may be
some
inconsistencies and
weaknesses with
flow. Decent
summary of all
weeks’ content and
basic reflective
summary.
Report is very
coherent and flows
well; topic is
addressed
thoroughly; analyses
in depth. There may
be minor
inconsistencies and
weakness with flow.
All weeks content is
summarised in depth
with detailed
reflective summary
and analysis.
Professional work.
Report is very coherent
and flows well; topic is
addressed thoroughly;
analyses in great depth.
Very minor, if any,
inconsistencies and
weaknesses with flow.
All weeks content is
summarised in detail
with detailed reflective
summary with good
examples.
Structure
5/60
Topic, concepts
are not clear in
introduction.
Material in the
body is generally
poorly
sequenced. No
discernible
conclusion; no
links to
introduction.
Topic, concepts are
stated with some
clarity in introduction.
Material in body is
generally logically
sequenced; some
weaknesses.
Conclusion does not
clearly summarise
essay; links to
introduction are not
clear.
Topic, concepts are
clearly conveyed in
introduction.
Material in body is
logically and clearly
sequenced; few or
minor weaknesses.
Conclusion
summarises essay;
may be some
weaknesses;
generally clear links
to intro.
Topic, concepts are
clearly outlined in
introduction. Material
in body is logically
and clearly
sequenced; very few
or minor weaknesses.
Conclusion mostly
effectively
summarises essay;
with
recommendations
and clear links to
introduction.
Topic, concepts are
clearly outlined in
introduction. Material in
body is logically and
clearly sequenced; very
minor, if any,
weaknesses.
Conclusion effectively
summarises essay; with
recommendations and
clear links to
introduction.
Language
5/60
Poor standard of
writing. Word limit
may not be
adhered to.
Incorrect format
(e.g. includes
Table of
contents; bullet
points; graphs
etc.)
A minimum of 1000
words. Basic and
sound standard of
writing; some errors
in punctuation,
grammar and
spelling.
Inconsistencies with
the formatting.
Good standard of
writing; few errors
in punctuation,
grammar and
spelling. Almost
correct format.
Very good standard of
writing; very few or
minor errors in
punctuation, grammar
and spelling. Correct
formatting.
Professional standard of
writing; no errors in
punctuation, grammar
and spelling. Correct
formatting.
Referencing
5/60
No referencing is
evident or, if
done, is
inconsistent and
technically
incorrect. No or
minimal
reference list,
mixed styles. No
in text citations
Basic and sound
attempt to reference
sources; may be
some inconsistencies
and technical errors
in style. Reference list
is generally complete
with 1 or 2 references
missing.
Good attempt to
reference sources;
inconsistencies and
technical errors in
style. Few
inaccuracies in
reference list and
all references
listed.
Very good attempt to
reference sources;
very minor
inconsistencies and
technical errors in
style. Thorough and
consistent reference
list and all references
listed.
Professional level of
referencing and
acknowledgment; no
errors of style evident.
Thorough and
consistent reference list
and all references listed
Reference no: EM132069492

GET HELP WITH YOUR PAPERS

WhatsApp
Hello! Need help with your assignments? We are here
Don`t copy text!