回到网站

Brunel University MG5611

Current Issues in Accounting

· 案例展示

Assessment Title:

Task 1. Cumulative assessment

Task 2. Debate

Task 3. Essay

Task 4. Reflective account

Module Leader:

Dr Grigorios Theodosopoulos

Distribution Date:

07/01/2020

Submission Deadline:

Task 1. Cumulative assessment:

A synopsis of your chosen article should be submitted via Blackboard in advance of the next lecture each week (by 12:00 noon of the actual lecture date at the very latest)

Task 2. Debate:

Debates will take place during lecture/workshops hours on week 25, additional material, as per task description, should be submitted by 12:00 on Tuesday 19 of March 2020

Task 3. Essay:

The essay must be submitted by 12:00 midday on Monday 01 of April 2020

Task 4. Reflective account:

The critical reflective account should be submitted by 12:00 midday on Wednesday 03 of April 2020

Feedback by :

09/05/2020

Contribution to overall module assessment:

Task 1. Cumulative assessment 10%

Task 2. Debate 30%

Task 3. Essay 50%

Task 4. Reflective account 10%

Indicative student time working on assessment:

Task 1. Cumulative assessment 15 hours in total 3 hours per synopsis

Task 2. Debate 32 hours in total equivalent to 4 full-time working days

Task 3. Essay 36 hours in total equivalent to 4.5 full-time working days

Task 4. Reflective account 8 hours in total equivalent to 1 full-time working day

Word or Page Limit (if applicable):

Task 1. Cumulative assessment: maximum 250 words per synopses

Task 2. Debate: maximum of 8 minutes per debate plus 2 minutes for questions and feedback

Task 3. Essay: maximum 1,500 words excluding references

Task 4. Reflective account: maximum 600 words excluding references (referencing for this task is optional)

Assessment Type (individual or group):

Individual

Task 1. Cumulative assessment:

This task is designed to enhance your engagement with the module material and develop your ability to critically review relevant academic accounting research.

Task 2. Debate:

This task will help you learn how to critically discuss current issues in accounting. The debate will help develop deeper understanding and knowledge of the associated issues. It will also allow you to develop your ability to search, explain, and critically evaluate relevant theories, and work in teams.

Task 3. Essay:

This task aims to enhance your ability to analyse, synthesize, and critique relevant theoretical concepts and research methods, as well as, to develop your capacity of critically evaluating the practical implications of alternative views and propositions on current issues in accounting practice.

Task 4. Reflective account:

This task is designed to help you reflect on your learning experience on the module and analyse how this has contributed to your academic and professional development.

The table below demonstrates how each of the 4 tasks contributes to the assessment of the modules learning outcomes

Required

Submit five synopses of designated articles (maximum 250 words each) during the term. The task involves reading at least one of the designated articles discussed during the teaching session, writing a synopsis, and submitting it via Blackboard in advance of the next lecture. Students can get two marks per submitted synopsis depending on the quality and relevance of their summation and on the successful identification of each article’s most valuable contribution to knowledge. This task is designed to enhance your engagement with the module material and develop your ability to critically review relevant academic accounting research.

Task 2 Debate (30% of total marks)

Required

Debate the following proposition in class:

Getting into an area of automation, artificial intelligence, and Big Data analytics, the accounting profession will face challenges that will gradually lead to its extinction. Attempts made by professional bodies and accounting educators to enhance the resilience of the profession going forward are to be proven futile.

Guidance

Work in groups of 4 to 6 and decide who in the group will support the proposition and who will oppose the proposition, aiming for an equal division. It is fully understood that the positions you take for this task may not coincide with your actual views on the proposition. Whatever view you represent you will research the topic in full and be prepared to defend your position and identify and use the specific research that supports your position and in effect undermines the opposing view. Each student will in effect argue his/her point which will be different to those of the same view.

Each group will take it in turns to hold their debate, which should last for a maximum of 8 minutes, followed by 2 minutes for questions/feedback from the class and the lecturer. A short Power Point presentation must be used to support the debate process; no other notes in paper or in electronic form are allowed to be used for the debate. Each student is allowed to make use of one active slide only, for example a group of six students should use a maximum of six active slides for the presentation. Active slides exclude: the first slide - which should contain a title, the module code/name and the names of the group members - and the slides used as a reference list. Students can use a font type of their choice but at a size from 16 and above. No appendixes or notes below the slides are allowed. Each student should also bring with them an A4 size document with their name and student number clearly written on it and keep/hold it in front of them during the debate, to enable assessment of individual performance.

Debates will be recorded. By 12:00 of Tuesday 19 of March 2020, each student will have to submit via BBL a log of the group’s activities - highlighting each member’s contribution to the preparation of the debate, as well as, a copy of the power point presentation with their name and student number written on the specific active slide they used. Two hard copies of the above, signed and agreed by all group members, plus two copies of the assessment and feedback criteria for task 2 – you can find that below – with each group member’s name and student number typed correctly, should be given to the module leader just before the group debate starts. Marks will be allocated on individual basis based both on students’ performance during the debate and each individual’s contribution to the group’s preparation.

This task will help you learn how to critically discuss current issues in accounting. The debate will help develop deeper understanding and knowledge of the associated issues. It will also allow you to develop your ability to search, explain, and critically evaluate relevant theories, and work in teams. The positions you take in the debate may not coincide with your actual views on the proposition. However, the activity will provide an opportunity to demonstrate your verbal communication skills and your understanding of research methods through a well-structured, rational argument, supported by evidence.

Task 3 Essay (50% of total marks)

Required

Write a fully referenced individual essay (maximum 1,500 words excluding references) addressing the following proposition:

“For today’s successful businesses, the numbers on the balance sheet represent just a small proportion of their value to investors” (ICAEW 2018). This demonstrates that contemporary financial reporting does not seem to be able to win the battle over accounting for new business models.

Guidance

In preparing your answer you might find it useful to take the following approach:

  • Discuss relevant theory on the development of accounting for business models.
  • Drawing on your research of relevant academic literature and examples from practice, discuss the role – if any – and the perceived effectiveness of financial reporting in communicating “value relevant” information to investors and key stakeholders.
  • Considering the various lenses through which one may view the topic, critically discuss whether you think corporate reporting is doing “a good enough job of explaining to stakeholders the value drivers behind a business” (ICAEW 2018).

To complete this exercise, you must carry out your own search of the literature and provide evidence of your ability to analyse, synthesize, and critique relevant theoretical concepts and research methods. You will also evaluate the practical implications of alternative views and propositions on current issues in accounting practice.

Task 4 Reflective account (10% of total marks)

Required

Submit a critical reflective account (maximum 600 words) via Blackboard on how your understanding of accounting has been enhanced by your learning experience on this module. This task is designed to help you reflect on your learning experience on the module and analyse how this has contributed to your academic and professional development.

PG grades and grade point bands [Senate Regulation 3 (2013 starters onwards)] are:

A++ (17), A+ (16), A (15), A- (14), B+ (13), B (12), B- (11), C+ (10), C (9), C- (8), D+ (7), D (6), D- (5), E+ (4), E (3), E- (2), F (1)

Submission Instructions

Coursework must be submitted electronically via the University’s Blackboard Learn system. The required file format for this report for tasks 1, 3, and 4 is any of the recent versions of Microsoft word and for task 2 you can chose between - any of the recent versions of - Microsoft Word or Microsoft PowerPoint. Your student ID number must be used as the file name (e.g. 0123456.docx). You must ensure that you upload your file in the correct format and use the College’s electronic coursework coversheet. Please note that submissions of ‘.Pages’ documents will not be accepted – they should be converted to approved format.

The electronic coursework coversheet must be completed and included at the beginning of all coursework submissions prior to submitting on Blackboard Learn. Electronic coversheets are available on Blackboard Learn within the Taught Programmes Office folder.

 

Assessment and feedback criteria for Task 2 Debate

ASSESSMENT OF DEBATE Group number:

MG5611 Current Issues in Accounting

Module Leader:

Grigorios Theodosopoulos

DATE OF Debate:

Start Time: Finish Time:

STUDENT’s NAMES

STUENT NUMBER

PROCESS OF DEBATE

Planning/Organisation of TOPICS 10%

good planning/organisation evident in process of debate

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

poor planning/organisation

Use of Language: 10%

Language is clear and concise – no filling , limited repetition – logical sequence of argument

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

Language is imprecise, colloquial (use of slang such as “like”,) pauses, buts, etc.

Use of Time, pacing, distribution of argument between speakers etc : 10%

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

poor timing/pacing, blank spots, lots of pauses, stammers, etc.

Group Functioning: 10% cohesive/coordinated group – looks organised and rehearsed but smooth

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

incoherent/uncoordinated group

Response to Questions: 10% good response to questions – everyone ready to join in and make valid points

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

poor response to questions – looking blank, failure to respond

Evidence of Research 20%

Excellent and well used relevant research (not enough just to have a good list of references, must use them)

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

Very little evidence or misused

OVERALL IMPRESSION: including good timing/pacing, argument moves between individuals, not over staged 10%

Excellent

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

very poor

DEBATE --Quality of debate including Content/Argument: 20% accurate/relevant content/argument

A B C D E F

ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ   ÿ

Poor debating skills, stilted presentation, errors with inaccurate/irrelevant content/argument

Comments

Module Leader:

Name …Grigorios Theodosopoulos………..

Signature ……………………………………

Second marker:

Name ……………………………………..

Signature ……………………………………

 

Assessment and feedback criteria for Task 3 Essay

Marks

A++ to A-grade

B+ to B- grade

C+ to C- grade

D+ to D- grade

E+ to E- grade

Fail

Criteria

Coverage of relevant theory

30%

Excellent coverage of a range of relevant theories. Excellent links between theory and practice.

Very good coverage of a range of appropriate theories. Developing good links between theory and practice.

Good level of use and inclusion of appropriate theory.

Satisfactory level of inclusion of appropriate theory.

Made reasonable attempts to include appropriate theory.

Little attempt to include any theory in a meaningful way.

Analysis and discussion

30%

Excellent analysis of the question demonstrating independence of thought with well-argued points. Conclusions flow logically from the analysis.

High level of analysis of the issues, with the key points covered and well argued in terms of the question. Very good conclusions covering the main points.

A range of good points made which are broadly addressing the question and leading to reasonable conclusions.

Good points made, which may not always directly address the question, but do cover most of the main issues. Conclusions may not always flow logically from points made.

Some good points made which may not always directly address the question, but do cover some of the main issues. Conclusions may not always flow logically from points made.

Some points made but discussion may lack coherence and do not address the main issues.

Evidence of reading and research

30%

Evidence of information gathered from a wide variety of sources, all appropriately sourced and referenced.

Evidence gathered from a good variety of sources, all appropriately sourced and referenced.

Good range of appropriately sourced and referenced information sources.

Good range of information sources, but not always appropriately sourced and referenced.

Demonstrates reasonable attempts to gather information from a range of sources, but sourcing and referencing is weak.

Limited evidence of reading or research outside lecture material. Weaknesses in sourcing and referencing.

Structure and Presentation

10%

Excellent grammar and presentation with a clear statement in the introduction of how the question is to be answered, conclusions and a bibliography / reference list given.

Very good presentation with good grammar and logical structure. Ideas are clearly expressed within the suggested word count.

Good presentation with reasonable structure and logical ideas. Suggested word count has been outdone by +/- 10%.

Satisfactory presentation with reasonable structure. Ideas are logical but may not always be clearly expressed.

Satisfactory presentation and overall structure but not supported by clearly presented points and ideas. Word count instructions have not been followed.

Weak structure with many grammatical errors, not presented to minimum satisfactory standards.

Any coursework or examined submission for assessment where plagiarism, collusion or any form of cheating is suspected will be dealt with according to the University processes which are detailed in Senate Regulation 6.

You can access information about plagiarism here.

The University regulations on plagiarism apply to published as well as unpublished work, collusion and the plagiarism of the work of other students.

Please ensure that you fully understand what constitutes plagiarism before you submit your work.

University’s Coursework Submission Policy

Please refer to the College’s Student Handbook for information on submitting late, penalties applied and procedures.

College’s Coursework Submission Policy

Please refer to the College’s Student Handbook for information relating to the College’s Coursework Submission Policy and procedures.

* this can be found at the bottom of the page under the ‘Documents’ section *

Extenuating Circumstances Policy

Please refer to the College’s Student Handbook for information relating to extenuating circumstances and procedures.

所有文章
×

快要完成了!

我们刚刚发给你了一封邮件。 请点击邮件中的链接确认你的订阅。

好的