Deakin's Bachelor of Commerce and MBA are internationally EPAS accredited. Deakin Business School is accredited by AACSB. MIS741 – Analysing the Impact of Digital Business Trimester 1, 2017 Assessment 1 – Video and Professional Capability Gap Analysis (Individual) DRAFT DATE AND TIME: Week 4, Wed 29 March 2017, 11:59PM PEER‐REVIEW DATE AND TIME: Week 5, Mon 3 April 2017, 11:59PM FINAL/REVISED DATE AND TIME: Week 5, Sun 9 April 2017, 11:59PM PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: 20% HURDLE DETAILS: See consequences below for no or late draft/peer‐review Learning Outcome Details Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) – underlined parts of the ULOs will be assessed Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO) ULO 1: Evaluate their current IS professional and other capabilities, compare these capabilities to post‐graduation IS job requirements, and propose how capability gaps will be resolved during their course. GLO6 Self‐management ULO 3: Present convincing resolutions to ethical dilemmas in written form, and self‐evaluations in written and oral form. GLO2 Communication Assessment Feedback Students who submit their work (final submission) by the due date will receive their marks and feedback on CloudDeakin on 28 April 2017, 5:30PM. Students who fail to submit their draft and/or peer‐review at all or by the DRAFT and/or PEER‐ REVIEW dates/times specified above will not receive peer‐review feedback. They will also lose 10/100 for the Assessment 1 result, because rubric below has an assessment criterion relating to the ‘response to peer‐review’. If you do not receive a peer‐review, you cannot respond to one.Page 2 of 9 No extensions can be granted for draft and peer‐review submissions. Email the unit chair for issues related to extenuating circumstances such as medical/hardships. The 5% per day penalty for late submission (see Notes section below) cannot be applied to the draft and peer‐review because of the short timeframe needed for the draft, peer‐review and final draft submissions. The 5% per day penalty will, however, apply to the submission of the revised, final version of the assignment. Description / Requirements This is an individual assignment where you will produce a Professional Capability Gap Analysis report, and a separate video. The requirements for the report and video are outlined next. Background work for the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report Identify one (1) job/position which you would like to do after graduation, keeping in mind that:  the job/position must be achievable given your industry experience and qualifications. For example, students with 6‐12 months of industry experience cannot be managers.  Australian employers of international graduates expect applicants to have Australian work experience relevant to the job/position. If you don’t, then a more realistic goal is to apply for junior / entry‐level positions initially. For example, pick one (1) job/position such as only desktop/software support (entry level), or (junior) business analyst (requires at least 12 months’ relevant industry experience), or alternative job/position title depending on your level of IS/ICT industry experience. Identify at least four detailed descriptions for your chosen one (1) job/position:  Full‐time students who will seek a job after graduation should identify position descriptions for job vacancy advertisements for your chosen job/position title.  Part‐time students who are currently employed, this assignment will not relate to your current position. Instead, identify a job/position you aspire to attain (e.g. position in a new company, promotion) after graduation. Identify descriptions from your company and other companies applicable to your chosen job/position title.  Full‐ or part‐time students who plan to start their own business after graduation can identify contract job descriptions reflecting the job/position title you will do with clients. Conduct research into the professional capabilities (e.g. skills, knowledge) for your chosen job/ position using recent (2014+), credible, authoritative industry sources. This includes reports or articles written by the Australian Computer Society, academic articles about the job/position capabilities, industry reports (e.g. from Forrester Research, Gartner Group, Ernst and Young, PWC), etc. Four example sources to get you started are as follows. The first two are generic lists of ICT skills which cover all ICT jobs. You need to research about your chosen job/position and work out which of these generic ICT skills apply to your chosen job/position:  SFIA Foundation 2015, ‘SFIA framework: SFIA V6, the sixth major revision of the Skills Framework for the Information Age’, retrieved 7 February 2017, Page 3 of 9 In particular, look under the sections “Levels of responsibility” and “Skills”. For example, the “Skills” which are core for Business Analysts include “Strategy and architecture”, “Change and transformation”, “User experience”, “Quality and conformance”, “Stakeholder management” and “Sales and marketing”. The “Levels of responsibility” provide greater detail of the depth of each skill required for entry through to managerial roles.  ACS 2015, ‘The ACS core body of knowledge for ICT professionals (CBOK), Australian Computer Society’, retrieved 7 February 2017, Focus on pages 16‐24, because the ACS CBOK discusses SFIA as well. Note that the CBOK covers all ICT jobs/positions, so it is important to interpret the skill in a way which is consistent your chosen job/position. For example, the critical CBOK skill blocks for a Business Analyst are “ICT problem solving”, “Professional knowledge” and “Outcomes management”. A broad understanding of “Services management” and “Technology resources” is needed at a minimum. Business Analysts generally do not do programming, but do need to know how IS are built as part of the “Technology building” skill block. Examples of academic articles relevant to Business Analyst roles are:  Paul, D. & Tan, Y.L. 2015, ‘An investigation of the role of business analysts in IS development’, Proceedings of the 23rd European Conference on Information Systems, Munster, Germany, retrieved 7 February 2017,  Babar, A., Wong, B. & Abedin, B. 2014, ‘Investigating the role of business analysts competencies into strategic business requirements gathering’, Proceedings of the 18th Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, Chengdu, China, 24‐28 June, retrieved 7 February 2017, You should be able to identify at least ten (10) additional sources relating to the professional capabilities of the position in addition to the four job/position and the four sources above. This means that your research should produce at least fourteen (14) high quality, credible sources. For Deakin Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLOs) Discipline‐specific knowledge (GLO1), Communication (GLO2), Problem solving (GLO5), undertake the following analysis:  Synthesise the important professional capabilities associated with each of the three GLOs from the four detailed job/position descriptions and your additional research.  Research what you need to do during your Masters course to improve at least one (or more) of capability for each GLO. Remember, successful IS professionals always seek to improve their skills and are not satisfied with their current skill level. Identify specific strategies/techniques you can use to improve your capabilities. For example: o not just ‘certifications’, but which specific certifications o not just ‘internship’, but what company, size, internship unit, role/work, etc o not just ‘professional networking’, but with whom, what events, etc?Page 4 of 9 What to include in the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report? You will write an individual Professional Capability Gap Analysis as follows (after background work):  A maximum of 500 words (about GLO1 180 words, GLO2 160 words, GLO5 160 words) for the report body which maps (e.g. using a table) the three Deakin GLOs against the important professional capabilities and, for each GLO and associated capabilities, the: o Specific capabilities you need to improve (not your strengths, just weaknesses) o Strategies you will use to achieve these capability improvements  The following (cover page and these are not in the word count) in Harvard format style: o Reference list of fourteen (14) or more research sources cited in the report body o An appendix with copies of the four detailed job/position descriptions. http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/study‐support/referencing/harvard Word limit See the rubric at the end of this document for word limit penalties. The word count is calculated by selecting the text of assignment (see above), and using MS Word’s word count feature and unchecking the “Include textboxes, footnotes and endnotes”. You must cite the minimum of fourteen (14) research sources (see the background work section) in the body of the report. The words in Harvard style citing (e.g. “…. (Lim, 2015)”) can be reduced with numbered citations (see link below), but formatting references in Harvard (not numbered) style: http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/study‐support/referencing/numbered‐citation You should also cite the four (4) job/position descriptions in the report body. The appendix should include the full citation for the job/position description, including the following: Company Name (year) Advertisement title [equivalent of page title in a web reference], date of advertisement, last access date, full URL of advertisement Further requirements for the report are as follows:  The report cannot include any quotes, images/figures or summarises from other sources. The entire report must be in your own words. In particular, review the following guidelines about paraphrasing (note that ‘summarising’ and ‘quoting’ is not permitted in this report). o http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/study‐ support/referencing/summarising‐paraphrasing‐quoting  You cannot use scanned tables (or images with text) and insert this in your report. All text in the body of the report, even if it is scanned, will be added to your word count. Please see rubric for details of the penalties which apply to exceeding the word count for this report. Peer‐review of the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report You will gain valuable feedback on your completed draft Professional Capability Gap Analysis report via peer‐review (i.e. a fellow student). You must respond to this feedback by your peer by justifying how you have improved your report based on this feedback. There is NO peer‐review on the video.Page 5 of 9 CloudDeakin will randomly assign you 1‐2 peers. Each peer group will have two submission folders (see Figure 1) under Assessments tab, then Assignments. The random allocation of pairs will occur at the end of Week 3 once student enrolments have stabilised. Figure 1 shows the process. The due dates/times for each deliverable (draft or 1st deliverable, peer‐review of 2nd deliverable, and final version of the assignment or 3rd deliverable) are stated at the start of this document. Figure 1: Peer‐review process for Assessment 1 Please note the following regarding the peer‐review task:  Figure 1 states how to identify Student A, B and C. For example, the “1st submitter” is the first student in the group folder to submit their draft (even if they later add a new version).  Sometimes students will submit a draft, and then submit newer versions, before the due date/time. Please review the latest draft submitted on or before the due date/time.  Only start the peer‐review process after the due date/time of the draft (or 1st deliverable).  If a peer in your peer‐review group misses the due date/time, or there are only two students who submitted by the due date/time, then it will just be Students A and B only. Ignore submissions after the due date/time unless the Unit Facilitator advises otherwise.  Write your peer‐review in a separate document and submit this as the 2nd deliverable in the folder labelled “2nd deliverable”. Do not submit the peer‐review in the 1st deliverable folder.  The peer‐review should only state the weaknesses of the report and what your peer should do to fix the problems you have identified. All reports have weaknesses and can be improved, so if you cannot identify any weaknesses, you are not trying hard enough!Page 6 of 9 As a peer reviewer, it is your responsibility to understand the Assessment 1 requirements and feedback rubric criteria below. If there is anything you are not sure of, ask for clarification. In particular, focus on the “High distinction” and “distinction” standards stated in the rubric. Your review needs to explain what the peer should improve to reach those higher standards. You can consider, but are not limited to, the following when conducting the peer‐review. It is not necessary to review every single one of these aspects. You could instead focus on particular areas needing the most work:  Look at the Assessment 1 feedback rubric for the major marking criteria, which will give you some ideas on what areas you can give feedback.  Is the report presented professionally (e.g. see rubric criteria on GLO2)?  Is the position realistic given the peer’s industry experience, residency status, etc?  Does the report show evidence of a lot of research? Are there important sources they have not used?  Has the peer identified all relevant, major professional capabilities for the position?  Is their report convincing? Have they provided good evidence of professional capabilities they have already?  Have the specified a realistic and thorough professional capability development plan for those which they have identified as gaps? If you believe the student has not understood the requirements or rubric, the peer‐review can:  State this and then state 2‐3 brief examples justifying why you have come to this conclusion  State briefly what the peer should do to resolve this (e.g. state what resources, information, or whatever they should use). Response to peer‐review and improving the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report You will write a response to the peer‐review in a maximum of 500 words, including the words from the peer. That is, your response will be approximately 250 words. It is suggested that you reproduce each critical point/recommendation made by the peer reviewer, and then write your response after each point/recommendation. Sometimes a table is a good way of presenting a response to a reviewer (e.g. review comments in one column, your response in another column). For example: Peer‐reviewer’s comments My responses Cut‐and‐paste the first peer‐review comment Write your response to this comment Cut‐and‐paste the second comment Write your response to this comment Cut‐and‐paste the third comment Write your response to this comment And so on for all the peer‐review comments Write your response to this comment The response should state how you improved your professional capability gap analysis using the feedback, and justify why you believe the change has addressed the issue identified.Page 7 of 9 If you strongly disagree with a point/recommendation, then you need to provide a convincing justification for why it is not appropriate or inaccurate. Keep in mind, however, that when we write something it is hard to accept that the reviewer is right and we are wrong. For example, if the reviewer has misunderstood what you wrote, then this is usually a sign that what you wrote was not clear or understandable. The fault, usually, is with the writer, not the reader. You can make other improvements to your report you wish to make, and not just changes to address the peer‐review comments. Video The video and Professional Capability Gap Analysis report are quite different. The video requires you to record yourself (i.e. a “head and shoulder” view) justifying to a hypothetical employer (e.g. for a job/position description from the report) why you are the best candidate for the job in 1.5 minutes. The video thus only covers your strengths, while the report only covers your weaknesses. The video will be assessed only on the basis of your GLO2 Communication capability (see the rubric below for further details). This is important because in verbal communication situations (e.g. clients, interviews, networking, etc) the listener will determine what they think of you in about 30 seconds. You must make a very good impression to the listener in a very short space of time. What is particularly important in oral communication is how you speak, not just what you talk about. The focus of the assessment of the video is on how you speak. Submission Instructions The final submission for the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report must be one (1) single file, named surname_MIS741_T1_year_assign1 (e.g. Liang_MIS741_T1_2017_assign1), including:  A cover page with the assignment title (“Assessment 1 – Professional Capability Gap Analysis report”), unit code and name, your name and student ID, and the word count.  The revised version only of the Professional Capability Gap Analysis report  Your response to the peer‐review, including the original of the peer reviewer. The submission of the video will be a separate file must meet the following requirements:  The name the video file the same as the report.  Start the submission process at least four or five (4‐5) hours before the due time of 11:59PM to allow time for your report and video to be uploaded to CloudDeakin on time. Your assignment will be considered late if the submission is not complete by the due time.  Smaller video files of 15 Mbs or less are perfectly acceptable to reduce submission time.  Follow all the instructions in the link below to create and submit your video. Please note that there are two steps to submission you must follow: https://my.visme.co/projects/4doqz40y‐instructions‐for‐uploading‐video‐assignmentsPage 8 of 9 Follow the “CloudDeakin: upload, name and submit your assignment” step which uploads your video to DeakinAir but does not submit the assignment as the title implies, and then follow the “CloudDeakin: how to submit a video as an assignment using videos hosted on DeakinAir, Youtube and/or Vimeo” which is a few screens down. The marker will not be able to view your video and you will receive zero if you do not complete both steps. The submission folder under Assessments tab, then Assignments in CloudDeakin will be available after the peer‐review process is complete to avoid students submitting to the wrong folder. You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until the marked assignment has been returned to you. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy. Any work you submit may be checked by electronic or other means for the purposes of detecting collusion and/or plagiarism. When you are required to submit an assignment through your CloudDeakin unit site, you will receive an email to your Deakin email address confirming that it has been submitted. You should check that you can see your assignment in the Submissions view of the Assignment dropbox folder after upload, and check for, and keep, the email receipt for the submission. Notes  Past students were found guilty of plagiarism, and given zero, when changing some/most/ all words of a source and pasting this into assignments. Plagiarism includes using translation tools to modify someone’s text and pasting into assignments (e.g. see Table N.1). The acceptable approach to use and cite sources can be found at the link below. Based on this, you will see that the examples in Table N.1 are not examples of paraphrasing: http://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/study‐ support/referencing/summarising‐paraphrasing‐quoting It is academic/professional misconduct to use other peoples’ work as your own, and/or create all/most of your report using material copied/modified from other sources. Even if Turnitin returns a low percentage, you can still be found guilty of plagiarism. Further, such reports are usually poor quality and will get a fail mark, even if not proven as plagiarism. Table N.1: Examples of plagiarism using translation/thesaurus tools Original source Plagiarised version (students found guilty, given zero) We bring businesses, associations and industries together. This blended community comes to GS1 Australia for advice, networking and solutions to their supply chain challenges. We partner with, and help showcase, members, solution providers and industry leaders to demonstrate and encourage supply chain best practice1. We bring organizations, affiliations and businesses jointly. This mixed group asks GS1 Australia for exhortation, systems administration and answers for their production network problems. We band together with, and demonstrate, individuals, arrangement suppliers and industry pioneers to exhibit and empower inventory network excellence. 1 GS1 Australia 2016, About us, retrieved 7 February 2017, Page 9 of 9 A bar code is simply an inventory tracking tool that retailers use in their computer systems. For example, if you sell a tshirt that comes in one color and 3 different sizes you would need to buy 3 bar codes2. A barcode is basically a stock following instrument that companies access with their PC frameworks. For instance, on the off chance a shirt is sold with one shading and three distinct sizes it is necessary to purchase three barcodes.  Penalties for late submission: The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked. You will receive 0% for the task. 'Day' means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after the due date.  For more information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the document Your rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unit in the first folder next to the Unit Guide of the Resources area in the CloudDeakin unit site.  Building evidence of your experiences, skills and knowledge (Portfolio) ‐ Building a portfolio that evidences your skills, knowledge and experience will provide you with a valuable tool to help you prepare for interviews and to showcase to potential employers. There are a number of tools that you can use to build a portfolio. You are provided with cloud space through OneDrive, or through the Portfolio tool in the Cloud Unit Site, but you can use any storage repository system that you like. Remember that a Portfolio is YOUR tool. You should be able to store your assessment work, reflections, achievements and artefacts in YOUR Portfolio. Once you have completed this assessment piece, add it to your personal Portfolio to use and showcase your learning later, when applying for jobs, or further studies. Curate your work by adding meaningful tags to your artefacts that describe what the artefact represents. 2 Australian Barcodes 2007, Frequently asked questions about barcodes, retrieved 7 February 2017, MIS741 Assignment 1: Professional Capability Gap Analysis Report and Video (Feedback Rubric/Assessment Criteria) GLO6 Self-management – 70% (this applies only to the report and peer-review response) Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Initiative exploring career opportunities Out of 30 Original, comprehensive, highly relevant, quality research of very specific job capabilities, way beyond the minimum requirements. Job capabilities are well aligned with GLOs. Excellent knowledge of GLOs. Detailed, relevant, mostly quality research of quite specific job capabilities, somewhat beyond the minimum requirements, but lacks originality. Job capabilities are mostly aligned with GLOs. Good knowledge of GLOs. Identifies some specific capabilities of the job, but some are too generic. More relevant, quality research would have found a few missing ones. Some alignment of job capabilities and GLOs. Some GLO knowledge. Adequate research of postgraduation job capabilities but many missing/generic, because only some research is relevant and/or quality. GLO and job capability alignment is okay, but needs better GLO knowledge. Inadequate research of postgraduation job capabilities; all or most missing/generic and/or all research is not relevant/quality. GLO and job capability alignment missing or inadequate. Little GLO knowledge. Personal development plan Out of 30 Very critical, thorough and highly specific evaluation of weaknesses. Original, specific and achievable development tasks with excellent alignment to weaknesses. Postgraduation job is very achievable with development plan. Mostly critical, thorough and specific evaluation of weaknesses. Specific and achievable development tasks with clear alignment to weaknesses, but lacks originality. Post-graduation job is quite achievable with development plan. Somewhat thorough evaluation of weaknesses, but a bit non-specific or non-critical in places. Mostly specific and achievable development tasks, and weakness alignment. Postgraduation job is somewhat achievable with development plan. Adequately thorough evaluation of weakness, but mostly non-specific or non-critical. Some specific and achievable development tasks, and weakness alignment, but needs clearer/better alignment with planned post-graduation job. Inadequate weakness evaluation because simplistic, non-specific and non-critical. Little/no specific or achievable development tasks with little/no weakness alignment. Postgraduation job is unlikely achievable with development plan. Response to peer-review Out of 10 Very convincing statements of how and why report changes address the reviewer feedback, and/or why feedback was incorrect. Mostly convincing statements of how and why report changes address the reviewer feedback, and/or why feedback was incorrect Somewhat convincing statements of how/why report changes address the reviewer feedback. Statements are a little generic and/or do not always address the feedback specifics. Adequate statements of how/why report changes address the reviewer feedback, but they are mostly generic and/or do not address the feedback specifics. Inadequate statements of how/why report changes address the reviewer feedback. Statements are all/mostly generic and/or do not address the feedback specifics. GLO2 Communication (written) – 30% (this applies to the report and the video) Criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail Word count (report) Out of 10 Very economical writing so the report is just under or exactly on the word count (no more), because (almost) no unnecessary word use. Does not use any scanned words.* Mostly economical writing so the report is just under or exactly on the word count (no more), because mostly little unnecessary word use. Does not use any scanned words.* Somewhat economical writing so the report is just under or exactly on the word count (no more), but quite a bit unnecessary word use. Does not use any scanned words.* Adequate economical writing but the report is a little (1-50 words) over the word count, and/or mostly unnecessary word use. Does not use any scanned words.* Exceeds the word count by more than 50 words, or is quite a few words under the word count (50 or more). May include scanned words (e.g. in tables, figures, images).* Written communication (report) Out of 10 Excellent tables, lists, heading formats, short paragraphs, formal writing, grammar/spelling, reference formatting and report structure. Does not use images/figures.* Good tables, lists, heading formats, short paragraphs, formal writing, grammar/spelling, reference formatting and report structure. Does not use images/figures.* Mostly okay tables, lists, heading formats, short paragraphs, formal writing, grammar/spelling, reference formatting and/or report structure. Does not use images/figures.* Adequate tables, lists, heading formats, short paragraphs, formal writing, grammar/spelling, reference formatting and/or report structure. May have used images/figures.* Inadequate tables, lists, heading formats, short paragraphs, formal writing, grammar/spelling, reference formatting and/or report structure. Many figures/images are used.* Oral communication (video) Out of 10 Excellent voice modulation/tone, talking speed, eye contact and body language/posture. Very good voice modulation/tone, talking speed, eye contact and body language/posture. Good voice modulation/tone, talking speed, eye contact and body language/posture but inconsistent at times. Adequate voice modulation/tone, talking speed, eye contact and body language/posture, but fairly inconsistent. Inadequate voice modulation/tone, taking speed, eye contact and/or body language/posture. * Please note the assignment requirements state that the report should not include scanned words (e.g. scanned tables, images, figures) and not include images/figures. .