Reflection of what learned in the unitPlease consider the marking criteria
I'll upload all the project documents and if you want to check the website you can use www.vcipark.com as this is the project
HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T1 2020 Unit Code HS3052 Unit Title Capstone Project (Design and Implementation) Assessment Type Individual Assignment Assessment Title Individual Assignment - 5: Journal and Self Reflection Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping) Each member should briefly summarize key aspects learned from this unit and how this knowledge can help you with your future career. 1. Apply project planning, technical skills and methods to develop and implement an appropriate solution 2. Apply and evaluate project management skills and concepts in problem solving 3. Present the knowledge, skills and ideas acquired through results and discussion with different audience levels 4. Critically analyse and synthesise complex information into a business proposal 5. Communicate using effective oral and written communication tools to a diverse range of stakeholders 6. Demonstrate ability to be an effective, autonomous team member or team leader and to be creative and innovative 7. Review and describe the major privacy, legal, ethical and societal issues with respect to managing digital information and information systems 8. Understand the ICT profession and professional expectations in the researched topic Weight 15% of the total assessments Total Marks 15 Word limit 1000 - 1500 Due Date Week 12 Friday 5pm. Submission Guidelines All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page. The assignment must be in MS Word format, no spacing, 11-pt Times New Roman font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard style. Page 2 of 2 Assignment 5 Specifications Background: This assignment is intended to extend and explore students’ ideas about requirement analysis and modelling, project management and teamwork, whilst simultaneously determining the current limits of students’ knowledge, skills and understanding. Some of the topic areas, which may give you some ideas as to what you could discuss over the life of the assignment in your reflection. Understanding, establishing and defining the problem or opportunity within the organisational context regarding information system analysis, design and development; System Requirements (how to identify functional and non-functional requirements; why it is important); Importance of requirement analysis and modelling for system analysis, design and development project in an organization; Modelling skills and techniques, such as structured, OO and Agile approaches, how to select and when should use them. Investigating requirements, what should be considered when selecting right techniques? Recommendations and consideration of how the organisation will be affected by any proposed system development solutions. System development approaches; How to select a correct methodology? Discuss a wide range of issues related to the project and teamwork, such as: Briefly reflect upon your own experience of participating in the group until now. Did it help you? Was it worth the effort? How could it be made to work better for you? What went right or wrong? If asked to do it again, would you change anything to make the group work more enjoyable and of benefit to your study? Briefly discuss how, if you were a member of a discussion and support group, what strategies and methods you think you could use to minimise or overcome misunderstandings that might occur within your group, as a result of language or cultural differences. Briefly discuss how, if you were a member of a discussion and support group, what strategies and methods you think are more useful to overcome difficulties that might occur within your group because one or more of your group members is not participating in an appropriate manner, for example, insufficient work or inappropriate behaviour. Briefly describe and discuss one topic, issue or question where you think that your knowledge and understanding was clarified, expanded or improved by contributions from other members of your group. Briefly describe and discuss one topic, issue or question where you think you made a significant contribution to the knowledge and understanding of other members of your group. Expectation Your assessor expects that you will seek guidance on any uncertainties you may have in completing this assessment to the best of your ability. It is expected that you embrace the opportunity to develop a new skill and explore a creative way of representing your experience in studying this unit and working with group members. It is also expected that all work submitted has already been edited for spelling, grammar, clarity and conciseness. Marking criteria Detailed marking rubric is available on Bb. HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM HS3052 Journal & Self Reflection Marking Criteria Rubric Group Member Name: Member A____________________________ Member C____________________________ Member B____________________________ Member D____________________________ Criteria High Distinction (80-100%) Distinction (70-79%) Credit (60-69%) Pass (50-59%) Fail (<50%) the extent to which the journal summarises your personal journey of studying this unit. you should briefly summarize one or more key things that you learned from this unit and how this knowledge can help you with your future career. weighting: 5 marks the journal very clearly summarises the personal learning experiences for a specific topic covered in the unit. it is concise, clear, easy to follow and understand, engaging and interesting to read. the amount of detail provided is excellent and within the word limit. you have clearly demonstrated evidence of self-reflection. the journal clearly summarises the key points covered in the topic selected. the amount of detail provided is consistent with a short journal. it is not an over- supply of information that results in a rushed, too detailed journal, but can be more concise and engaging. the self-reflection can be more concise, clear and interesting to read. the journal mostly summarises the topic selected. for the most part, the amount of detail provided is consistent with a short journal. however, not so clear and lacks engagement and interest. you have demonstrated evidence of self-reflection but need more relevant details and clarity. at times the discussion of the topic selected is unclear. offers too much information and suffers from repetitiveness. also, at times, not much relevant information provided. the journal needs to be clearer and more interesting. lack of self- reflection on the topic selected. the journal is not clear on the topic selected. it lack’s clarity, sometimes repetitive. the statements or arguments made are unclear, didn’t focus on the key points. too much information is provided, leaving the viewer intellectually confused and exhausted. the journal is also very boring to read. there is a very little to no evidence of self-reflection. holmes institute faculty of higher education undergraduate program evidence of self- reflection on group work and experience weighting: 4 marks the journal very clearly demonstrates evidence of self-reflection on group work and why project and teamwork is important. what you did well, or not well and how to improve in the future. discussion is clear, easy to follow and understand, also interesting to read. the journal clearly demonstrates evidence of self- reflection of group work and the importance of collaboration. can be more concise, clear and interesting. the journal mostly covers the evidence of self- reflection of group work and the importance of collaboration but it need to work on concise and clarity. the journal is unclear at times in how it demonstrates evidence of self-reflection on the group work and collaboration. sometimes too much or not enough information and areas of repetition, and not easy to follow and understand. journal is not so engaging and does not hold audience attention. there is very little to no evidence of self-reflection on the group work and collaborate experiences. it is confusing, difficulty to understand, and boring to read. the organisation of the journal. weighting: 3 marks the journal was well organised. the ideas flowed in a manner that was easily followed and understood. the material transitioned seamlessly from one concept/theme to another. the journal was well organised. the ideas flowed in a manner that was easily followed and understood. there were a few transitions that were not entirely seamless. the journal was fairly well organised and the ideas flowed well. there were quite a few transitions that were a little disjointed. the journal lacked organisation and was not easy to follow. ideas were put together in a way that made comprehension difficult. the journal was unorganised and difficult to follow. there did not appear to be a logical approach to sequencing the ideas. holmes institute faculty of higher education undergraduate program integration of theory concepts. weighting: 3 marks the journal incorporates relevant elements of hs3051 theory, which is correctly referenced and supports the discussion within the journal to a very high standard. this includes correct and consistent harvard referencing where appropriate. the="" extent="" to="" which="" the="" journal="" summarises="" your="" personal="" journey="" of="" studying="" this="" unit.="" you="" should="" briefly="" summarize="" one="" or="" more="" key="" things="" that="" you="" learned="" from="" this="" unit="" and="" how="" this="" knowledge="" can="" help="" you="" with="" your="" future="" career.="" weighting:="" 5="" marks="" the="" journal="" very="" clearly="" summarises="" the="" personal="" learning="" experiences="" for="" a="" specific="" topic="" covered="" in="" the="" unit.="" it="" is="" concise,="" clear,="" easy="" to="" follow="" and="" understand,="" engaging="" and="" interesting="" to="" read.="" the="" amount="" of="" detail="" provided="" is="" excellent="" and="" within="" the="" word="" limit.="" you="" have="" clearly="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection.="" the="" journal="" clearly="" summarises="" the="" key="" points="" covered="" in="" the="" topic="" selected.="" the="" amount="" of="" detail="" provided="" is="" consistent="" with="" a="" short="" journal.="" it="" is="" not="" an="" over-="" supply="" of="" information="" that="" results="" in="" a="" rushed,="" too="" detailed="" journal,="" but="" can="" be="" more="" concise="" and="" engaging.="" the="" self-reflection="" can="" be="" more="" concise,="" clear="" and="" interesting="" to="" read.="" the="" journal="" mostly="" summarises="" the="" topic="" selected.="" for="" the="" most="" part,="" the="" amount="" of="" detail="" provided="" is="" consistent="" with="" a="" short="" journal.="" however,="" not="" so="" clear="" and="" lacks="" engagement="" and="" interest.="" you="" have="" demonstrated="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection="" but="" need="" more="" relevant="" details="" and="" clarity.="" at="" times="" the="" discussion="" of="" the="" topic="" selected="" is="" unclear.="" offers="" too="" much="" information="" and="" suffers="" from="" repetitiveness.="" also,="" at="" times,="" not="" much="" relevant="" information="" provided.="" the="" journal="" needs="" to="" be="" clearer="" and="" more="" interesting.="" lack="" of="" self-="" reflection="" on="" the="" topic="" selected.="" the="" journal="" is="" not="" clear="" on="" the="" topic="" selected.="" it="" lack’s="" clarity,="" sometimes="" repetitive.="" the="" statements="" or="" arguments="" made="" are="" unclear,="" didn’t="" focus="" on="" the="" key="" points.="" too="" much="" information="" is="" provided,="" leaving="" the="" viewer="" intellectually="" confused="" and="" exhausted.="" the="" journal="" is="" also="" very="" boring="" to="" read.="" there="" is="" a="" very="" little="" to="" no="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection.="" holmes="" institute="" faculty="" of="" higher="" education="" undergraduate="" program="" evidence="" of="" self-="" reflection="" on="" group="" work="" and="" experience="" weighting:="" 4="" marks="" the="" journal="" very="" clearly="" demonstrates="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection="" on="" group="" work="" and="" why="" project="" and="" teamwork="" is="" important.="" what="" you="" did="" well,="" or="" not="" well="" and="" how="" to="" improve="" in="" the="" future.="" discussion="" is="" clear,="" easy="" to="" follow="" and="" understand,="" also="" interesting="" to="" read.="" the="" journal="" clearly="" demonstrates="" evidence="" of="" self-="" reflection="" of="" group="" work="" and="" the="" importance="" of="" collaboration.="" can="" be="" more="" concise,="" clear="" and="" interesting.="" the="" journal="" mostly="" covers="" the="" evidence="" of="" self-="" reflection="" of="" group="" work="" and="" the="" importance="" of="" collaboration="" but="" it="" need="" to="" work="" on="" concise="" and="" clarity.="" the="" journal="" is="" unclear="" at="" times="" in="" how="" it="" demonstrates="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection="" on="" the="" group="" work="" and="" collaboration.="" sometimes="" too="" much="" or="" not="" enough="" information="" and="" areas="" of="" repetition,="" and="" not="" easy="" to="" follow="" and="" understand.="" journal="" is="" not="" so="" engaging="" and="" does="" not="" hold="" audience="" attention.="" there="" is="" very="" little="" to="" no="" evidence="" of="" self-reflection="" on="" the="" group="" work="" and="" collaborate="" experiences.="" it="" is="" confusing,="" difficulty="" to="" understand,="" and="" boring="" to="" read.="" the="" organisation="" of="" the="" journal.="" weighting:="" 3="" marks="" the="" journal="" was="" well="" organised.="" the="" ideas="" flowed="" in="" a="" manner="" that="" was="" easily="" followed="" and="" understood.="" the="" material="" transitioned="" seamlessly="" from="" one="" concept/theme="" to="" another.="" the="" journal="" was="" well="" organised.="" the="" ideas="" flowed="" in="" a="" manner="" that="" was="" easily="" followed="" and="" understood.="" there="" were="" a="" few="" transitions="" that="" were="" not="" entirely="" seamless.="" the="" journal="" was="" fairly="" well="" organised="" and="" the="" ideas="" flowed="" well.="" there="" were="" quite="" a="" few="" transitions="" that="" were="" a="" little="" disjointed.="" the="" journal="" lacked="" organisation="" and="" was="" not="" easy="" to="" follow.="" ideas="" were="" put="" together="" in="" a="" way="" that="" made="" comprehension="" difficult.="" the="" journal="" was="" unorganised="" and="" difficult="" to="" follow.="" there="" did="" not="" appear="" to="" be="" a="" logical="" approach="" to="" sequencing="" the="" ideas.="" holmes="" institute="" faculty="" of="" higher="" education="" undergraduate="" program="" integration="" of="" theory="" concepts.="" weighting:="" 3="" marks="" the="" journal="" incorporates="" relevant="" elements="" of="" hs3051="" theory,="" which="" is="" correctly="" referenced="" and="" supports="" the="" discussion="" within="" the="" journal="" to="" a="" very="" high="" standard.="" this="" includes="" correct="" and="" consistent="" harvard="" referencing="" where="">50%) the extent to which the journal summarises your personal journey of studying this unit. you should briefly summarize one or more key things that you learned from this unit and how this knowledge can help you with your future career. weighting: 5 marks the journal very clearly summarises the personal learning experiences for a specific topic covered in the unit. it is concise, clear, easy to follow and understand, engaging and interesting to read. the amount of detail provided is excellent and within the word limit. you have clearly demonstrated evidence of self-reflection. the journal clearly summarises the key points covered in the topic selected. the amount of detail provided is consistent with a short journal. it is not an over- supply of information that results in a rushed, too detailed journal, but can be more concise and engaging. the self-reflection can be more concise, clear and interesting to read. the journal mostly summarises the topic selected. for the most part, the amount of detail provided is consistent with a short journal. however, not so clear and lacks engagement and interest. you have demonstrated evidence of self-reflection but need more relevant details and clarity. at times the discussion of the topic selected is unclear. offers too much information and suffers from repetitiveness. also, at times, not much relevant information provided. the journal needs to be clearer and more interesting. lack of self- reflection on the topic selected. the journal is not clear on the topic selected. it lack’s clarity, sometimes repetitive. the statements or arguments made are unclear, didn’t focus on the key points. too much information is provided, leaving the viewer intellectually confused and exhausted. the journal is also very boring to read. there is a very little to no evidence of self-reflection. holmes institute faculty of higher education undergraduate program evidence of self- reflection on group work and experience weighting: 4 marks the journal very clearly demonstrates evidence of self-reflection on group work and why project and teamwork is important. what you did well, or not well and how to improve in the future. discussion is clear, easy to follow and understand, also interesting to read. the journal clearly demonstrates evidence of self- reflection of group work and the importance of collaboration. can be more concise, clear and interesting. the journal mostly covers the evidence of self- reflection of group work and the importance of collaboration but it need to work on concise and clarity. the journal is unclear at times in how it demonstrates evidence of self-reflection on the group work and collaboration. sometimes too much or not enough information and areas of repetition, and not easy to follow and understand. journal is not so engaging and does not hold audience attention. there is very little to no evidence of self-reflection on the group work and collaborate experiences. it is confusing, difficulty to understand, and boring to read. the organisation of the journal. weighting: 3 marks the journal was well organised. the ideas flowed in a manner that was easily followed and understood. the material transitioned seamlessly from one concept/theme to another. the journal was well organised. the ideas flowed in a manner that was easily followed and understood. there were a few transitions that were not entirely seamless. the journal was fairly well organised and the ideas flowed well. there were quite a few transitions that were a little disjointed. the journal lacked organisation and was not easy to follow. ideas were put together in a way that made comprehension difficult. the journal was unorganised and difficult to follow. there did not appear to be a logical approach to sequencing the ideas. holmes institute faculty of higher education undergraduate program integration of theory concepts. weighting: 3 marks the journal incorporates relevant elements of hs3051 theory, which is correctly referenced and supports the discussion within the journal to a very high standard. this includes correct and consistent harvard referencing where appropriate.>