MAJAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE FACULTY OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET Module Name and Level Financial Statement Analysis (Level 3) Module Code FC 40-3 Assessment No. II (Two) Assessment Type & weighting: Individual Assignment. (60 %) STUDENT MCUC NUMBER: Please note that a grade will only be given to those whose student number is noted on this form. Please ensure that the student numbers from all group members are recorded accurately. Submission Date: MODULE TUTOR: Suryanarayana DECLARATION • The work contained in this assignment is my own and that all materials and sources used have been acknowledged. • I/We have not copied or colluded in part or in whole, or otherwise plagiarised the work of other students. • This assignment has not been submitted for previous assessment in any other subject or to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other unit, module, degree or diploma of a university or any other institute, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text. • I/We confirm that I/we have read, understood and followed the guidelines for assignment submission and presentation provided by the lecturer. • I/We understand that this assignment may be retained on the database and used to make comparisons with other assignments in future. • I/We have made a copy of my assignment • This work may be photocopied and/or communicated for the purpose of identifying plagiarism. • I/We give permission for a copy of this marked assignment to be retained by the faculty of Business Management for the purpose of course reviews by external examiners and to be used as a resource by Majan College. • I/We understand that unauthorized late submission without a valid written extension will be marked as per the college policy mentioned in the students handbook page 18 section 18.5. Financial Statement Analysis (FC 40-3) Individual Assignment 60 % weighting You are required to select any two companies of your choice from the same industry, (either two Local or two International) and critically evaluate a set of published accounts of these companies for a period of four years. You are then required to submit a detailed report of the analysis at the end of week 14. You must notify and obtain approval for your selected companies from your lecturer within ONE WEEK of the issue of this assignment. The report should cover the following points: • A brief profile of the companies chosen for the study. • A discussion on trend and common size statements comparing and contrasting the financial performance of the chosen companies. • Critical analysis of the statement of cash flows of the chosen companies. • Critical analysis of the overall financial performance of the company using additional techniques such as, Z score analysis, Off balance sheet analysis and SWOT analysis. Note: All your calculations to support your arguments should be shown in a separate excel file. The paper will be graded taking into account the following points. Sr No Area / Topic Percentage. 1 Grasp of concepts Understanding of relevant concepts. 25 % 2 Argument/Analysis : Development of Argument / Analysis , Detailed discussion on the tasks involved, Critical awareness / interpretation Application of relevant accounting tools and techniques & conclusions. 40% 4 Structure Logical flow, Cohesion, Completion and focus of task/s 15% 5 Language 5% 6 Information, Research & Referencing: Variety of sources used, relevance of sources used 15 % INSTRUCTIONS Your work will be graded on the following aspects: 1. This is an individual Assignment 2. The assignment MUST be submitted on-line (through MOVE) on or before the due date. 3. Your assignment shall reflect the depth and breadth of your original analyses in a clear and coherent manner. 4. Any reference to authors and other writers shall be quoted with due acknowledgement in your assignment report using the Harvard Referencing System. For details of Harvard referencing style refer the student’s hand book page 40-42 section 7.2. 5. This is an individual assignment and carries a 60 % weighting of the module grade. 6. This assignment follows a report format and must be original and creative. An analytical piece of work is required. The use of ‘cut and paste’ approach will be penalized. It must be presented in a structured manner, with appropriate cover page, content page, introduction, body (with appropriate heading / sub-headings), conclusion, references, page numbered and any required appendices. 7. Your report should be word processed and professionally presented. The length of your report should be of 2000 words (+/- 10%), presented in text of font size 12 with 1.5 line spacing. Please state the exact word count at the end of the assignment. 8. The cover page should be attached with the assignment and uploaded through MOVE (on-line. Name of the student, The Programme, Module Title, Assignment Title and number of words must be reflected on the cover sheet. 9. All assignments must be adhered strictly to the deadlines specified by Majan College. Failure to hand in the assignment for any reason and without prior approval and a valid written extension from the module tutor will not be marked and will be awarded a grade G (0) irrespective of the quality of the work. See students handbook page 18-19 section 4.7 10. Unacknowledged use of work of others (plagiarism) is regarded as a dishonest practice and will be will be penalized. See the penalties in the student’s handbook page 30-31 section 5.6. Additional Guidelines • The Assignment Submission link on MOVE will be open, a week ahead of the submission date. • You can submit your assignment multiple times, till the submission deadline. Note that Turnitin could take upto 24 hours to produce similarity reports for submissions. • The last submission, within the deadline, will be considered as your final submission. • Assignments should be submitted by 6pm on the day of the deadline. There is a grace period until midnight to allow for any technical difficulties, but any assignments submitted after this will be counted as late. Technical problems will not be accepted as an excuse for submitting after the day of the deadline. • The similarity percentage of your final submission will be one of the factors considered, for assessing the originality of your assignment. However, the decision to report an assignment for plagiarism is taken by the Lecturers, who mark your assignment. • The Lecturers will consider a number of factors such as Assignment type, Part of the assignment where similarity occurs, Nature of similarity etc., along with the similarity percentage of your assignment, to assess the originality of your assignment. Therefore, similarity percentage would not be accepted as a basis for disputing academic judgments regarding plagiarism. • Note that the similarity percentage of your submission can change till the submission deadline, if the submissions of other students have similarity to your assignment. Therefore, the similarity percentages are not final, till the assignment submission is closed. • You are required to tick to confirm the statement: “I confirm that this assignment is my own and all sources have been acknowledged. I understand that the use of other people’s work or ideas without acknowledgement is plagiarism and could result in failing the assignment”. You will not be able to submit the assignment without ticking this box. For further information see section 4.3.8 in your student handbook. GRADING SYSTEM Although grades may be awarded on the basis of marks in some assessments, students should note that both marks and grades will be awarded on the basis of the assessment criteria for each grade. Old grading System (Before Feb 2015) GRADE GRADE POINT DESCRIPTION GENERAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA A+ 16 Excellent • An outstanding piece of work. • Shows evidence of wider reading and originality • Strongly analytical. All important points are covered. • Arguments should be supported by examples and evidence, objectively presented and evaluated, • Well-structured and well written, without noticeable grammatical or other errors. • Correctly referenced A 15 A- 14 B+ 13 Very Good • Very good work. • All main points will have been covered, though minor issues may have been omitted. • The work will be analytical, balanced and soundly based. • Examples and supporting evidence should have been included. • The writing should be essentially correct, without major grammatical or other errors. • Generally referenced correctly. B 12 B- 11 C+ 10 Good • Generally good work. • Most points will have been covered, but many finer points will generally have been missed. • Shows limited reading. • Arguments/analysis should be basically well structured and balanced with relevant examples, but with errors and gaps. • The writing is clear, but has errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. • Referencing will be present but may at times be inaccurate or insufficient. C 9 C- 8 D+ 7 Pass • Satisfactory. • Shows sufficient grasp of the subject to be acceptable. • Tends to be descriptive. • Examples and evidence is likely to be weak and limited. • Shows limited reading. • Referencing is likely to be absent or very poorly carried out. D 6 D- 5 E 4 Refer • Unsatisfactory/ Compensatable fail. • Serious errors and omissions. • Very little analysis F 2 Fail • Work of a very poor standard with little relevant information and/or serious errors. F- 1 • Work containing little of merit G 0 • No work submitted Old grading System (before Feb 2015) GRADING SLAB GRADE GRADE POINT Range of Marks in % A+ 16 86 to 100 A 15 76 to 85.9 A- 14 70 to 75.9 B+ 13 67 to 69.9 B 12 63 to 66.9 B- 11 60 to 62.9 C+ 10 57 to 59.9 C 9 53 to 56.9 C- 8 50 to 52.9 D+ 7 47 to 49.9 D 6 43 to 46.9 D- 5 40 to 42.9 E 4 35 TO 39.9 F 2 20 TO 34.9 F- 1 0 TO 19.9 G 0 NA New Grading System (Starting Feb. 2015) Grade Letter Mark Band % Grade Descriptor A+ 80-100 Outstanding P A S S • An outstanding piece of work. • Shows evidence of wider reading and originality • Strongly analytical. All important points are covered. • Arguments should be supported by examples and evidence, objectively presented and evaluated, • Well-structured and well written, without noticeable grammatical or other errors. • Correctly referenced A 75-79 Excellent A- 70-74 B+ 67-69 Commendable • Very good work. • All main points will have been covered, though minor issues may have been omitted. • The work will be analytical, balanced and soundly based. • Examples and supporting evidence should have been included. • The writing should be essentially correct, without major grammatical or other errors. • Generally referenced correctly B 64-66 B- 60-63 C+ 57-59 Good • Generally good work. • Most points will have been covered, but many finer points will generally have been missed. • Shows limited reading. • Arguments/analysis should be basically well structured and balanced with relevant examples, but with errors and gaps. • The writing is clear, but has errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. • Referencing will be present but may at times be inaccurate or insufficient. C 54-56 C- 50-53 D+ 47-49 Satisfactory • Satisfactory. • Shows sufficient grasp of the subject to be acceptable. • Tends to be descriptive. • Examples and evidence is likely to be weak and limited. • Shows limited reading. • Referencing is likely to be absent or very poorly carried out. D 44-46 D- 40-43 E 35-39 Marginal Fail F A I L • Unsatisfactory/ Compensatable fail. • Serious errors and omissions. • Very little analysis F 25-34 Fail • Work of a very poor standard with little relevant information and/or serious errors. F- 01-24 Fail • Work containing little of merit G 0 Non-Submission • No work submitted Rubrics for Assignment ASSIGNMENT Poor 20 average 40 Satisfactory 60 Good 80 Exceptional 100 Grasp of concepts Understanding of relevant concepts. (25%) Does not show any grasp of the subject matter; demonstrating inadequate understanding of the topic/s and issue/s. Shows a limited grasp of the subject matter demonstrating limited but acceptable understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows the required level of grasp of the subject matter demonstrating an average understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows a good grasp of the subject matter demonstrating an accomplished understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows a comprehensive grasp of the subject matter demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Argument/Analysis : Development of Argument / Analysis, Detailed discussion on the tasks involved, Critical awareness / interpretation. Application of relevant accounting tools and techniques & conclusions (40%) No relevant accounting techniques are applied and shows no evidence of usage of any tools or techniques. Lack of analysis of information. No discussion is evident. The discussed tasks are completely out of focus. Little or no evidence of critical evaluation of material. Little evidence is seen for application of some of the accounting techniques but shows an incomplete awareness with little, if any. Poor analysis of information. Although there is evidence for some discussion, they are discrete and lacking focus. It does not reflect critical application of the concepts to the task. Evidence of limited critical evaluation in some areas, with some lost opportunities Satisfactory application of accounting techniques reasoning and evidence shows an awareness of the relevant issues which is acceptable. Somewhat realistic and appropriate but not very specific; there is some techniques which are not applied. The information from various sources although relevant is not properly applied to the task. There is some evidence for critical analysis and reasoning. Evidence of a general critical evaluation, although some material not evaluated The application of relevant accounting techniques are seen and supported with reasons and evidence; presents a fairly balanced view; shows an awareness which is both reasonable and objective. Good application of the information to the task. There is evidence of in-depth analysis of data. But, all the tasks are not consistent in the analytical rigor. The inferences drawn could have been more meaningful. Evidence of good critical appreciation and evaluation of relevant theory and research and a systematic attempt to relate it to the topic All the relevant accounting techniques has been applied presents a critical view; and clear interpretation is drawn through the application of accounting techniques which are both reasonable and objective. Excellent analysis of the information and precise application to the task. Critical reasoning is evident in the discussion of all tasks. Evidence of thorough critical appreciation and evaluation of relevant theory and research and a systematic and creative attempt to relate it to the topic. Structure Logical flow, Cohesion, Completion and focus of task/s: (15%) The report is unorganized to the point of being virtually unreadable. Lacks cohesion and orderly flow. The assignment has unacceptable failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression. Tasks are incomplete and unfocussed. The report is unorganized, but can be read. Poor flow of the report structure. The assignment has failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression, which impair its capacity to communicate. All the tasks lack proper focus in discussion The report is somewhat organized. The flow is not coherent and needs improvement. While the assignment has some failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression, these do not impair its capacity to communicate. All the tasks are addressed and discussed but one/two lack focus/clarity The report is fairly well organized. There is order, cohesion and coherence, but there is still scope for improvement. A generally well- structured assignment, which manages clear communication of ideas. All the tasks are addressed and discussed with the required focus. The report is very well organized with a cohesive discussion lending coherence to the content. The structure is exemplary. An assignment with excellent clarity of expression which significantly enhances communication of ideas. All the tasks are discussed astutely with proper focus. Language (5%) The report is difficult to read due to overwhelming errors or misspellings Frequent compositional errors or misspellings, but the report can be read. More than occasional errors or misspellings, but that does not take away significantly from the quality. Well executed. Few grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Execution is excellent. No grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Information Research & ReferencingVariety of sources used, relevance of sources used: (15 %) There is no evidence for information search The report references clearly do not comply with the basic requirements of HARVARD STYLE format. The references are not adequate to support the literature used in the report Information search is not adequate. Limited and uncritical use of a restricted range of sources The report shows some compliance to HARVARD STYLE referencing, but shows many errors. Very few references quoted which are inconsistent with the amount of literature used in the report. Relevant information search is evident, but not adequate. Use of a range of appropriate sources. The report demonstrates a basic level of HARVARD STYLE referencing, but still contains major deficiencies. No sophistication is evident i.e. Websites do not follow Harvard Referencing style Good usage of variety information from various sources. Use of a wide range of appropriate sources with some critical awareness of their status and relevance The report demonstrates a solid understanding of the basic elements of HARVARD STYLE formatting. In-text citations if presented at relevant areas will lend more appropriateness to the report Excellent compilation of the relevant information from variety of sources. Excellent usage of the information to support the discussion. Use of a wide range of appropriate sources, indicating personal research and with full critical awareness of their status and relevance. The report demonstrates excellent HARVARD STYLE formatting skills. Student understands and recognizes the concept of intellectual property, can defend him/herself if challenged, and can properly incorporate the ideas/published works of others into their own work building upon them.