Assignment - ACS Code of Conduct
Due date: 31-Dec-2014
Length: 800 words
Submission method options
Task
Proceed according to the following instructions.
1. Use the same ethical dilemma or ethically questionable situation that you identified in your first assignment.
2. Undertake further research about your chosen case to assist you in analysing and discussing it in your essay.
3. Analyse the ethical dilemma using the Australian Computer Society Code of Professional Conduct, The word limit is 800 words ± 10%. Note: Headings, citations, references and any appendices do not count towards your word limit, but quotations do. At the start of the assignment indicate in brackets the word count of your assignment excluding those items mentioned above.
4. Make a recommendation on the basis of your analysis providing reasons for this recommendation
5. Include a Reference list at the end of your work, in the correct APA referencing style, corresponding to in-text citations. You must include at least THREE (3) quality academic references from different sources. Please note that these three references are in addition to those provided to you through this subject (for example, you still must reference, the ACS code, Tavani, the Interact subject lecture notes etc BUT these references cannot be used as one of your three quality references from different sources). Only use references that have been cited in the body of your assignment and ones that support what you have presented in your assignment.
NOTE: Format your assignment according to the instructions given in the Assessment Information, Presentation section.
Rationale
The assessment item is designed to help you to build skills towards achieving the learning objectives, by requiring you to:
o apply the ACS Code of Conduct to the analysis of an ethically questionable situation to determine the rightness or wrongness of actions/decisions made therein;
o make a recommendation on the basis of your analysis using the ACS Code of Conduct
o apply the APA referencing style.
Marking criteria
The following marking sheet will be used to assess students' submissions.
Please check that you have met all the criteria before you submit your assignment.
Criteria Standards
High Distinction (HD) Distinction (DI) Credit (CR) Pass (PS) Fail (FL)
Analysis of the ethical dilemma using the ACS Code of Conduct Correctly maps all the ethical issues, within the case, to the relevant sections of the Code (including section numbers).
Comprehensively analyses the identified ethical issues from the point of view of the Code.
Makes a clear, convincing and a justifiable recommendation/s
Demonstrates a breadth and depth of understanding of the Code by articulating its deeper and more subtle aspects through the recommendation/s provided. Adequately maps the ethical issues, within the case, to the correct sections of the Code (including section numbers).
The analysis properly explains the link between the ethical issues and the relevant sections of the Code.
The recommendation/s made is reasonable and is supported with a well expressed justification
Demonstrates a thorough understanding of the Code. Makes a genuine attempt at mapping the ethical issues, within the case, to the correct sections of the Code (including section numbers).
The analysis explains to some extent the link between the ethical issues and the elements of the Code.
The recommendation/s made are clear and a good attempt is made to support it with a justification.
Demonstrates a good understanding of the Code. Few ethical issues, within the case, are correctly mapped to the right sections of the Code (including section numbers).
The analysis does not explain well the link between the ethical issues and the elements of the Code.
The recommendation/s made makes sense but is not supported with a justification
Demonstrates some evidence of understanding of the Code. Incorrectly maps the ethical issues, within the case, to the sections of the Code (including section numbers).
The analysis of the ethical issues in light of the elements of the Code is poor.
The recommendation made makes no sense
Demonstrates little evidence of understanding of the Code.
Writing & structure Highly developed skills in expression and presentation of ideas.
Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.
No errors in grammar & spelling. Very well developed skills in expression and presentation of ideas.
Fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.
Grammar and spelling accurate. Well developed skills in expression and clear presentation of ideas.
Mostly fluent writing style appropriate to assessment task/document type.
Grammar and spelling contains a few minor errors. Good skills in expression and presentation of ideas.
Meaning is clear and apparent, but writing style not always fluent or well organised.
Grammar and spelling contains several careless errors. Rudimentary or poor skills in expression and presentation of ideas.
Not all material is relevant &/or is presented in a dis-organised manner.
Meaning apparent, but writing style not fluent or well organised.
Referencing Faultless APA referencing, including reference list and citations.
Use of very high quality relevant academic references. Evidence of very good APA referencing, including reference list and citations.
Use of high quality relevant academic references. Evidence of good APA referencing, including reference list and citations.
Good quality relevant academic references. Evidence of basic APA referencing skills but with errors.
Mix of good and poor quality academic references. Not referenced according to APA referencing standard or no references included.
Poor quality or inappropriate (or no) references.
GET ANSWERS / LIVE CHAT