RECENT ASSIGNMENT

BAO 3309 Advanced Financial Accounting
Individual assignment
Assessment Weight: 20%
Due Date:
Research Essay
Word limit: 2500 words (excluding abstracts and references)
Required:
1. Critically discuss the notion of public interest and its relevance to financial reporting for the creation of decision useful financial information with the help of research literature.
2. Identify and select at least three accounting policies by reviewing the latest financial statements of an Australian firm listed in ASX and critically discussthe disclosureoftheseaccountingpolicies for decision usefulness.
3. On 20 December 2013, the AASB approved AASB CF 2013-1 “Amendments to the Australian Conceptual Framework”. The amendments tothe Australian Conceptual Framework reducedthe number of users of financial information for profit organisations to existing and potential investors, lenders and other creditors in making decisions about providing resources to the entity. The users prior to the amendment were identified as present and potentialpresent and potential investors, employees, lenders, suppliers and other trade creditors, customers, governments and their agencies and the public.Critically discuss with the help of research literature that description of the users after amendment to the framework will result in the creation of more decision useful informationforall the users of financial statements.
References
1. ASX listed companieshttp://www.asx.com.au/asx/research/listedCompanies.do
2. VU library http://w2.vu.edu.au/library/EJournalSearch/
Please note that the assignment requires evidence of extensive research beyond the prescribed text.
Assignment coversheet is available at VU Collaborate.
See next page for further information
The following matters should be given particular attention:
1. Submission of your assignment
1.1 Submission of this assignment by due date (as advised by the local lecturer) is compulsory for successful completion of the subject. The identical electronic copy must be submitted through WebCTTurnitin by due date. The printed copy along with a Turnitin Similarity Report (less than 25% similarity required) can be submitted to your lecturer at the conclusion of the lecture you normally attend.
1.2 The printed copy must be the identical version of the electronic copy submitted through Turnitin at Webct. Inconsistent version of the printed copy and the electronic copy will result in a Fail grade (Note: If you cannot submit your assignment through Turnitin due to a technical problem then email your assignment before the due date to your lecturer immediately. You cannot withdraw an assignment from Turnitin after the due date).
1.3 Late submission without extension approval from the Unit Coordinators and local lecturers will be penalised 2 (out of 20) marks per day and no mark will be awarded five days.
1.4 No Extension will be granted unless supported by appropriate documentation prior to the due date. An application for an extension must be in writing and must use the appropriate form
1.5 Students are responsible to protect their work and save data by making necessary backup. Loss of data due to a computer or storage devices problems will not be considered a valid reason for an extension.
2. Referencing and style
2.1 Assignment must be typed using Word document and double-spaced with a normal margin (i.e. 3cm)
2.2 Evidence of extensive research beyond the prescribed texts is required. Students should refer to journals such as Accounting Forum, Business Strategy & the Environment (John Wiley & Sons, Inc), The International Journal of Accounting, Journal of Business Ethics which are available on the electronic journals webpage of the VU library website at http://w2.vu.edu.au/library/EJournalSearch/
2.3 The required referencing style is Harvard (Please visit VU library for examples of Harvard Referencing Style at http://guides.library.vu.edu.au/Harvard). Essays not using the required referencing style or not showing in-text and end of text references will be returned unmarked
2.4 Avoid Plagiarism
Academic Honesty and Preventing Plagiarism Policy states plagiarism as
‘The practice that involves use of another person’s intellectual output and presenting it (without appropriate acknowledgement) as one’s own’.
Examples of Plagiarism:
•Word-for-word copying of sentences/paragraphs in an assignment without acknowledgement or with insufficient or improper acknowledgement;
•Downloading essays or assignments from the web and presenting these for assessment;
•Presenting another student’s work or research data as the student’s work;
•Copying out parts of any text without acknowledging the source(s). This may be written text, structures within texts, diagrams, formulae, sound files, still photographs, audio-visual material (sound and image files), graphics/animations/multimedia objects, other computer based material, mathematical proofs, art objects, products and others. This can be done as verbatim copying or paraphrasing.
•The use of someone else’s concepts, experimental results, experimental conclusions or conclusions drawn from analysing evidence or arguments without acknowledging the originator of the idea(s) or conclusion(s).
Students are responsible for:
•Understanding and respecting the University’s policies and procedures regarding plagiarism, collusion, and other forms of academic misconduct and as such should only submit work for correction or academic credit that is their own or that properly acknowledges the ideas, interpretations, words or creative works of others;
•Avoiding the lending or making accessible original work to others;
•Being clear about the appropriate referencing rules that are applicable to their field of study;
•Refusing to be a party to another student’s efforts to undermine the academic integrity of the University.
•Seeking assistance with their learning and assessment tasks if they are unsure of appropriate forms of acknowledgement.

MARKING SCHEME RESEARCH ESSAY
SEMESTER 2, 2014
Student Name
Student Number
Tutorial group Day and Time
Mark out of 100
Assessment Structure Excellent Very Good Good Average Marginal Poor Very Poor
1. Abstract (5)
2.Introduction (5)
3. Part A (20)
4. Part B (25)
5. Part C (30)
6. Conclusion (5)
7. Referencing-structure and quality (5)
8. Overall expression and coherence (5)
Assessment criteria to be applied on Assessments 1 to 8
Excellent: Work fulfilling the above criteria to an outstanding degree, in particular demonstrating excellence in sustained argument, critical thought and synthesis of material from diverse sources.
Very Good: Work demonstrating extensive knowledge and understanding of major content areas and issues; the ability to appropriately synthesise material from a range of sources; a well-developed capacity for critical analysis of key issues and concepts; the ability to present a defensible personal perspective on issues; evidence of wide reading in relevant areas of the discipline.
Good: Above average work demonstrating good knowledge and understanding of major content areas and issues; demonstration of some capacity for critical analysis; the ability to present a perspective on issues; evidence of reading in relevant areas of the discipline
Average: Work of ‘average’ standard which demonstrates a average comprehension both of basic concepts and some issues, based on class work and some further reading in the area; some ability to compare key concepts and theoretical perspectives; average presentation, particularly in regard to structure, expression and referencing.
Marginal: Work which shows a basic understanding of key elements of the subject matter at a descriptive level, based mainly on attendance at lectures; satisfactory presentation with some deficiencies in structure, expression and referencing.
Poor: Work which shows little evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter and is unsatisfactorily presented, particularly in regard to structure, expression and referencing.
Very poor: Work which shows no evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter.