see attached files
ACT301 Assignment 1, Semester , 2021 Page 1 ACT301 Accounting Theory, Semester 1, 2021 Assignment 1 Marks - Weight 15% Due Date: Sunday 18th April Midnight (week 6) Instructions: ➢ This assignment consists of two questions. The due date and time is noted above. ➢ It is your responsibility to ensure you factor in any time difference between Darwin and other locations when submitting your assignment. ➢ Please upload your file using the submission point for the assignment on Learnline. ➢ Assignments submitted via e-mail will NOT be accepted. ➢ There is no need to complete a university cover sheet but DO please include your name, Student Number, and your tutor’s name. Ethics: ➢ This is not a group assignment; it is an individual assessment. Your answers will likely be different from other students. If portions of your assignment are copied or very close to copying, all parties will be penalised for copying. Copying would be considered plagiarism and CDU has restrict policies in this regard (please see https://www.cdu.edu.au/academic-integrity for details). https://www.cdu.edu.au/academic-integrity ACT301 Assignment 1, Semester , 2021 Page 2 Question 1(Marks =15) Let us assume that the government has become concerned that existing disclosure regulation tends to fixate on the financial performance of organisation but fails to address other aspects of corporate performance, including failure to provide information about corporate social and environmental impacts as well as about various initiatives and investments an organisation has undertaken to improve its social and environmental performance. As such, the government has decided to introduce legislation that will require business corporations to provide information about the social and environmental impacts of their operations, as well as the social and environmental initiatives undertaken by the corporations. Required: You are required to do the following: (a) Explain from a ’public interest theory perspective’ the rationale for the government introducing the legislation and how the government will assess whether any proposed legislation should actually be introduced. (marks = 5) (b) Predict from a ‘capture theory of perspective ‘ the type of constituents that will benefit in the long run from any social and environmental disclosure legislation. (Marks =5) ( c) Predict from an ‘economic interest group perspective’ whether any potential legislation to be introduced will lead to an increase in the accountability of corporations in relation to their social and environmental performance despite any implications that this increased corporate accountability might have for the financial success of large but heavily polluting organisations. (Marks =5) ACT301 Assignment 1, Semester , 2021 Page 3 Question 2 (Marks =20) Using the various theories that you have learnt so far, please explain in your own words: (a) What does ‘accountability’ mean? (Marks =5) (b) What aspects of corporate performance do you believe that a business organisation should be accountable for? (Marks =15) UTF-8''ACT301-Assessment-01-Rubric-S117.pdf S121 ACT301 ACCOUNTING THEORY ISSUES ASSESSMENT 1 RUBRIC, VALUE: 15% Task Case Study: Critical analysis of a given accounting case(s). Preparation Additional research in accounting literature. Criteria High Distinction > 85% Distinction >75%<85% credit="">60% <75% pass="">50% <60% fail="">60%><50% weighted="" grade="">12.75 >11.25 <12.75>9 <11.25>7.5 <9>9><7.5 analysis of the issues / questions (5%) insightful and thorough analysis of all the problems/questions. thorough analysis of most of the problems/questions. superficial analysis of some of the problems/ questions in the case. incomplete analysis of the problems/questions. lacks analysis of the problems/questions. knowledge (20%) ideas are clearly presented, interesting and show understandings of content and a new take on the subject. focussed and demonstrates depth and accuracy of understanding. ideas are clear and interesting and demonstrate some creativity. content is potentially useful in increasing understandings. ideas are not always clearly presented and rely heavily on lecture/textbook. content has limited value in increasing understandings. ideas lack clarity are not new or interesting and demonstrate little evidence of gaining new understandings. content has little or no value to the discipline. ideas are unclear and undeveloped. they are merely a regurgitation of article facts/others ideas and demonstrate no evidence of gaining new understandings. critical analysis (25%) excellent ability to summarise and interpret multi-sourced data, to appraise evidence, evaluate arguments and to formulate and good demonstration of the capacity to summarise and critically analyse information, formulate own conclusions. reasonable summary and analysis of information. able to draw warranted conclusions and generalisations. limited ability to interpret data, appraise evidence or evaluate arguments. inadequate conclusion. conclusion inconsistent with the no critical analysis of information, poor conclusions and no original thought. express very sound conclusions. argument built in the analysis. connections: issues and theories (25%) makes appropriate, insightful and powerful connections between the issue/problem and the theory. makes appropriate and insightful connections between the issue/ problem and the theory. makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between the issue/problem and the theory. makes little connection between the issue/problem and the theory. makes little or no connection between the issue/problem and the theory. accessing, summarising, and acknowledging resources (10%) evidence of broad, systematic and creative research. demonstrates skilful use of high quality, credible, relevant sources. selection of sources goes beyond the mainstream literature. an excellent summary of relevant data. wide range of sources accurately reference. evidence of controlled and systematic research. demonstrates selection of credible, relevant sources from relevant, quality literature. accurate summary of relevant data. good range of sources with minor errors in referencing. evidence of good research skills. demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. information is gathered from a good range of electronic and non- electronic sources but could be extended. summary of data could be improved. reasonable range of sources, some referencing errors. research conducted demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. information is gathered from a limited range of electronic and non- electronic sources some capacity to summarise data. limited resources with a number of errors in referencing. limited research skills demonstrated. very limited range of sources utilised. lack of demonstrated ability to summarise data. insufficient or poor sources with major errors in referencing. academic outstanding ability to good ability to reasonable ability to limited ability to limited understanding communication construct a sound and construct a sound and construct a sound and construct a sound and of accounting theory (10%) consistent argument. consistent argument. consistent argument. consistent argument. demonstrated. mainly concise writing style concise writing style reasonable writing writing style should be descriptive report totally lacking in with little tautology or style. improved. verbosity of any form. repetition. no should reduce the mark-earning content lack of assignment colloquialisms. incidents of padding reduced due to padding focused content, with tautology and with tautology and significant verbiage. repetition. may have repetition. uses tendency to use colloquialisms. colloquialisms. overview of well-constructed well written and reasonably written and not consistently simplistic, tends to english skills assignment: presented assignment: presented: some logically structured: narrate or merely structure appropriate, clear, and distinct units of thought awkward transitions; narrates; digresses from summarise; illogical logic smooth transitions; in paragraphs; clear some brief, weakly one topic to another; arrangement of ideas mechanics arrangement of organisational elements transitions between developed, coherent, unified or undeveloped paragraphs; awkward use of words, numerous errors in style some major grammatical or (5%) seems particularly apt. uses sophisticated and logically arranged paragraphs; a few arrangement may not appear entirely natural; and presentation including spelling proofreading errors; language frequently sentences effectively; mechanical difficulties contains extraneous punctuation and weakened by clichés, usually chooses words or stylistic problems; information; more grammar. colloquialisms, aptly; observes may make occasional frequent wordiness; repeated inexact word professional problematic word unclear or awkward choices. conventions of written choices or syntax sentences; imprecise english and report errors; a few spellings or use of words or over- format; free of spelling, punctuation errors or a reliance on passive grammatical, cliché; uses appropriate voice; some distracting punctuation and typing report format. grammatical errors; errors. some spelling, punctuation and typing errors. analysis="" of="" the="" issues="" questions="" (5%)="" insightful="" and="" thorough="" analysis="" of="" all="" the="" problems/questions.="" thorough="" analysis="" of="" most="" of="" the="" problems/questions.="" superficial="" analysis="" of="" some="" of="" the="" problems/="" questions="" in="" the="" case.="" incomplete="" analysis="" of="" the="" problems/questions.="" lacks="" analysis="" of="" the="" problems/questions.="" knowledge="" (20%)="" ideas="" are="" clearly="" presented,="" interesting="" and="" show="" understandings="" of="" content="" and="" a="" new="" take="" on="" the="" subject.="" focussed="" and="" demonstrates="" depth="" and="" accuracy="" of="" understanding.="" ideas="" are="" clear="" and="" interesting="" and="" demonstrate="" some="" creativity.="" content="" is="" potentially="" useful="" in="" increasing="" understandings.="" ideas="" are="" not="" always="" clearly="" presented="" and="" rely="" heavily="" on="" lecture/textbook.="" content="" has="" limited="" value="" in="" increasing="" understandings.="" ideas="" lack="" clarity="" are="" not="" new="" or="" interesting="" and="" demonstrate="" little="" evidence="" of="" gaining="" new="" understandings.="" content="" has="" little="" or="" no="" value="" to="" the="" discipline.="" ideas="" are="" unclear="" and="" undeveloped.="" they="" are="" merely="" a="" regurgitation="" of="" article="" facts/others="" ideas="" and="" demonstrate="" no="" evidence="" of="" gaining="" new="" understandings.="" critical="" analysis="" (25%)="" excellent="" ability="" to="" summarise="" and="" interpret="" multi-sourced="" data,="" to="" appraise="" evidence,="" evaluate="" arguments="" and="" to="" formulate="" and="" good="" demonstration="" of="" the="" capacity="" to="" summarise="" and="" critically="" analyse="" information,="" formulate="" own="" conclusions.="" reasonable="" summary="" and="" analysis="" of="" information.="" able="" to="" draw="" warranted="" conclusions="" and="" generalisations.="" limited="" ability="" to="" interpret="" data,="" appraise="" evidence="" or="" evaluate="" arguments.="" inadequate="" conclusion.="" conclusion="" inconsistent="" with="" the="" no="" critical="" analysis="" of="" information,="" poor="" conclusions="" and="" no="" original="" thought.="" express="" very="" sound="" conclusions.="" argument="" built="" in="" the="" analysis.="" connections:="" issues="" and="" theories="" (25%)="" makes="" appropriate,="" insightful="" and="" powerful="" connections="" between="" the="" issue/problem="" and="" the="" theory.="" makes="" appropriate="" and="" insightful="" connections="" between="" the="" issue/="" problem="" and="" the="" theory.="" makes="" appropriate="" but="" somewhat="" vague="" connections="" between="" the="" issue/problem="" and="" the="" theory.="" makes="" little="" connection="" between="" the="" issue/problem="" and="" the="" theory.="" makes="" little="" or="" no="" connection="" between="" the="" issue/problem="" and="" the="" theory.="" accessing,="" summarising,="" and="" acknowledging="" resources="" (10%)="" evidence="" of="" broad,="" systematic="" and="" creative="" research.="" demonstrates="" skilful="" use="" of="" high="" quality,="" credible,="" relevant="" sources.="" selection="" of="" sources="" goes="" beyond="" the="" mainstream="" literature.="" an="" excellent="" summary="" of="" relevant="" data.="" wide="" range="" of="" sources="" accurately="" reference.="" evidence="" of="" controlled="" and="" systematic="" research.="" demonstrates="" selection="" of="" credible,="" relevant="" sources="" from="" relevant,="" quality="" literature.="" accurate="" summary="" of="" relevant="" data.="" good="" range="" of="" sources="" with="" minor="" errors="" in="" referencing.="" evidence="" of="" good="" research="" skills.="" demonstrates="" an="" attempt="" to="" use="" credible="" and/or="" relevant="" sources.="" information="" is="" gathered="" from="" a="" good="" range="" of="" electronic="" and="" non-="" electronic="" sources="" but="" could="" be="" extended.="" summary="" of="" data="" could="" be="" improved.="" reasonable="" range="" of="" sources,="" some="" referencing="" errors.="" research="" conducted="" demonstrates="" an="" attempt="" to="" use="" credible="" and/or="" relevant="" sources.="" information="" is="" gathered="" from="" a="" limited="" range="" of="" electronic="" and="" non-="" electronic="" sources="" some="" capacity="" to="" summarise="" data.="" limited="" resources="" with="" a="" number="" of="" errors="" in="" referencing.="" limited="" research="" skills="" demonstrated.="" very="" limited="" range="" of="" sources="" utilised.="" lack="" of="" demonstrated="" ability="" to="" summarise="" data.="" insufficient="" or="" poor="" sources="" with="" major="" errors="" in="" referencing.="" academic="" outstanding="" ability="" to="" good="" ability="" to="" reasonable="" ability="" to="" limited="" ability="" to="" limited="" understanding="" communication="" construct="" a="" sound="" and="" construct="" a="" sound="" and="" construct="" a="" sound="" and="" construct="" a="" sound="" and="" of="" accounting="" theory="" (10%)="" consistent="" argument.="" consistent="" argument.="" consistent="" argument.="" consistent="" argument.="" demonstrated.="" mainly="" concise="" writing="" style="" concise="" writing="" style="" reasonable="" writing="" writing="" style="" should="" be="" descriptive="" report="" totally="" lacking="" in="" with="" little="" tautology="" or="" style.="" improved.="" verbosity="" of="" any="" form.="" repetition.="" no="" should="" reduce="" the="" mark-earning="" content="" lack="" of="" assignment="" colloquialisms.="" incidents="" of="" padding="" reduced="" due="" to="" padding="" focused="" content,="" with="" tautology="" and="" with="" tautology="" and="" significant="" verbiage.="" repetition.="" may="" have="" repetition.="" uses="" tendency="" to="" use="" colloquialisms.="" colloquialisms.="" overview="" of="" well-constructed="" well="" written="" and="" reasonably="" written="" and="" not="" consistently="" simplistic,="" tends="" to="" english="" skills="" assignment:="" presented="" assignment:="" presented:="" some="" logically="" structured:="" narrate="" or="" merely="" structure="" appropriate,="" clear,="" and="" distinct="" units="" of="" thought="" awkward="" transitions;="" narrates;="" digresses="" from="" summarise;="" illogical="" logic="" smooth="" transitions;="" in="" paragraphs;="" clear="" some="" brief,="" weakly="" one="" topic="" to="" another;="" arrangement="" of="" ideas="" mechanics="" arrangement="" of="" organisational="" elements="" transitions="" between="" developed,="" coherent,="" unified="" or="" undeveloped="" paragraphs;="" awkward="" use="" of="" words,="" numerous="" errors="" in="" style="" some="" major="" grammatical="" or="" (5%)="" seems="" particularly="" apt.="" uses="" sophisticated="" and="" logically="" arranged="" paragraphs;="" a="" few="" arrangement="" may="" not="" appear="" entirely="" natural;="" and="" presentation="" including="" spelling="" proofreading="" errors;="" language="" frequently="" sentences="" effectively;="" mechanical="" difficulties="" contains="" extraneous="" punctuation="" and="" weakened="" by="" clichés,="" usually="" chooses="" words="" or="" stylistic="" problems;="" information;="" more="" grammar.="" colloquialisms,="" aptly;="" observes="" may="" make="" occasional="" frequent="" wordiness;="" repeated="" inexact="" word="" professional="" problematic="" word="" unclear="" or="" awkward="" choices.="" conventions="" of="" written="" choices="" or="" syntax="" sentences;="" imprecise="" english="" and="" report="" errors;="" a="" few="" spellings="" or="" use="" of="" words="" or="" over-="" format;="" free="" of="" spelling,="" punctuation="" errors="" or="" a="" reliance="" on="" passive="" grammatical,="" cliché;="" uses="" appropriate="" voice;="" some="" distracting="" punctuation="" and="" typing="" report="" format.="" grammatical="" errors;="" errors.="" some="" spelling,="" punctuation="" and="" typing="">7.5 analysis of the issues / questions (5%) insightful and thorough analysis of all the problems/questions. thorough analysis of most of the problems/questions. superficial analysis of some of the problems/ questions in the case. incomplete analysis of the problems/questions. lacks analysis of the problems/questions. knowledge (20%) ideas are clearly presented, interesting and show understandings of content and a new take on the subject. focussed and demonstrates depth and accuracy of understanding. ideas are clear and interesting and demonstrate some creativity. content is potentially useful in increasing understandings. ideas are not always clearly presented and rely heavily on lecture/textbook. content has limited value in increasing understandings. ideas lack clarity are not new or interesting and demonstrate little evidence of gaining new understandings. content has little or no value to the discipline. ideas are unclear and undeveloped. they are merely a regurgitation of article facts/others ideas and demonstrate no evidence of gaining new understandings. critical analysis (25%) excellent ability to summarise and interpret multi-sourced data, to appraise evidence, evaluate arguments and to formulate and good demonstration of the capacity to summarise and critically analyse information, formulate own conclusions. reasonable summary and analysis of information. able to draw warranted conclusions and generalisations. limited ability to interpret data, appraise evidence or evaluate arguments. inadequate conclusion. conclusion inconsistent with the no critical analysis of information, poor conclusions and no original thought. express very sound conclusions. argument built in the analysis. connections: issues and theories (25%) makes appropriate, insightful and powerful connections between the issue/problem and the theory. makes appropriate and insightful connections between the issue/ problem and the theory. makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between the issue/problem and the theory. makes little connection between the issue/problem and the theory. makes little or no connection between the issue/problem and the theory. accessing, summarising, and acknowledging resources (10%) evidence of broad, systematic and creative research. demonstrates skilful use of high quality, credible, relevant sources. selection of sources goes beyond the mainstream literature. an excellent summary of relevant data. wide range of sources accurately reference. evidence of controlled and systematic research. demonstrates selection of credible, relevant sources from relevant, quality literature. accurate summary of relevant data. good range of sources with minor errors in referencing. evidence of good research skills. demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. information is gathered from a good range of electronic and non- electronic sources but could be extended. summary of data could be improved. reasonable range of sources, some referencing errors. research conducted demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. information is gathered from a limited range of electronic and non- electronic sources some capacity to summarise data. limited resources with a number of errors in referencing. limited research skills demonstrated. very limited range of sources utilised. lack of demonstrated ability to summarise data. insufficient or poor sources with major errors in referencing. academic outstanding ability to good ability to reasonable ability to limited ability to limited understanding communication construct a sound and construct a sound and construct a sound and construct a sound and of accounting theory (10%) consistent argument. consistent argument. consistent argument. consistent argument. demonstrated. mainly concise writing style concise writing style reasonable writing writing style should be descriptive report totally lacking in with little tautology or style. improved. verbosity of any form. repetition. no should reduce the mark-earning content lack of assignment colloquialisms. incidents of padding reduced due to padding focused content, with tautology and with tautology and significant verbiage. repetition. may have repetition. uses tendency to use colloquialisms. colloquialisms. overview of well-constructed well written and reasonably written and not consistently simplistic, tends to english skills assignment: presented assignment: presented: some logically structured: narrate or merely structure appropriate, clear, and distinct units of thought awkward transitions; narrates; digresses from summarise; illogical logic smooth transitions; in paragraphs; clear some brief, weakly one topic to another; arrangement of ideas mechanics arrangement of organisational elements transitions between developed, coherent, unified or undeveloped paragraphs; awkward use of words, numerous errors in style some major grammatical or (5%) seems particularly apt. uses sophisticated and logically arranged paragraphs; a few arrangement may not appear entirely natural; and presentation including spelling proofreading errors; language frequently sentences effectively; mechanical difficulties contains extraneous punctuation and weakened by clichés, usually chooses words or stylistic problems; information; more grammar. colloquialisms, aptly; observes may make occasional frequent wordiness; repeated inexact word professional problematic word unclear or awkward choices. conventions of written choices or syntax sentences; imprecise english and report errors; a few spellings or use of words or over- format; free of spelling, punctuation errors or a reliance on passive grammatical, cliché; uses appropriate voice; some distracting punctuation and typing report format. grammatical errors; errors. some spelling, punctuation and typing errors.>11.25>12.75>50%>75%>85%>