微信客服：xiaoxionga100
微信客服：ITCS521
ACCT2011-会计代写
时间：2023-09-09
ACCT2011 Reporting on Business Performance
Semester 2 2023
Group Assignment Instructions and Guidelines
Completed Group Assignment: Due 23:59 pm (AEDT) Monday 9 October 2023
Draft Part A Response: Due 23:59 pm (AEST) Monday 11 September 2023
The teaching team will review and provide feedback on Draft Part A responses. As per assessment
criteria and rubric included in Appendix 1 to this assignment, up to 2 marks of the total marks is for
the Draft Part A response submission. This mark will be awarded when the completed group
assignment is graded.
1. Background Information for Group Assignment
Create Green Ltd (CG) is an electric vehicle manufacturing company listed on the Australian Securities
Exchange (ASX). Since 1 July 2022, a CG project team with extensive vehicle design experience, recognised
mechanical engineering skills and high level programming expertise, has been working on Project Self Drive
(SD). The objective of Project SD is to research and develop CG’s first electric self-driving autonomous vehicle.
CG’s project team has total responsibility for all activities undertaken in the research and development phases
of Project SD.
Electric vehicle market data indicates the software developed from Project SD, Think Fast, could be used in
CG’s current line of electric trucks. This is due to the software’s highly adaptable human perception and
decision-making processes. Accordingly, the Project SD was allocated an unlimited budget.
Between 1 July 2022 and 31 December 2022, the project team undertook intensive Project SD research work
into identifying different approaches for achieving self-driving autonomy. Costs of $7,500,000 were incurred.
Due to the project’s revolutionary research findings, an incremental prototype of the Think Fast software,
suitable for CG’s current line of electric trucks, was built, functionally tested, and refined between 1 January
2023 and 30 June 2023 at a cost of $3,500,000.
A recent Australian Federal Government report states, “At 1 January 2023 there were 120,000 registered electric
vehicles in Australia. Due to innovative developments in the commercial electric vehicle market, this statistic is
expected to grow 150% by 2030”. On 1 September 2023, CG entered into negotiations with a transport company
to supply 100 of its electric trucks fitted with the Think Fast software by 30 June 2024.
2
You have been onboarded as a graduate financial accountant reporting directly to CG’s Financial Controller.
On your first day, you receive the following email from the Financial Controller:
“Hi, welcome to the team. Have assigned the Project SD costs accounting treatment task to you. Please
consider how to treat these costs in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023 from multiple
perspectives. Looking forward to working with you.”
2. Assignment Questions
REQUIRED:
Your Part A and Part B responses are to be presented in a short answer format.
Part A (14 marks in total, 12 marks for final submission, 2 marks for Draft Part A submission)
Consider the accounting treatment of research work costs and, separately, the incremental prototype costs for
Project SD in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023 from the following perspectives.
(a) From AASB Conceptual Framework (Compilation date 20 December 2021) (AASB CF). Explain how
the research work and incremental prototype costs may or may not satisfy all aspects of the AASB
CF’s:
(i) definition of an asset; and
(ii) recognition criteria.
(b) From AASB 138 Intangible Assets (Compilation date 31 December 2022) (AASB 138).
(i) Explain how AASB 138 addresses problems identified in your Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers; and
(ii) Identify and justify the appropriate accounting treatment for research work costs and, separately,
incremental prototype costs in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023.
To support all your Part A answers, include relevant AASB CF and AASB 138 paragraph reference(s) and
facts applied from the assignment background information.
(Hint: You may wish to present your Part A responses in a table with headings. Below is a suggested form of
presentation. This can be adapted to a landscape page orientation.)
Part (a)
Research work costs Incremental prototype costs
(a) (i)
(a) (ii)
Part (b)
(b) (i)
(b) (ii) Research work costs Incremental prototype costs
Responses to the following questions will be considered on their ability to apply relevant AASB technical
requirements, present appropriate background information discussion and develop well argued responses. Do
not submit a series of dot points. Marks will be awarded for content as well as structure, and quality of the
communication.
You are not permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, to generate any part of
your responses. AI tools cannot be relied upon to generate responses that will adequately address the
requirements of this assignment.
Part A, Part B and Part C responses must be in your own words.
3
Part B (6 marks in total)
Think back to ACCT1006 and the reflection skills you learnt in that unit. As a reminder, look at the 5Rs
Framework for Reflection resources on Canvas under Group Assignment.
Required:
Using the Relating criteria from the 5Rs Framework for Reflection, reflect on your draft Part A Review
response feedback.
Describe how this feedback impacted your group’s understanding of how the AASB CF and AASB accounting
standard’s requirements can:
(a) conflict; and
(b) collectively, provide useful guidance for financial statement preparers.
Include supporting example(s) in your Part B (a) and Part B (b) responses that show your group’s reflective
experiences.
Part C (20 marks)
Your Part C response is to be presented in an essay format.
“Accounting concepts, definitions and criteria can be ambiguous. Subsequently, further regulation is often
required.”
Discuss this statement. Your persuasive response should include:
• an introduction;
• one (1) argument point from the AASB CF element definitions and recognition criteria perspective;
• one (1) argument point from the AASB 138 perspective; and lastly
• a conclusion that includes a final opinion and valid reason(s).
Both argument points must be accompanied by supporting example(s) developed from your Part A (including
Draft Part A response and feedback) and Part B responses, evidence and/or academic reference(s)*#.
*Supporting examples from your Part A and Part B responses must explain in detail how and why they support the argument point.
#Your references should be from papers published in peer reviewed academic journals - not internet sources such as Wikipedia, not
ACCT2011 course materials such as the Semester 2 2023 slides and tutorial materials, and not textbook chapter references, such as
the Henderson et al textbook. Please look at the library resources for assignment link on Canvas under Group Assignment.
For the final completed group assignment total word limit is 1,500 words. This includes all footnotes,
images and intext references and excluding a reference list and any appendices.
For the Draft Part A response, guide is 450 words. This includes all footnotes, images and intext
references and excluding a reference list and any appendices.
4
3. Assessment Criteria
The group assignment represents 20% of your total mark for ACCT2011 and is compulsory. To provide students
with feedback, group assignments will be graded against the assessment criteria and rubric included in
Appendix 1 to this assignment. Note the group assignment will be marked out of 40 marks and converted to a
mark that contributes to 20% of your total mark for ACCT2011.
Academic Honesty
As a student of the University, you are responsible for taking part in your education in an honest and authentic
manner. It is, therefore, expected that you take extra care to ensure that there are no breaches of academic
honesty. All assignments will be manually and electronically checked for plagiarism (copying). Any perceived
breaches of academic honesty will be referred to the Office of Educational Integrity for further investigation and
penalised if verified. You can read more information on what plagiarism is and how to avoid plagiarism from the
University link: https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/academic-integrity/breaches.html
Students are reminded that all sources of support for the group assignment must be acknowledged and failure
to acknowledge such support may potentially breach the University’s academic honesty requirements. You
are not permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT to generate any part of your responses.
Their undeclared use will be reported as a major breach of policy for investigation.
Each group member is expected to be involved in the preparation, drafting, proofing and checking of all aspects
of this group assignment including ensuring no breaches of academic honesty. Group members will be held
jointly responsible for the entire submission and awarded the same merit mark. In the event of a breach of
academic honesty the penalty could apply to all members irrespective of which member(s) caused the breach.
4. Group Assignment Plus Group Work Report
The group assignment is to be completed in groups of three or four students. Each student must be enrolled
in the same tutorial and signed-up to a group via Canvas.
If your group has less than 3 members or you do not sign-up to a group during the sign-up period you will be
placed in a group by teaching staff. Students who are placed in a group by teaching staff will receive an email.
Once you have signed up to a group you can see which group you are enrolled in by clicking the Groups link
on the Global Navigation menu in Canvas. The following link provides detailed instructions on how to do this:
https://community.canvaslms.com/t5/Student-Guide/How-do-I-view-my-Canvas-groups-as-a-student/ta-p/281.
In addition to submitting the group assignment, each group is required to prepare and submit a group work
report to demonstrate effective working within your group. Two reports must be submitted, a group assignment,
and a group work report.
The group work report is not included in the word limit for the group assignment.
Although this report is not graded or weighted in the marking, non-completion could result in a penalty
of 20% of the maximum marks attainable.
5
In the group work report:
1. Prepare an account of participation and contribution of each member of the team. It is assumed that all
members contribute equally and any non-trivial departure from equal contribution should be identified (See
example 1 below). In the event of significant, non-trivial departure from equal contribution, marks may be
deducted from under-contributing group members.
Example 1: An account of participation and contribution by team members
Name and
Student No.
Date
Joined
Brief description of role or
responsibility (if applicable)
% of
contribution
Explanation if not
equal
contribution
1) J Smith 25/M/0Y Took minutes of all meetings;
presented outline of key issues and
draft answer to Part A for group to
discuss. Final cold read of all parts
and word count check, submitted
group assignment and report to
Turnitin.
25%
2) A Ng 25/M/0Y Researched source material and
prepared draft answer for Part C.
Proof read Part A draft answer,
checked referencing.
25%
3) L Zhang 25/M/0Y Reviewed Part A answer. Prepared
alternative answer to Part C for group
meeting. Assisted with final review to
ensure group assignment was within
the word count.
25%
4) N Chand 25/M/0Y Reviewed Part B answer and
redrafted response to Part B for all
group members to discuss. Prepared
group report.
25%
2. Prepare a summary of meetings, showing when each meeting was held, who attended and what was
decided. Minutes should be kept for each meeting to enable your group to prepare the summary. If
meetings are being conducted by email circulation/instant messaging etc., the group should agree a time
(e.g. Thursday 8 p.m. – midnight) within which responses are considered as participation in the meeting
(See example 2).
Example 2: A summary of meetings
Time, date, and
meeting forum
Attendees Discussions and decisions Other comments
5 – 6 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Zoom meeting
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
N Chand
Agreed to read documents and bring
ideas to next meeting; agreed on who
will record minutes of each group
meeting.
12 – 1 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Group chat
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
Discussed approaches and develop
plan; JS and LZ to draft answer to Part
A. AN and NC to draft answer to Part B.
First drafts to be circulated by Thursday
for review/discussion at next meeting.
N Chand absent
(unexpected work
commitments).
Emailed ideas in
advance
6
5 – 6 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Zoom meeting
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
N Chand
Comments on first draft; discussed all
suggested ideas for Part C and agreed
on ideas to develop. AN and NC to
prepare second draft to Part C and
circulate by Friday for review/discussion
next meeting.
3. The submitted work report must be signed by all group members (See example 3)
Example 3:
Student name SID Signature Date
J Smith XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
A Ng XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
L Zhang XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
N Chand XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
In the event there are issues with group members not contributing to the group assignment, and reasonable
attempts have within the group to address these issues and have not been successful, then the coordinator
should be advised before the due date of 9 October 2023. Please note marks may be deducted for non-
contributing students.
5. Formatting requirements
• The group assignment and the group work report are to be presented in 12 point font (either Times
New Roman or Arial) and paragraphs formatted with 1 or 1.5 line spacing and with margins not less
than 2.5cm.
• You are required to save and submit the group assignment as a Microsoft word file, using the
cohort_tutorial number group number filename format. For example, if your group is enrolled in the
CC cohort, tutorial number 01 and allocated group 1 in this tutorial group, the filename for the group
assignment will be CC_T01_G01_GA.docx.
• The cohort, tutorial number, group number and SID of all group members must be included on the first
page of the group assignment.
• The cohort, tutorial number and group number must appear in the header section of every page for the
group assignment.
• Your group assignment should not exceed 1,500 words including all intext referencing, footnotes
and images and excluding the reference list and any appendices. The word count is based on the word
count information as presented in Turnitin based on the Microsoft word document submitted and this
will be checked. It is each group’s responsibility to ensure the submitted Microsoft word document
through Turnitin does not exceed 1,500 words in total. For guidance on words in excess of the word
limit, students are advised to refer to the Business School’s Policies at:
https://business.sydney.edu.au/students/policy
As a suggestion, you can use the following procedure to assist you to track the word count of the
Microsoft Word version of your assignment:
▪ Open your assignment Microsoft Word document.
▪ Use Ctrl+Shift+G to open the Word Count dialog box and insert a tick in the “Include textboxes,
footnotes and endnotes”. This function is also available under Review/Word Count.
7
• Your assignment must be appropriately and properly referenced using the American Psychological
Association referencing style (or APA as it is more commonly known). The University of Sydney library
provides helpful guidance on using APA style referencing. Please refer to the library resources for your
assignment module on Canvas. You can also refer https://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/citation/apa7
6. Submission requirements
• The deadline for submission is 23.59pm (AEDT) on Monday 9 October 2023. Please ensure you
submit well before the deadline in case there are problems.
• The group assignment must be submitted in electronic form. No submissions will be accepted via email.
• One group member is to submit the assignment on behalf of the group. Consider multiple reworkings
to tighten and to check your group’s assignment satisfies the 1,500 Turnitin word count. Turnitin in
Canvas does not automatically email a digital receipt. Once you have successfully submitted your
group’s assignment, take a screenshot of the submission details including a date time stamp. We
strongly recommend that you save this screenshot as proof of your group’s submission. Should
submission problems arise, you should contact the University’s ICT Service Desk on 02 9351
2000 (option 2 for ICT) or email ict.support@sydney.edu.au
• If you submit after the due date, a late penalty of 5% per day, or part thereof, including weekends, will
be applied. Any group assignment submitted beyond the closing date of 23.59 (AEDT) on 18 October
2023, will result in a mark of zero.
• Under the Canvas ‘Assignment” link in the left toolbar on the Homepage you will find the link to the
Turnitin submission portals under the Group assignment section. One portal is called “Group
assignment” and the other “Group work report.” Before you submit work to each of these folders, please
ensure that you have saved the group assignment and the group work report under the correct filename
format (i.e. filename format cohort_tutorial number_GXX_GA.doc for the group assignment and
filename format cohort_tutorial number_GXX_WR.docx for the group work report). Please ensure your
group submits the correct document to the correct submission portal.
• For each of the two files to be submitted, there is only one (1) submission allowed for the group. If
multiple group members submit, only the first group member’s submission will be marked. The other
submissions will be discarded. Turnitin will allow a second submission for the group before the due
date, provided it is submitted by the same person who originally submitted it. In that case, the last
version submitted will be marked.
7. Support
• You can post questions relating to the requirements of the group assignment on the Group assignment
Discussion Forum on Canvas. This would ensure all students have access to the same information. It
is assumed each student will read the queries and comments in the Group assignment Discussion
Forum (Note: Unit of Study teaching staff will not answer individual questions and no questions
will be answered during tutorials and student drop in sessions).
• You can obtain guidance on working in groups from the University website:
https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/group-work.html For technical support during your submission,
contact the University’s Service Desk on 02 9351 2000 (option 2 for ICT) or ict.support@sydney.edu.au.
8
Appendix 1 Assessment Criteria
Part A (14 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Practitioners Review
Draft Part A
submission
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Reasonable attempt for 1 or less of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable draft attempt for 2 of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
1.5 marks
Good
Reasonable draft attempt for 3 of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
2.0 marks
Very good
Comprehensive draft attempt for all
Part A sub parts questions.
Part A (a) (i)
Final submission
3 marks 0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
One correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
Some correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
All correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
Part A (a) (ii)
Final submission
3 marks 0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
One correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
Some correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
All correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included
9
Part A (b) (i)
Final submission
Part A (b) (ii)
Final submission
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation of how AASB
138 addresses problems identified
in Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how
AASB 138 addresses problems
identified in Part A (a)(i) and (ii)
answers.
One correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how AASB 138
addresses problems identified in
Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
Some correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very Good
Very good explanation of how AASB
138 addresses problems identified
in Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
All correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited accounting treatment and
justification for the research work
and incremental prototype costs in
CG’s financial statements for the
year ended 30 June 2023.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable accounting treatment
and justification for the research
work and incremental prototype
costs in CG’s financial statements
for the year ended 30 June 2023.
One correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good accounting treatment and
justification for the research work
and incremental prototype costs in
CG’s financial statements for the
year ended 30 June 2023.
Some correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very Good
Very good accounting treatment
and justification for the research
work and incremental prototype
costs in CG’s financial statements
for the year ended 30 June 2023.
All correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
10
Part B (6 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Part B (a)
AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards
requirements: Conflict
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how conflict
can exist between AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides
little insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the feedback on the
group’s initial understanding of how
conflict can exist between AASB CF
and AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
basic insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the feedback on the group’s initial
understanding of how conflict can
exist between AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how conflict
can exist between AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
very clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Part B (b)
AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards
requirements:
Collectively provide
useful guidance for
financial statement
preparers.
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how AASB
CF and AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides
little insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the feedback on the
group’s initial understanding of how
AASB CF and AASB accounting
standards requirements can
collectively provide useful guidance
for financial statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
basic insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the feedback on the group’s initial
understanding of how AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how AASB
CF and AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
very clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Part C (20 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Part C
Valid discussion in a
persuasive essay that
demonstrates critical
thinking/reasoning and
is supported with
examples developed
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Poor introduction.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable introduction.
1.5 marks
Good
Good introduction.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good introduction.
5 marks 0 to 2.0 marks
Below expectations
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
11
from Part A and Part B
responses, evidence
and/or academic
reference(s)
Poor attempt to develop an
argument point the AASB CF
element definitions and recognition
criteria perspective.
Or
Not attempted.
Reasonable attempt to develop an
argument point the AASB CF
element definitions and recognition
criteria perspective.
Well-developed argument point
from the AASB CF element
definitions and recognition criteria
perspective.
Very well developed argument
point from the AASB CF element
definitions and recognition criteria
perspective.
5 marks 0 to 2.0 marks
Below expectations
Poor attempt to develop an
argument point from the AASB 138
perspective.
Or
Not attempted.
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable attempt to develop an
argument point from the AASB 138
perspective.
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
Well-developed argument point
from the AASB 138 perspective.
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
Very well-developed argument
point from the AASB 138
perspective.
4 marks 0 to 1.5 marks
Below expectations
Limited critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Little attempt to link supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
Or
Not attempted.
2.0 to 2.5 marks
Reasonable
Some critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Some attempt to link supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
3.0 to 3.5 marks
Good
Reasonable critical
thinking/reasoning is evident.
Linked to supporting examples
developed from Parts A and Part B
answers and/or other sources.
4.0 marks
Very good
Good critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Well explained links to supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Unsatisfactory
Poor conclusion and invalid
reason(s) provided.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable conclusion and valid
reason(s) provided.
1.5 marks
Good
Good conclusion and valid reason(s)
provided.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good conclusion and highly
valid reason(s) provided.
Communication
Communication, style,
clarity of expression
including spelling,
grammar, punctuation
and proper referencing
using APA style
2 marks
0 to 0.5 mark
Unsatisfactory
Poorly written and incoherent, few
developed responses.
Poor or no use of APA referencing.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonably well written with some
coherent and developed responses.
Some correct application of APA
style and/or evidence of missing in-
text referencing and/or evidence of
indiscriminate or inappropriate use
of references.
1.5 marks
Good
Well written with coherent and
developed responses.
Mostly correct use of APA style and
reasonable application of both in-
text references and reference list.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very well written with coherent and
developed responses.
Mostly correct use of APA style and
reasonable application of both in-
text references and reference list.
Semester 2 2023
Group Assignment Instructions and Guidelines
Completed Group Assignment: Due 23:59 pm (AEDT) Monday 9 October 2023
Draft Part A Response: Due 23:59 pm (AEST) Monday 11 September 2023
The teaching team will review and provide feedback on Draft Part A responses. As per assessment
criteria and rubric included in Appendix 1 to this assignment, up to 2 marks of the total marks is for
the Draft Part A response submission. This mark will be awarded when the completed group
assignment is graded.
1. Background Information for Group Assignment
Create Green Ltd (CG) is an electric vehicle manufacturing company listed on the Australian Securities
Exchange (ASX). Since 1 July 2022, a CG project team with extensive vehicle design experience, recognised
mechanical engineering skills and high level programming expertise, has been working on Project Self Drive
(SD). The objective of Project SD is to research and develop CG’s first electric self-driving autonomous vehicle.
CG’s project team has total responsibility for all activities undertaken in the research and development phases
of Project SD.
Electric vehicle market data indicates the software developed from Project SD, Think Fast, could be used in
CG’s current line of electric trucks. This is due to the software’s highly adaptable human perception and
decision-making processes. Accordingly, the Project SD was allocated an unlimited budget.
Between 1 July 2022 and 31 December 2022, the project team undertook intensive Project SD research work
into identifying different approaches for achieving self-driving autonomy. Costs of $7,500,000 were incurred.
Due to the project’s revolutionary research findings, an incremental prototype of the Think Fast software,
suitable for CG’s current line of electric trucks, was built, functionally tested, and refined between 1 January
2023 and 30 June 2023 at a cost of $3,500,000.
A recent Australian Federal Government report states, “At 1 January 2023 there were 120,000 registered electric
vehicles in Australia. Due to innovative developments in the commercial electric vehicle market, this statistic is
expected to grow 150% by 2030”. On 1 September 2023, CG entered into negotiations with a transport company
to supply 100 of its electric trucks fitted with the Think Fast software by 30 June 2024.
2
You have been onboarded as a graduate financial accountant reporting directly to CG’s Financial Controller.
On your first day, you receive the following email from the Financial Controller:
“Hi, welcome to the team. Have assigned the Project SD costs accounting treatment task to you. Please
consider how to treat these costs in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023 from multiple
perspectives. Looking forward to working with you.”
2. Assignment Questions
REQUIRED:
Your Part A and Part B responses are to be presented in a short answer format.
Part A (14 marks in total, 12 marks for final submission, 2 marks for Draft Part A submission)
Consider the accounting treatment of research work costs and, separately, the incremental prototype costs for
Project SD in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023 from the following perspectives.
(a) From AASB Conceptual Framework (Compilation date 20 December 2021) (AASB CF). Explain how
the research work and incremental prototype costs may or may not satisfy all aspects of the AASB
CF’s:
(i) definition of an asset; and
(ii) recognition criteria.
(b) From AASB 138 Intangible Assets (Compilation date 31 December 2022) (AASB 138).
(i) Explain how AASB 138 addresses problems identified in your Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers; and
(ii) Identify and justify the appropriate accounting treatment for research work costs and, separately,
incremental prototype costs in CG’s financial statements for the year ended 30 June 2023.
To support all your Part A answers, include relevant AASB CF and AASB 138 paragraph reference(s) and
facts applied from the assignment background information.
(Hint: You may wish to present your Part A responses in a table with headings. Below is a suggested form of
presentation. This can be adapted to a landscape page orientation.)
Part (a)
Research work costs Incremental prototype costs
(a) (i)
(a) (ii)
Part (b)
(b) (i)
(b) (ii) Research work costs Incremental prototype costs
Responses to the following questions will be considered on their ability to apply relevant AASB technical
requirements, present appropriate background information discussion and develop well argued responses. Do
not submit a series of dot points. Marks will be awarded for content as well as structure, and quality of the
communication.
You are not permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT, to generate any part of
your responses. AI tools cannot be relied upon to generate responses that will adequately address the
requirements of this assignment.
Part A, Part B and Part C responses must be in your own words.
3
Part B (6 marks in total)
Think back to ACCT1006 and the reflection skills you learnt in that unit. As a reminder, look at the 5Rs
Framework for Reflection resources on Canvas under Group Assignment.
Required:
Using the Relating criteria from the 5Rs Framework for Reflection, reflect on your draft Part A Review
response feedback.
Describe how this feedback impacted your group’s understanding of how the AASB CF and AASB accounting
standard’s requirements can:
(a) conflict; and
(b) collectively, provide useful guidance for financial statement preparers.
Include supporting example(s) in your Part B (a) and Part B (b) responses that show your group’s reflective
experiences.
Part C (20 marks)
Your Part C response is to be presented in an essay format.
“Accounting concepts, definitions and criteria can be ambiguous. Subsequently, further regulation is often
required.”
Discuss this statement. Your persuasive response should include:
• an introduction;
• one (1) argument point from the AASB CF element definitions and recognition criteria perspective;
• one (1) argument point from the AASB 138 perspective; and lastly
• a conclusion that includes a final opinion and valid reason(s).
Both argument points must be accompanied by supporting example(s) developed from your Part A (including
Draft Part A response and feedback) and Part B responses, evidence and/or academic reference(s)*#.
*Supporting examples from your Part A and Part B responses must explain in detail how and why they support the argument point.
#Your references should be from papers published in peer reviewed academic journals - not internet sources such as Wikipedia, not
ACCT2011 course materials such as the Semester 2 2023 slides and tutorial materials, and not textbook chapter references, such as
the Henderson et al textbook. Please look at the library resources for assignment link on Canvas under Group Assignment.
For the final completed group assignment total word limit is 1,500 words. This includes all footnotes,
images and intext references and excluding a reference list and any appendices.
For the Draft Part A response, guide is 450 words. This includes all footnotes, images and intext
references and excluding a reference list and any appendices.
4
3. Assessment Criteria
The group assignment represents 20% of your total mark for ACCT2011 and is compulsory. To provide students
with feedback, group assignments will be graded against the assessment criteria and rubric included in
Appendix 1 to this assignment. Note the group assignment will be marked out of 40 marks and converted to a
mark that contributes to 20% of your total mark for ACCT2011.
Academic Honesty
As a student of the University, you are responsible for taking part in your education in an honest and authentic
manner. It is, therefore, expected that you take extra care to ensure that there are no breaches of academic
honesty. All assignments will be manually and electronically checked for plagiarism (copying). Any perceived
breaches of academic honesty will be referred to the Office of Educational Integrity for further investigation and
penalised if verified. You can read more information on what plagiarism is and how to avoid plagiarism from the
University link: https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/academic-integrity/breaches.html
Students are reminded that all sources of support for the group assignment must be acknowledged and failure
to acknowledge such support may potentially breach the University’s academic honesty requirements. You
are not permitted to use artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT to generate any part of your responses.
Their undeclared use will be reported as a major breach of policy for investigation.
Each group member is expected to be involved in the preparation, drafting, proofing and checking of all aspects
of this group assignment including ensuring no breaches of academic honesty. Group members will be held
jointly responsible for the entire submission and awarded the same merit mark. In the event of a breach of
academic honesty the penalty could apply to all members irrespective of which member(s) caused the breach.
4. Group Assignment Plus Group Work Report
The group assignment is to be completed in groups of three or four students. Each student must be enrolled
in the same tutorial and signed-up to a group via Canvas.
If your group has less than 3 members or you do not sign-up to a group during the sign-up period you will be
placed in a group by teaching staff. Students who are placed in a group by teaching staff will receive an email.
Once you have signed up to a group you can see which group you are enrolled in by clicking the Groups link
on the Global Navigation menu in Canvas. The following link provides detailed instructions on how to do this:
https://community.canvaslms.com/t5/Student-Guide/How-do-I-view-my-Canvas-groups-as-a-student/ta-p/281.
In addition to submitting the group assignment, each group is required to prepare and submit a group work
report to demonstrate effective working within your group. Two reports must be submitted, a group assignment,
and a group work report.
The group work report is not included in the word limit for the group assignment.
Although this report is not graded or weighted in the marking, non-completion could result in a penalty
of 20% of the maximum marks attainable.
5
In the group work report:
1. Prepare an account of participation and contribution of each member of the team. It is assumed that all
members contribute equally and any non-trivial departure from equal contribution should be identified (See
example 1 below). In the event of significant, non-trivial departure from equal contribution, marks may be
deducted from under-contributing group members.
Example 1: An account of participation and contribution by team members
Name and
Student No.
Date
Joined
Brief description of role or
responsibility (if applicable)
% of
contribution
Explanation if not
equal
contribution
1) J Smith 25/M/0Y Took minutes of all meetings;
presented outline of key issues and
draft answer to Part A for group to
discuss. Final cold read of all parts
and word count check, submitted
group assignment and report to
Turnitin.
25%
2) A Ng 25/M/0Y Researched source material and
prepared draft answer for Part C.
Proof read Part A draft answer,
checked referencing.
25%
3) L Zhang 25/M/0Y Reviewed Part A answer. Prepared
alternative answer to Part C for group
meeting. Assisted with final review to
ensure group assignment was within
the word count.
25%
4) N Chand 25/M/0Y Reviewed Part B answer and
redrafted response to Part B for all
group members to discuss. Prepared
group report.
25%
2. Prepare a summary of meetings, showing when each meeting was held, who attended and what was
decided. Minutes should be kept for each meeting to enable your group to prepare the summary. If
meetings are being conducted by email circulation/instant messaging etc., the group should agree a time
(e.g. Thursday 8 p.m. – midnight) within which responses are considered as participation in the meeting
(See example 2).
Example 2: A summary of meetings
Time, date, and
meeting forum
Attendees Discussions and decisions Other comments
5 – 6 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Zoom meeting
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
N Chand
Agreed to read documents and bring
ideas to next meeting; agreed on who
will record minutes of each group
meeting.
12 – 1 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Group chat
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
Discussed approaches and develop
plan; JS and LZ to draft answer to Part
A. AN and NC to draft answer to Part B.
First drafts to be circulated by Thursday
for review/discussion at next meeting.
N Chand absent
(unexpected work
commitments).
Emailed ideas in
advance
6
5 – 6 p.m.
XX/XX/XX
Zoom meeting
J Smith
A Ng
L Zhang
N Chand
Comments on first draft; discussed all
suggested ideas for Part C and agreed
on ideas to develop. AN and NC to
prepare second draft to Part C and
circulate by Friday for review/discussion
next meeting.
3. The submitted work report must be signed by all group members (See example 3)
Example 3:
Student name SID Signature Date
J Smith XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
A Ng XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
L Zhang XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
N Chand XXXXXXXXX XX/XX/XX
In the event there are issues with group members not contributing to the group assignment, and reasonable
attempts have within the group to address these issues and have not been successful, then the coordinator
should be advised before the due date of 9 October 2023. Please note marks may be deducted for non-
contributing students.
5. Formatting requirements
• The group assignment and the group work report are to be presented in 12 point font (either Times
New Roman or Arial) and paragraphs formatted with 1 or 1.5 line spacing and with margins not less
than 2.5cm.
• You are required to save and submit the group assignment as a Microsoft word file, using the
cohort_tutorial number group number filename format. For example, if your group is enrolled in the
CC cohort, tutorial number 01 and allocated group 1 in this tutorial group, the filename for the group
assignment will be CC_T01_G01_GA.docx.
• The cohort, tutorial number, group number and SID of all group members must be included on the first
page of the group assignment.
• The cohort, tutorial number and group number must appear in the header section of every page for the
group assignment.
• Your group assignment should not exceed 1,500 words including all intext referencing, footnotes
and images and excluding the reference list and any appendices. The word count is based on the word
count information as presented in Turnitin based on the Microsoft word document submitted and this
will be checked. It is each group’s responsibility to ensure the submitted Microsoft word document
through Turnitin does not exceed 1,500 words in total. For guidance on words in excess of the word
limit, students are advised to refer to the Business School’s Policies at:
https://business.sydney.edu.au/students/policy
As a suggestion, you can use the following procedure to assist you to track the word count of the
Microsoft Word version of your assignment:
▪ Open your assignment Microsoft Word document.
▪ Use Ctrl+Shift+G to open the Word Count dialog box and insert a tick in the “Include textboxes,
footnotes and endnotes”. This function is also available under Review/Word Count.
7
• Your assignment must be appropriately and properly referenced using the American Psychological
Association referencing style (or APA as it is more commonly known). The University of Sydney library
provides helpful guidance on using APA style referencing. Please refer to the library resources for your
assignment module on Canvas. You can also refer https://libguides.library.usyd.edu.au/citation/apa7
6. Submission requirements
• The deadline for submission is 23.59pm (AEDT) on Monday 9 October 2023. Please ensure you
submit well before the deadline in case there are problems.
• The group assignment must be submitted in electronic form. No submissions will be accepted via email.
• One group member is to submit the assignment on behalf of the group. Consider multiple reworkings
to tighten and to check your group’s assignment satisfies the 1,500 Turnitin word count. Turnitin in
Canvas does not automatically email a digital receipt. Once you have successfully submitted your
group’s assignment, take a screenshot of the submission details including a date time stamp. We
strongly recommend that you save this screenshot as proof of your group’s submission. Should
submission problems arise, you should contact the University’s ICT Service Desk on 02 9351
2000 (option 2 for ICT) or email ict.support@sydney.edu.au
• If you submit after the due date, a late penalty of 5% per day, or part thereof, including weekends, will
be applied. Any group assignment submitted beyond the closing date of 23.59 (AEDT) on 18 October
2023, will result in a mark of zero.
• Under the Canvas ‘Assignment” link in the left toolbar on the Homepage you will find the link to the
Turnitin submission portals under the Group assignment section. One portal is called “Group
assignment” and the other “Group work report.” Before you submit work to each of these folders, please
ensure that you have saved the group assignment and the group work report under the correct filename
format (i.e. filename format cohort_tutorial number_GXX_GA.doc for the group assignment and
filename format cohort_tutorial number_GXX_WR.docx for the group work report). Please ensure your
group submits the correct document to the correct submission portal.
• For each of the two files to be submitted, there is only one (1) submission allowed for the group. If
multiple group members submit, only the first group member’s submission will be marked. The other
submissions will be discarded. Turnitin will allow a second submission for the group before the due
date, provided it is submitted by the same person who originally submitted it. In that case, the last
version submitted will be marked.
7. Support
• You can post questions relating to the requirements of the group assignment on the Group assignment
Discussion Forum on Canvas. This would ensure all students have access to the same information. It
is assumed each student will read the queries and comments in the Group assignment Discussion
Forum (Note: Unit of Study teaching staff will not answer individual questions and no questions
will be answered during tutorials and student drop in sessions).
• You can obtain guidance on working in groups from the University website:
https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/group-work.html For technical support during your submission,
contact the University’s Service Desk on 02 9351 2000 (option 2 for ICT) or ict.support@sydney.edu.au.
8
Appendix 1 Assessment Criteria
Part A (14 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Practitioners Review
Draft Part A
submission
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Reasonable attempt for 1 or less of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable draft attempt for 2 of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
1.5 marks
Good
Reasonable draft attempt for 3 of
the 4 Part A sub parts questions.
2.0 marks
Very good
Comprehensive draft attempt for all
Part A sub parts questions.
Part A (a) (i)
Final submission
3 marks 0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
One correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
Some correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s definition of an
asset.
All correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
Part A (a) (ii)
Final submission
3 marks 0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
One correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
Some correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of how the
research work and incremental
prototype costs may or may not
satisfy the AASB CF’s recognition
criteria.
All correct AASB CF paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included
9
Part A (b) (i)
Final submission
Part A (b) (ii)
Final submission
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation of how AASB
138 addresses problems identified
in Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how
AASB 138 addresses problems
identified in Part A (a)(i) and (ii)
answers.
One correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how AASB 138
addresses problems identified in
Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
Some correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very Good
Very good explanation of how AASB
138 addresses problems identified
in Part A (a)(i) and (ii) answers.
All correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited accounting treatment and
justification for the research work
and incremental prototype costs in
CG’s financial statements for the
year ended 30 June 2023.
Or
Not attempted.
No correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) or relevant background
information facts are included.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable accounting treatment
and justification for the research
work and incremental prototype
costs in CG’s financial statements
for the year ended 30 June 2023.
One correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information fact is
included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good accounting treatment and
justification for the research work
and incremental prototype costs in
CG’s financial statements for the
year ended 30 June 2023.
Some correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
3.0 marks
Very Good
Very good accounting treatment
and justification for the research
work and incremental prototype
costs in CG’s financial statements
for the year ended 30 June 2023.
All correct AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) and relevant
background information facts are
included.
10
Part B (6 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Part B (a)
AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards
requirements: Conflict
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how conflict
can exist between AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides
little insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the feedback on the
group’s initial understanding of how
conflict can exist between AASB CF
and AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
basic insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the feedback on the group’s initial
understanding of how conflict can
exist between AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how conflict
can exist between AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements.
Supporting example(s) provides a
very clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Part B (b)
AASB CF and AASB
accounting standards
requirements:
Collectively provide
useful guidance for
financial statement
preparers.
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how AASB
CF and AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides
little insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the feedback on the
group’s initial understanding of how
AASB CF and AASB accounting
standards requirements can
collectively provide useful guidance
for financial statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
basic insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the feedback on the group’s initial
understanding of how AASB CF and
AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the feedback on the group’s
initial understanding of how AASB
CF and AASB accounting standards
requirements can collectively
provide useful guidance for financial
statement preparers.
Supporting example(s) provides a
very clear insight into the group’s
reflective experiences.
Part C (20 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Part C
Valid discussion in a
persuasive essay that
demonstrates critical
thinking/reasoning and
is supported with
examples developed
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Poor introduction.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable introduction.
1.5 marks
Good
Good introduction.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good introduction.
5 marks 0 to 2.0 marks
Below expectations
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
11
from Part A and Part B
responses, evidence
and/or academic
reference(s)
Poor attempt to develop an
argument point the AASB CF
element definitions and recognition
criteria perspective.
Or
Not attempted.
Reasonable attempt to develop an
argument point the AASB CF
element definitions and recognition
criteria perspective.
Well-developed argument point
from the AASB CF element
definitions and recognition criteria
perspective.
Very well developed argument
point from the AASB CF element
definitions and recognition criteria
perspective.
5 marks 0 to 2.0 marks
Below expectations
Poor attempt to develop an
argument point from the AASB 138
perspective.
Or
Not attempted.
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable attempt to develop an
argument point from the AASB 138
perspective.
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
Well-developed argument point
from the AASB 138 perspective.
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
Very well-developed argument
point from the AASB 138
perspective.
4 marks 0 to 1.5 marks
Below expectations
Limited critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Little attempt to link supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
Or
Not attempted.
2.0 to 2.5 marks
Reasonable
Some critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Some attempt to link supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
3.0 to 3.5 marks
Good
Reasonable critical
thinking/reasoning is evident.
Linked to supporting examples
developed from Parts A and Part B
answers and/or other sources.
4.0 marks
Very good
Good critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Well explained links to supporting
examples developed from Parts A
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Unsatisfactory
Poor conclusion and invalid
reason(s) provided.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable conclusion and valid
reason(s) provided.
1.5 marks
Good
Good conclusion and valid reason(s)
provided.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good conclusion and highly
valid reason(s) provided.
Communication
Communication, style,
clarity of expression
including spelling,
grammar, punctuation
and proper referencing
using APA style
2 marks
0 to 0.5 mark
Unsatisfactory
Poorly written and incoherent, few
developed responses.
Poor or no use of APA referencing.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonably well written with some
coherent and developed responses.
Some correct application of APA
style and/or evidence of missing in-
text referencing and/or evidence of
indiscriminate or inappropriate use
of references.
1.5 marks
Good
Well written with coherent and
developed responses.
Mostly correct use of APA style and
reasonable application of both in-
text references and reference list.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very well written with coherent and
developed responses.
Mostly correct use of APA style and
reasonable application of both in-
text references and reference list.
