Write My Paper Button

WhatsApp Widget

Cloud and Beyond CLBE304 | My Assignment Tutor

Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051ASSESSMENT BRIEF COURSE: Bachelor of Information TechnologyUnit:Cloud and BeyondUnit Code:CLBE304Type of Assessment:Assessment 3 – Reflective Journal (Content Analysis)Length/Duration:2,500 wordsUnit LearningOutcomes addressed:Upon successful completion of this unit students should be able to:a. Understand the common terms and definitions of cloud computing models,architectures and technologiesb. Critically analyse the technical capabilities and business benefits ofvirtualisation and cloud computingc. Evaluate various service delivery models of cloud computing architecture, andthe ways in which clouds can be deployed as public, private, hybrid, andcommunity cloudsd. Discuss the governance and security challenges that cloud deploymentsexperience, and how these are addressede. Evaluate a set of business requirements to determine suitability for a cloudcomputing modelSubmission Date:Week 14Assessment Task:Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 andcreate concise content analysis summaries of the theoretical concepts contained inthe course lecture slides.Total Mark:40 marksWeighting:40% of the unit total marksStudents are advised that submission of an Assessment Task past the due date without a formally signedapproved Assignment Extension Form (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> FORM – Assignment ExtensionApplication Form – Student Login Required)More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy & Procedures –Student Login Required) Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:Students are required to analyse the weekly lecture material of weeks 1 to 11 and create concisecontent analysis summaries 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 helpsto fully describe the lecture slide content, discussion of such theoretical articles or discussion of thetutorial part should be included in the content analysis.The document structure is as follows (2500 Words):1. Title Page2. Introduction (100 words)3. Background (100 words)4. Content analysis (reflective journals) for each week from 1 to 11 (2200 words; 200 words perweek):a. Theoretical Discussioni. Important topics coveredii. Definitionsb. Interpretations of the contentsi. What are the most important/useful/relevant information about the content?c. Outcomei. What have I learned from this?5. Conclusion (100 words)Your report must include:• At least eight references, out of which, five reference 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 notbe readable by markers. Please be aware that any assessments submitted in other formats will beconsidered LATE and will lose marks until it is presented in Word.For assistance please speak to our Academic Learning Skills Coordinators, in Sydney([email protected]) or in Melbourne ([email protected]). They can help you withunderstanding the task, draft checking, structure, referencing and other assignment-related matters.GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKSContent for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points andconclusion.Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must developand demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality workpresented 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 materialsavailable on the Kent Learning Management System (Moodle). For details please click the linkhttp://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 informationthat are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of eachTrimester.Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unlessotherwise specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specificAssessment Task, any paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting asatisfactory 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 theAssessment Task in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary varianceto the word count in that it is generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% thanthe stated length.GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCINGReferences are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such asbooks, chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as areference, but not the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student iscapable of conducting their own research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’sunderstanding of the work they cite, all in-text references (not just direct quotes) must include thespecific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before preparing your Assessment Task or owncontribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism through Referencing) byclicking on the following link: link:http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articlescan 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 gainknowledge 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 wherethese are produced by legitimate sources, such as government departments, research institutes suchas the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), or international organisations suchas the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and government departmentsproduce 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).MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC):Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458Version 2: 11th October, 2019 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051Your answers for the final examination questions will be assessed as per the following markingcriteria. Please read carefully each section/level and marks weightage. MarkingCriteriaFailPassCreditDistinctionHigh DistinctionResearch /10Little evidence ofresearch Sourcesare missing,inappropriate,poorly integrated orlacking credibility.Lacks clear link ofsources toarguments.Basic and soundresearch. Basic use ofsources to support ideas,generally wellintegrated, most sourcesare credible_ May beweaknesses withparaphrasing orintegration/application.Research- isgenerally thorough.Good use of sourcesto support ideas,mostly wellintegrated, sourcesare credible. May beweaknesses withparaphrasing orintegration/application.Thorough research isindicated. Very good useof sources to supportideas, well-integrated,sources are credible.May be minorweaknesses withparaphrasing orintegration/applicationThorough research isindicated. Professionaluse of sources tosupport ideas, wellintegrated, sourcesare credible. Veryminor, if any,weaknesses withparaphrasing orintegration/application.ContentAnalyses / 60Lacks coherence;topic is poorlyaddressed; littleanalysis. Noevidence fromexternal research tosupport the casematerial. Thediscussion isdescriptive andpoorly sequenced.Is generally coherent;topic is addressed to areasonable depth withsome description.External research onconcepts relevant to thecase material issomehow obvious; theconcepts are analysed toa reasonable depth.There are someinconsistencies/weaknesses with theflow.Is coherent andflows well; topic isaddressed quitewell. Externalresearch onconcepts relevant tothe case material isobvious; theconcepts areanalysed quite well.There may be someinconsistencies/weaknesses withflow.Is very coherent andflows well; topic isaddressed quite well.External research onconcepts relevant to thecase material is obvious;the concepts areanalysed in depth. Theremay be minorinconsistencies andProfessional work.Argument is verycoherent and flowswell; topic isaddressed thoroughly.External research onconcepts relevant tothe case material is ofan outstandingquality; the conceptsare analysed in greatdepth. Very minor, ifany, inconsistenciesand weaknesses withflow.Structure / 10The report is notappropriatelyformatted; morethan two of therequired sectionsare missing.The report format isgenerally correct but theinformation under thesections does notcompletely correspondto the requirements.Recommendations aremissing.The report format isalmost correct; theinformation underthe sectionscorrespond toThe report format iscorrect; all sections areincluded; theinformation under thesections corresponds tothe requirementsRecommendations donot suggest specificactions and do notderive from thediscussion.The report format iscorrect; all sectionsare included; theinformation under theLang &Presentation/ 10Poor standard ofwriting. Word limitmay not be adheredto.Basic and soundstandard of writing;some errors inpunctuation, grammarand spellingGood standard ofwriting; few errorsin punctuation,grammar andspelling.Very good standard ofwriting; very few orminor errors inpunctuation, grammarand spelling.Professional standardof writing; no errors inpunctuation, grammarand spelling.Referencing /10No referencing isevident or, if done,is inconsistent andtechnicallyincorrect. No orminimal referencelist, mixed styles. Noin text citationsBasic and sound attemptto reference sources;may be someinconsistencies andtechnical errors in style.Reference list isgenerally complete with1 or 2 referencesmissing.Good attempt toreference sources;inconsistencies andtechnical errors instyle. Fewinaccuracies inreference list and allreferences listed.Very good attempt toreference sources; veryminor inconsistenciesand technical errors instyle. Thorough andconsistent reference listand all references listed.Professional level ofreferencing andacknowledgment; noerrors of style evident.Thorough andconsistent referencelist and all referenceslisted.

Don`t copy text!
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
???? Hi, how can I help?