ACC707 ACC707 AUDITING AND ASSURANCE T316 Draft 21-09-2016 Page 1 of 2 *AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT PTY LTD ABN: 72 132 629 979 CRICOS 03171A Marking rubric for T316: ACC707 Auditing and Assurance Assessment 2 Criteria Fail (0- 49%) Pass (50 – 59%) Credit (60 – 69%) Distinction (70 – 79%) High Distinction (80 – 100%) Research – extent and application Value 30% Mark awarded Inaccurate, inappropriate or no use of literature. Analysis not developed. No original explanations provided. Minimum number of sources, not all current or relevant. Paraphrasing used throughout but not always accompanied by original explanations. Theory relevant but not always linked to analysis. Good selection of theory from a range of sources to build and adequately justifies analysis. Paraphrasing used throughout but accompanied by original explanations Insightful and appropriate selection of theory from a good range of current and relevant sources to systematically build and justify analysis. Minimum paraphrasing Integration and originality in the selection and handling of relevant theory to build and justify analysis. Wide range of current and relevant sources integrated in systematic way. Analysis Value 30% Mark awarded Poor evaluation. Significant gaps in knowledge of the theory and lack of understanding of auditors’ liability and duty of care. No analysis provided. Disjointed or no discussion. Simple discussion of auditor’s liability and duty of care. Work reflects limited engagement with accounting issues and auditor responsibility & duty of care in respect of Lehman Brothers. Not all aspects of task completed in sufficient detail. Most aspects of the task completed but assessment lacks cohesion. Identifies and discusses auditor’s liability and duty of care. Discussion of some relevant issues in accounting and auditor responsibility & duty of care in Lehman Brothers’ case. All aspects of the task completed – some cohesion. Identifies and clearly explains auditor’s liability and duty of care. Links to accounting issues and auditor responsibility & duty of care in respect of Lehman Brothers. All aspects of the task completed with minimal errors in cohesion Identifies and insightfully discusses auditor’s liability and duty of care. Strong links to accounting issues and auditor responsibility & duty of care in respect of Lehman Brothers. All aspects of the task completed in a comprehensive and cohesive manner Recommendations / conclusions Value 20% Mark awarded Few or no recommendations made / no justification. Any recommendations made are not supported or are inaccurate. Some recommendations made/not well linked to the results of the evaluation of auditor’s liability and duty of care. Good recommendations made, linked to the results of the evaluation of auditor’s liability and duty of care. Very good recommendations made, linked to the evaluation of auditor’s liability and duty of care. Theory used systematically to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of the auditor’s duty and responsibility. Excellent recommendations made, linked to the evaluation of auditor’s liability and duty of care. Theory used in insightful way to justify recommendations and discuss enhancement of the auditor’s duty and responsibility. Presentation Value 20% Mark awarded Referencing is absent / not systematic / incorrect Acceptable presentation – obvious errors demonstrating lack of attention to detail. Some attempt at referencing but obvious errors Good presentation overall but some obvious errors. Referencing is mainly accurate Professional presentation – minor errors in some elements. Correct referencing throughout Highly professional presentation – satisfies all presentation elements. Correct referencing throughout Total mark out of 100 Comments: Assessment mark / 30