ACCT2011
Semester 1 2023
Group Assignment Instructions and Guidelines
Completed Group Assignment: Due 23:59 pm (AEST) Monday 1 May 2023
Draft Part A Response: Due 23:59 pm (AEDT) Friday 31 March 2023
A panel of practitioners from HLB Mann Judd 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 Practitioner Review Part A response submission. This mark will
be awarded when the completed group assignment is graded.
1. Background Information for Group Assignment
Smartkids Ltd is one of Australia’s largest providers of before school, after school and vacation care services.
It rents facilities provided by schools and currently provides services in 650 venues located at schools in
Australia. Smartkids Ltd is a listed company and its shares are actively traded on the Australian Securities
Exchange. Smartkids Ltd uses a 30 June year-end balance date and adopts the AASB Conceptual Framework
AASB 13 Fair Value Measurement, AASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment and AASB 138 Intangible Assets.
On 1 April 2023, Smartkids Ltd expanded its operations into the music education sector by establishing a music
school that provides to children of all ages music lessons in a wide range of music instruments. During the
financial year ended 30 June 2023, Smartkids Ltd purchased the following assets for the music school:
Commercial building for $6,000,000: This building will be used to provide private music lessons to children
and is included with other buildings recognised in the buildings class of assets in Smartkids Ltd’s financial
statements. The AASB 116 revaluation model had been adopted for this class of assets.
‘Music Grammar’ brand name for $500,000: Music Grammar is a well-known brand. Smartkids Ltd expects
the Music Grammar brand name will indefinitely attract students to their business. The Music Grammar brand
name will be a new class of intangible assets.
While Smartkids Ltd has adopted the revaluation model for the building class of assets, it is uncertain about
measurement of the Music Grammar brand name after recognition. The Chief Finance Officer (CFO) would like
to use the revaluation model for both the building and brand name classes of assets. You are an experienced
member of Smartkids Ltd’s Corporate Reporting Team and have been approached by the CFO in regards to
the following questions.
2
2. Assignment Questions
Responses to the following questions will be considered on their ability to present relevant information and
develop well supported arguments. Do not submit a series of dot points. Please note Part C requires your group
to prepare a persuasive extended essay response. 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 assessment. Part A, Part B and Part C responses must be in your own words.
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 Practitioner Review Part A submission)
(a) From a financial statement user perspective, explain why the CFO would prefer to use the revaluation
model as an after recognition measurement basis for the building and brand name classes of assets.
(b) From a financial reporting perspective, explain:
(i) why Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB 116 revaluation model for the building class of
assets: and
(ii) whether Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB 138 revaluation model for the brand name class
of assets.
Include technical references and any other necessary information that would assist with your
explanations.
(c) Explain:
(i) the AASB 13 fair value hierarchy approach and how it could assist with the determination of
possible fair value amounts for the commercial building and Music Grammar brand name
assets; and
(ii) how the use of the AASB 13 fair value hierarchy approach could impact or change fair value
disclosures presented in Smartkids Ltd’s financial statements. Include one (1) detailed fair
value disclosure example for either the commercial building or Music Grammar brand name
to support this explanation.
Part B (6 marks)
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 Assignments/Group assignment.
Using the Relating criteria from the 5Rs Framework for Reflection and your group’s original words, reflect on
your draft Part A Practitioner Review Feedback.
Describe how this feedback impacted your group’s understanding of:
(a) accounting standard requirements; and
(b) the importance of disclosure information.
Include supporting example(s) in your Part B (a) and Part B (b) responses that show your group’s reflective
experiences.
3
Part C (20 marks)
Your Part C response is to be presented in an essay format.
“To present relevant financial statement information, it is important to have consistent requirements in AASB
accounting standards.”
Discuss this statement. Your persuasive response should include:
• an introduction;
• one (1) for argument point supporting this statement;
• one (1) alternative argument point that refutes this statement; and lastly
• a conclusion that includes a final opinion and valid reason(s).
Both argument points are to 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 1 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 the Group Assignment Canvas page for
guidance.
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.
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.
You are expected to use your own original words rather than copying and pasting information from
sources.
4
Academic Integrity
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-dishonesty.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, that the
trustworthiness and reliability of the sources of information should be considered. 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/docs/DOC-10661-421255565.
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.
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
5
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
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
6
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 1 May 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 and the group work report as Microsoft word
files, using the cohort_tutorial number_GXX filename format. For example, if your group is enrolled
in the CC cohort, tutorial number 01 and allocated group number 03 in this tutorial group, the filename
for the group assignment will be CC_T01_G03_assignment.doc, and for the group work report the
filename will be CC_T01_G03_workreport.doc.
• The cohort, tutorial number, group number and SID of all group members must be included on the first
page of the group assignment and the group work report.
• The cohort, tutorial number and group number must appear in the header section of every page for both
the group assignment and the group work report.
• 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 23:59 pm (AEST) on Monday 1 May 2023. Please ensure you submit
well before the deadline in case there are problems.
• Both the group assignment and the group work report 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 23:59pm (AEST) on 10 May
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_group assignment.doc for the
group assignment and filename format cohort_tutorial number_GXX_workreport.doc 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).
8
• 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.
9
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 of the 3
Part A questions.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable draft attempt for 2 of
the 3 Part A questions.
1.5 marks
Good
Reasonable draft attempt for all 3
Part A questions.
2.0 marks
Very good
Comprehensive draft attempt for all
3 Part A questions.
Part A (a)
Final submission
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Limited or poor explanation of from
a financial statement user
perspective, why CFO would prefer
to use the revaluation model as an
after recognition measurement
basis for the building and brand
name classes of assets.
Or
Not attempted.
1.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of from a
financial statement user
perspective, why CFO would prefer
to use the revaluation model as an
after recognition measurement
basis for the building and brand
name classes of assets.
1.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of from a financial
statement user perspective, why
CFO would prefer to use the
revaluation model as an after
recognition measurement basis for
the building and brand name classes
of assets.
2.0 marks
Very Good
Very good explanation of from a
financial statement user
perspective, why CFO would prefer
to use the revaluation model as an
after recognition measurement
basis for the building and brand
name classes of assets.
Part A (b) (i)
Final submission
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation for why
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
116 revaluation model for the
building class of assets.
.
Or
Not attempted.
No or incorrect AASB 116 paragraph
reference(s) included.
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation for why
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
116 revaluation model for the
building class of assets.
One correct and relevant AASB 116
paragraph reference(s) included.
1.5 marks
Good
Good explanation for why Smartkids
Ltd could adopt the AASB 116
revaluation model for the building
class of assets.
Some correct and relevant AASB 116
paragraph reference(s) included.
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation for why
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
116 revaluation model for the
building class of assets.
All correct and relevant AASB 116
paragraph reference(s) included.
Part A (b) (ii)
Final submission
2 marks 0 to 0.5 mark
Below expectations
Limited explanation for whether
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
1.0 mark
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation for whether
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
1.5 marks
Good
Good explanation for whether
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
2.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation for whether
Smartkids Ltd could adopt the AASB
10
138 revaluation model for the brand
name class of assets.
.
Or
Not attempted.
No or incorrect AASB 138 paragraph
reference(s) included.
138 revaluation model for the brand
name class of assets.
One correct and relevant AASB 138
paragraph reference(s) included.
138 revaluation model for the brand
name class of assets.
Some correct and relevant AASB 138
paragraph reference(s) included.
138 revaluation model for the brand
name class of assets.
All correct and relevant AASB 138
paragraph reference(s) included.
Part A (c) (i)
Final submission
Part A (c) (ii)
Final submission
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited or poor explanation of the
AASB 13 fair value hierarchy
approach and how it could assist
with the determination of possible
fair value amounts for the
commercial building and Music
Grammar brand name assets.
No or incorrect AASB 13 paragraph
reference(s) included.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of the AASB
13 fair value hierarchy approach and
how it could assist with the
determination of possible fair value
amounts for the commercial
building and Music Grammar brand
name assets.
One correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of the AASB 13
fair value hierarchy approach and
how it could assist with the
determination of possible fair value
amounts for the commercial
building and Music Grammar brand
name assets.
Some correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of the AASB
13 fair value hierarchy approach and
how it could assist with the
determination of possible fair value
amounts for the commercial
building and Music Grammar brand
name assets.
All correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
3 marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited or poor explanation of how
the use of the AASB 13 fair value
hierarchy approach could impact or
change fair value disclosures
presented in Smartkids Ltd’s
financial statements.
No or incorrect AASB 13 paragraph
reference(s) included.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable explanation of how the
use of the AASB 13 fair value
hierarchy approach could impact or
change fair value disclosures
presented in Smartkids Ltd’s
financial statements.
One correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
2.5 marks
Good
Good explanation of how the use of
the AASB 13 fair value hierarchy
approach could impact or change
fair value disclosures presented in
Smartkids Ltd’s financial statements.
Some correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good explanation of how the
use of the AASB 13 fair value
hierarchy approach could impact or
change fair value disclosures
presented in Smartkids Ltd’s
financial statements.
All correct and relevant AASB 13
paragraph reference(s) included.
11
Part B (6 marks in total)
Criteria Marks Scale
Part B (a)
Accounting standard
requirements
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the practitioner feedback on
the group’s understanding of
accounting standard requirements.
Supporting example(s) provide little
insight into the group’s relevant
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the practitioner
feedback on the group’s
understanding of accounting
standard requirements.
Supporting example(s) provide a
basic insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the practitioner feedback on the
group’s understanding of
accounting standard requirements.
Supporting example(s) provide a
clear insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the practitioner feedback on
the group’s understanding of
accounting standard requirements.
Supporting example(s) provide a
very clear insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
Part B (b)
The importance of
disclosure information
3
marks
0 to 1.0 mark
Below expectations
Limited description of the impact
from the practitioner feedback on
the group’s understanding of the
importance of disclosure
information.
Supporting example(s) provide little
insight into the group’s relevant
reflective experiences.
Or
Not attempted.
1.5 to 2.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable description of the
impact from the practitioner
feedback on the group’s
understanding of the importance of
disclosure information.
Supporting example(s) provide a
basic insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
2.5 marks
Good
Good description of the impact from
the practitioner feedback on the
group’s understanding of the
importance of disclosure
information.
Supporting example(s) provide a
clear insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
3.0 marks
Very good
Very good description of the impact
from the practitioner feedback on
the group’s understanding of the
importance of disclosure
information.
Supporting example(s) provide a
very clear insight into the group’s
relevant reflective experiences.
12
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
from Part A and Part B
responses, evidence
and/or academic
reference(s)
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
Poor attempt to develop an
argument point that supports the
statement “To present relevant
financial statement information, it
is important to have consistent
requirements in AASB accounting
standards.”
Or
Not attempted.
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable attempt to develop an
argument point that supports the
statement “To present relevant
financial statement information, it
is important to have consistent
requirements in AASB accounting
standards.”
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
Well developed argument point
that supports the statement “To
present relevant financial statement
information, it is important to have
consistent requirements in AASB
accounting standards.”
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
Very well developed argument
point that supports the statement
“To present relevant financial
statement information, it is
important to have consistent
requirements in AASB accounting
standards.”
5 marks 0 to 2.0 marks
Below expectations
Poor attempt to develop an
alternative argument point that
refutes the statement “To present
relevant financial statement
information, it is important to have
consistent requirements in AASB
accounting standards.”
Or
Not attempted.
2.5 to 3.0 marks
Reasonable
Reasonable attempt to develop an
alternative argument point that
refutes the statement “To present
relevant financial statement
information, it is important to have
consistent requirements in AASB
accounting standards.”
3.5 to 4.0 marks
Good
Well-developed alternative
argument point that refutes the
statement “To present relevant
financial statement information, it
is important to have consistent
requirements in AASB accounting
standards.”
4.5 to 5.0 marks
Very good
Very well-developed alternative
argument point that refutes the
statement “To present relevant
financial statement information, it
is important to have consistent
requirements in AASB accounting
standards.”
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
2.0 to 2.5 marks
Reasonable
Some critical thinking/reasoning is
evident.
Some attempt to link supporting
examples developed from Parts A
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
13
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
Or
Not attempted.
and Part B answers and/or other
sources.
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.