I want only assessment 3. I have less marks in last assignments. So please do it good. I need it with turnitin report.
Page | 1 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: Unit Code and Title: SBM1105 Strategic Project, Program and Portfolio Management Assessment Overview Assessment Task Weighting Due Length ULO Assessment 1: Quiz ( individual assessment) This assessment requires student to complete weekly invigilated online quizzes. 35% Week 2 to Week 10 25 minutes ULO-1, ULO-2, ULO-3, ULO-4 Assessment 2: Critical Analysis (Group assessment) This assessment requires students to critically analyse a business scenario to review portfolio and program management concept to discuss their application to organizational situation. Students also need to discuss on conflicting issues facing program manager in obtaining the desired outcomes (benefit realization) for a chosen business scenario. 30% Week 7 2,000 words ULO-1 ULO-2 Assessment 3: Case Study Analysis and Presentation (Individual Assessment) This assessment requires student to analyse a given case study pertaining to organizational Project Program and Portfolio Management (P3M) and to write response to the questions to demonstrate their critical understanding of the scenario. Student is also required to present strategic recommendation in a separate presentation session. 35% Week 11 2,500 words ULO-2 ULO-3 ULO-4 Assessment 1: Quiz Due date: Week 2 to Week 10 Group/individual: Individual Word count / Time provided: 25 minutes Weighting: 35% Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO-1, ULO-1, ULO-3, ULO-4 Assessment Details Page | 2 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: Assessment Details: The purpose of this assessment is to test students understanding of course content and concepts covered in weekly class lecture and activities. The quiz will be online and invigilated. For successful completion of the quiz, you are required to study the material provided, engage in the unit’s activities, and in the discussion forums. Marking Information: The quiz will be marked out of 100 and the average of all 9 quizzes will be considered to make a final mark which will be weighted 35% of the total unit mark. Assessment 2: Critical Analysis Due date: Week 7 Group/individual: Group Word count / Time provided: 2,000 words Weighting: 30% Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO-1, ULO-2 Assessment Details: This assessment requires students to critically analyse a business scenario to review portfolio and program management concept to discuss their application to organizational situation. Students also need to discuss on conflicting issues facing program manager in obtaining the desired outcomes (benefit realization) for a chosen business scenario. Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark Understanding of contemporary P2M concept (15 marks) Lack of understanding of the relevant theories, principles and approaches to project portfolio management. Evidence of basic understanding of the relevant theories, principles and approaches to project portfolio management Evidence of good understanding of the relevant theories, principles and approaches to project portfolio management. Evidence of very good understanding of the relevant theories, principles and approaches to project portfolio management Evidence of excellent understanding of the relevant theories, principles and approaches to project portfolio management. Critical Review of contemporary P2M concept (45 marks) No demonstration of critical thinking through analysis of contemporary P2M Demonstration of limited interpretation and critical thinking Good demonstration of critical thinking through analysis of Good supporting interpretation and arguments from literature and Excellent referencing of supporting literature in the Page | 3 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: concept; lack of evidence of sufficient use of literature and limited interpretation; no evidence of critical review through analysis of contemporary P2M concept; Use of some supporting literature with limited contemporary P2M concept; Evidence of good reference to supporting literature in reviewing concept in portfolio management. analysis of contemporary P2M concept with detail explanation demonstrating very good critical thinking skills; Evidence of strong reference to supporting literature in reviewing concept in portfolio management with significant synthesis of arguments and evidence of independent research interpretation, explanation and analysis of contemporary P2M concept. Analysis presented is rigours and enlightening indicating independent strongly argued coherent writing. Demonstration of excellent critical thinking skills.; evidence of excellent reference to supporting literature in reviewing concepts in portfolio management with significant synthesis of arguments. Review presented is rigours. Clarity of expression (20 marks) The writing is poor with no logical flow and many grammatical errors The writing is satisfactory exhibiting majority of grammatically correct sentences that are appropriately punctuated with some spelling or typing errors The writing is fluent and coherent with good presentation exhibiting grammatically correct sentences that are appropriately punctuated with minor spelling or typing error but may need to interpret The writing is fluent and coherent with very good presentation exhibiting grammatically correct sentences that are appropriately punctuated with no spelling or typing error The writing is fluent and coherent with excellent presentation exhibiting grammatically correct sentences that are appropriately punctuated with no minor spelling or typing error Academic writing and referencing (20 marks) Demonstration of a limited sense of purpose or theme and insufficient understanding g of the topic. Information is limited, unclear and the depth is not adequately developed. The idea is a simple restatement of the topic. The presentation and referencing show insufficient application of the appropriate Harvard style guide and presentation guideline. The writing does not go far enough in expanding key issues. The reader is left with questions. It requires further information to clarify main arguments. The presentation and referencing show some application of the appropriate Harvard style guide and presentation guideline The presentation and referencing mostly conforms to the appropriate Harvard style guide and presentation guideline The writing is used to support the main ideas and convince the reader of the argument who is left in no doubt of the purpose. The presentation and referencing conform to the appropriate Harvard style guide presentation guideline The writing perceives a sense of the wider context of the ides. The presentation and referencing are appropriate and consistent with the Harvard style guide and presentation guideline. Page | 4 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: Assessment 3: Case Study Analysis and Presentation Due date: Week 11 Group/individual: Individual Word count / Time provided: 2,500 words Weighting: 35% Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO-3, ULO-4 Assessment Details: This assignment requires student to analyse a given case study pertaining to organizational Project Program and Portfolio Management (P3M) and to write response to the questions to demonstrate their critically understanding of the scenario. The Case Study is available at Assessment 3_Case Study Analysis_LorryMerr Corporation (SBM1105o, T220) to download. Student is also required to present his/her strategic recommendation in a separate presentation session. Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 35% of the total unit mark and consist of two parts: Written and Presentation. Rubrics for written part (Report: Maximum marks possible is 67): Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark Case Study Analysis (60 %) The response pertaining to case study questions are missing or unclear or inaccurate and/or irrelevant. The response pertaining to case study questions are generally evident but are vague, incomplete and/or have some inaccuracies. The response pertaining to case study questions are answered and summarized accurately for most parts but some Informations are irrelevant and/or inaccurate The response pertaining to case study questions are well answered and summarized with minimal irrelevant or inaccurate information; arguments are supported by reference. The response pertaining to case study questions are very well answered supported by good summary; goes beyond expectation to support argument from extra readings which are well referenced. Strategy for P3M implementation is also discussed. Clarity of expression (20 %) The writing is poor with no logical flow and many grammatical errors. The writing is satisfactory