Blog

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning Literacy and Numeracy in Context

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning

Literacy and Numeracy in Context

Task Summary

Title	Assessment 1: Literacy in Practice.
Type & length	Explanation, Analysis, and Teaching Plan: 2000 words.
Due Date	Week 3, 24/05/2026, 11.59 pm AEST Sunday.
Weighting	50%.
Academic Integrity	GenAI May Be Used within the limits specified.
Submission	Completed template document submitted to Turnitin.
Unit Learning Outcomes	This assessment task maps to the following ULOs: explain a theory-based understanding and knowledge of the role of literacy and numeracy in education. analyse the literacy and numeracy demands upon students together with other available data to identify areas of individual need. develop teaching plans that embody literacy and numeracy focuses, incorporating the effective use of literacy and numeracy strategies and assessment tasks to inform teaching, as well as developing specific strategies for students who require additional support. evaluate the role of digital technologies for effective teaching with literacy and numeracy for all students including students with disability or additional learning needs.

Task Rationale

This section describes the purpose of the assessment task (the ‘why’).

The purpose of the task is to develop both your understanding of the role of literacy in Australian education, and application of the analysis and teaching practices you will use to facilitate your students’ achievement of it. Scaffolded literacy development is an essential part of all learning across the curriculum, so this task is directly relevant to all areas of your future professional practice.

Task Description

This section provides a brief description of the assessment task (the ‘what’).

You will present a theory-based explanation of the role of literacy learning within education, highlighting the importance of ensuring all students are supported across the curriculum to achieve the highest levels of literacy possible. Embodying this essential practice, you will analyse a student work sample and draw upon the Australian Curriculum (V9) General Capability: Literacy to determine the literacy levels evidenced (make sure you make reference to the Version 9 curriculum). Next, you will develop a literacy teaching plan to extend the literacy capabilities of a hypothetical group of students.

Task Instructions

This section provides step-by-step task instructions (the ‘how’).

You will complete three components: an explanation, an analysis, and a teaching plan. These will be completed using the template provided and uploaded to TurnItIn as a single document.

Part A: Explanation of the Role of Literacy Learning within Education (700 words ±10%)

Why do we teach literacy? Explain the role of literacy learning within contemporary Australian education. Your explanation must:

Be in written (paragraph) form.
Be specific to your future teaching context (Primary / Secondary).
Consistently integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your explanation, including the unit’s key readings.
Be clear and present specific points (avoid generalisations).
Include discussion about the curriculum-wide relevance of literacy learning.
Include discussion about how literacy capabilities are relevant both to students’ learning within school, and life beyond school.
(Optionally) connect to the relevant Australian Professional Standards for Teachers.

Part B: Analysis of Student Literacy Capabilities (700 words ±10%)

How do we know our students’ literacy capabilities? Analyse the literacy capabilities evident within a student work sample. Your analysis must:

Be in written (paragraph) form.
Use the Australian Curriculum (V9) General Capability: Literacy to determine the student’s literacy levels.
Explicitly identify the literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s) that your analysis is focusing on (these should be the ones most relevant to the selected work sample).
Explicitly identify the literacy Level(s) within the Sub-element(s) that are evidenced, and what part(s) of the sample evidence them.
Identify both strengths and areas for future targeted teaching evident in the sample.
Consistently integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your discussion, including the unit’s key readings.

Part C: Teaching Plan for Literacy (600 words ±10%)

How do we develop our students’ literacy capabilities? Pretend that the student work sample analysed in Part B is representative of those produced by about a third of the students in your (hypothetical) class, and that these students have similar literacy needs to those of the student who produced the sample. For the purposes of this task, it can be assumed that these students also need support with all elements of their literacy; not just those elements that can be identified from the work sample. Present an outline for how specific literacy skills can be taught to this group of students within your hypothetical class. Your teaching plan must:

Be completed in the table (see the template).
Explicitly identify the Year Level that this teaching will be delivered to.
Explicitly identify the Key Learning Area (e.g., English, Geography, PDH/PE, Science, etc.).
Explicitly identify a Content Descriptor from within that Key Learning Area (code and statement).
Succinctly explain the focus of the lesson (aligned to part / all of the Content Descriptor).
Explicitly identify the Australian Curriculum (V9) General Capability: Literacy Element, Sub-element, and Level Statements that will be integrated within this learning (use a row for each different Element / Sub-element / Level Statement heading grouping). These must represent achievable challenges for your students.
Explain the specific teaching and learning strategies that will be used to achieve the identified Literacy learning, within the larger Key Learning Area learning (focus on the literacy learning, but ensure it is clear how this fits within the larger learning experience). Include examples of specific foci (e.g., spelling, vocabulary, punctuation, grammar, expressive technique, etc.) and some use of teaching resources (e.g., model texts, scaffolds / templates, classroom wall charts, etc.).
Explicitly identify opportunities for collaborative learning. Explain how the literacy learning can integrate pair, group, or whole class interactions that will boost learning and engagement.
Explicitly identify digital technologies that can be used to enhance the literacy learning (noting that watching a video is not an example of meaningful digital technology use).
Integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your planning decisions, including the unit’s key readings.

Formatting and style

Use Arial or Calibri font and 1.5 line spacing – see SCU QuickGuides for formatting guidance.

Referencing

You may elect to integrate sources from beyond the unit, however this is not required. Note: if you do integrate sources from beyond the unit, this must be done in addition to drawing upon the key readings provided within the unit (not in place of).
Adhere to APA 7th style throughout – see the SCU Library APA 7th referencing guide.

Task Submission

This section explains how you will submit your assessment.

Please note that you are required to use the Assessment Template. This unit provides a template for both Assessment 1 and Assessment 2 – ensure you use the correct one for each task.

Your assessment must be saved as a Word (DOCX) document. You must save your submission with a filename comprised of your curriculum / syllabus, surname and initial, and the unit and assessment number, e.g.:

AC_Logan.M_EDUC5003_A1
NESA_Logan.M._EDUC5003_A1
WA_Logan.M_EDUC5003_A1

This document must be uploaded to TURNITIN. The submission link can be found in the Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the EDUC5003 Blackboard Site.

Please note: It is YOUR responsibility to ensure that you have submitted the correct file and the FINAL version of your assessment for marking BEFORE the due date/time. Turnitin no longer generates an automatic email receipt. If you have successfully uploaded your assessment, a green bar will appear at the top of the screen that says: Submission uploaded successfully: Download digital receipt. Use the hyperlink to download your digital receipt – it is your timestamped proof of submission.

Academic Integrity

This section explains the rules surrounding academic integrity for this assessment task, procedures for safe compliance, and possible penalties.

At Southern Cross University academic integrity means behaving with the values of honesty, fairness, trustworthiness, courage, responsibility, and respect in relation to academic work. The Southern Cross University Academic Integrity Framework aims to develop a holistic, systematic, and consistent approach to addressing academic integrity across the entire University. For more information see the Academic Integrity webpage on the SCU website.

NOTE: Academic Integrity breaches include unacceptable use of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools, the use of GenAI has not been appropriately acknowledged or is beyond the acceptable limit as defined in the Assessment, poor referencing, not identifying direct quotations correctly, close paraphrasing, plagiarism, recycling (if you are repeating the unit, do not recycle elements of a previously submitted assessment), misrepresentation, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, fabricating information.

At SCU the use of GenAI tools is acceptable, unless it is beyond the acceptable limit as defined in the Assessment Item by the Unit Assessor.

LIMITATIONS WHEN USING GenAI:

GenAI may be used for this assessment within defined limits:

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools (e.g., ChatGPT) may be used within defined limits for this assessment. You may use GenAI to help guide you in the process of completing your assessment work, but not to write your assessment (in part or full). Think of it as a tool, much like the SCU library or a conversation with a knowledgeable colleague: a quick way to access information or an AI tutor to help answer your questions. As such, you can use GenAI to help guide your research, ask questions to help to clarify your understanding, brainstorm preliminary ideas, get feedback on your ideas, and clarify concepts.

Remember, just as if you Googled something, you still need to evaluate the information to determine its accuracy and relevance. GenAI can and does produce biased and false information. You must find reputable scholarly sources to support any of the ideas generated. This is a requirement for this assessment. Importantly, you cannot include content generated by GenAI in your assessment (even if you have paraphrased, summarised, or quoted the output) – instead, use that content as a stepping-stone towards finding the relevant and reputable academic literature needed for your assessment.

You may use Grammarly Premium to help you undertake simple editing to improve the spelling and grammar of your written work.

ACKNOWLEDGING GenAI:

If you use GenAI tools, you must use these ethically, acknowledge their use, and keep evidence of how they were used. For general guidance on what this means, consult the Learning Zone resources Acknowledging and Referencing Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) use and Build your skills using GenAI – PAIR Framework. The SCU Library Guide – GenAI can also help you develop your AI literacy skills.

If you use any GenAI tools (including Grammarly Premium and Copilot), you must acknowledge this usage. In this unit, you do this by including the SCU acknowledgement statement on the cover page of your assessment submission, ticking the appropriate boxes, and completing the table (if relevant).

Importantly, if you use GenAI in this unit, you are also required to include an appendix as the final page of your Assessment submission, in which you clearly document the prompts you provided to these tools and the responses they generate in return (screenshots are acceptable). If no GenAI tools are used in the completion of your assessment, no appendix is required.

If you are not sure how to, or how much you can use GenAI tools in your studies, contact your Unit Assessor. If you use GenAI tools beyond the defined limits or without acknowledgment it may result in an academic integrity breach against you as described in the Student Academic and Non-Academic Misconduct Rules, Section 3.

MEASURES FOR ENSURING COMPLIANCE:

Based on the Assessment, Teaching and Learning Procedures, Section 3 (clause 16), the following steps may be taken to verify your compliance with the defined limits of GenAI usage in this assessment:

Invited to attend a Zoom meeting with the Unit Assessor and asked to share your understanding of the assessment task/s and associated concepts; and/or
Invited to share an explanation of the processes and a list of any digital tools that were used.

This should not be considered an accusation of wrongdoing; however, if there is an unsatisfactory outcome, a formal academic integrity breach may be lodged for further investigation.

SUGGESTED PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS FOR STUDENTS:

The following are suggestions to safeguard yourself if you are asked to demonstrate your compliance with the assessment conditions:

Ensure your use of GenAI is within the defined limits for this assessment task before using it.
If you are not sure, ASK the Unit Assessor prior to using the digital tool.
If you use GenAI tools for learning, ensure that you DO NOT copy and paste entire sections of text. You may take the ideas but cannot copy.
Keep a list of the digital tools and applications that you used to complete this assessment, and clear evidence of exactly how you used it (see the above GenAI may be used for this assessment within defined limits section of this document for more details).
Take screenshots of your progress when completing your assessment (undertaking research as well as writing), include the date and e in the screenshot. Save these in case they are required.

Special Consideration

This section explains the procedure for applying for a Special Consideration Assessment Extension.

Students wishing to request special consideration to extend the due date of an assessment task must submit a Request for Special Consideration form via the MyEnrolment page as early as possible and prior to the original due date for that assessment task, along with any accompanying documents, such as medical certificates. To apply – see SCU Special Consideration.

For further information, please refer to the Special Consideration section of the relevant SCU Policy.

Late Submissions & Penalties

This section explains the rules relating to assessments submitted after the due date.

According to SCU Policy, late penalties apply. Except when special consideration is awarded, late submission of assessment tasks will automatically lead to the imposition of a penalty. Penalties will be incurred as soon as the deadline is reached:

A penalty of 5% of the total available marks for the assessment task will be deducted from the awarded mark at one minute after the time listed in the due date.
A further penalty of 5% of the total available marks for the assessment task will be deducted from the awarded mark achieved on each subsequent calendar day until the mark reaches zero.

For more information, see the Assessment, Teaching and Learning procedures policy.

Grades and Feedback

This section explains how your assessments will be marked.

Assessments that have been submitted by the due date will receive an SCU grade. Grades and feedback will be posted to the ‘Gradebook section on the Blackboard Ultra unit site. Please allow 7 days (excluding public holidays) for marks to be posted. Usually, an Announcement will be made on the unit site’s homepage when grades are made available.

Task Rubric

Marking Criteria	High Distinction +	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Marginal Fail	Fail	NA
Criterion 1: Explanation 30%	Flawless explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, complete with extremely high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and inarguable statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Expertly provides unfailingly clear and specific points, always supported through integration of an expansive range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear, specific, and accurate connection to the APST. Explanation could be used in the Australian Curriculum V10!	Highly distinctive explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including very high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and extremely convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Masterfully provides very clear and specific points, nearly always supported through integration of a broad range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear, specific, and accurate connection to the APST.	Distinctive explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and very convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Skilfully provides clear and specific points, consistently supported through integration of a range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear and accurate connection to the APST.	Creditable explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including commendable discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Effectively provides largely clear and specific points, mostly supported through integration of several high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Passable explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including some discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Adequately provides somewhat clear and specific points, sufficiently supported through integration of a limited range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Insufficient explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education that includes discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Does not adequately provide clear and specific points supported through integration of a range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 2: Analysis 30%	Faultless analysis of a suitable work sample, including perfect identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and inarguable determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Ideally identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Expertly identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Unfailingly integrates high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements. Overall, analysis is an exemplar of practice.	Highly distinctive analysis of a suitable work sample, including exceptionally high-level identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and outstandingly accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Extremely clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Masterfully identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Highly commendable and consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Distinctive analysis of a suitable work sample, including high-level identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and very accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Very clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Skilfully identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Commendable and consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Creditable analysis of a suitable work sample, including effective identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and largely accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Effectively identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Largely consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Passable analysis of a suitable work sample, including adequate identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and somewhat accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Sufficiently clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Somewhat effectively identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Sufficient integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Inadequate analysis of a suitable work sample, including identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and sufficiently accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Does not adequately clearly identify specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Does not effectively identify the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Insufficient integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 3: Teaching Plan 30%	Presents an entirely classroom-ready planning outline. Perfect and complete identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Perfect and complete identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are inarguably suitable for the students and context. Expert planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are perfectly conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with ideal examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Exemplary, specific, and perfectly realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Superlative, specific, and perfectly appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this is a paragon of literacy planning!	Presents a highly distinctive planning outline. Extremely thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Exceptional identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are very highly suitable for the students and context. Masterful planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are highly conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with very effective examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Masterful, specific, and exceptionally realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Masterful, specific, and highly appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning would produce an invaluable learning experience!	Presents a distinctive planning outline. Very thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Very effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are highly suitable for the students and context. Skilful planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with effective examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Skilful, specific, and highly realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Skilful, specific, and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning is ready for classroom use!	Presents a creditable planning outline. Thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Largely effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are suitable for the students and context. Mostly effective planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are largely conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with mostly suitable examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Effective and largely realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Effective and largely realistic and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, with some refinements, this planning is ready for classroom use!	Presents a passable planning outline. Somewhat thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Adequately effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are sufficiently suitable for the students and context. Somewhat effective planning that outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are adequately conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with passably suitable examples of literacy foci and learning resources. Sufficiently realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Sufficiently realistic and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, with several key refinements, this planning could produce a solid learning experience!	Does not present a passable planning outline. Inadequately thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Inadequately effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are suitable for the students and context. Insufficiently effective planning that outlines literacy learning strategies / activities conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with suitable examples of literacy foci and learning resources. Insufficient consideration of realistic and appropriate opportunities for collaborative learning. Insufficient consideration of realistic and appropriate integration of digital technologies to meaningfully enhance this learning. Insufficient integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning is not ready for classroom use.	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 4: Academic and professional literacy 10%	Faultless academic literacy demonstrated with ALL present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Perfect use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Correctly formatted in-text citations. Correctly formatted reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Outstanding academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Perfect use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Correctly formatted in-text citations. Correctly formatted reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Distinctive academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Nearly faultless use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Near-perfect formatting of in-text citations. Near-perfect formatting of reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Creditable academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Skillful use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Commendable formatting of in-text citations. Commendable formatting of reference list. Closely followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Passable academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Adequate use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Sufficiently well formatted in-text citations. Sufficiently well formatted reference list. Largely followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Insufficient academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Incorrect word count (+/- 10%). Inadequate use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Insufficiently well formatted in-text citations. Insufficiently well formatted reference list. Did not follow template instructions. Did not clearly distinguish between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Does not demonstrate academic literacy at the expected level.	Not addressed / Not applicable.

Description of SCU Grades

High Distinction:

The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows exceptional ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as outstanding in relation to the learning requirements specified.

Distinction:

The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows a well-developed ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as distinguished in relation to the learning requirements specified.

Credit:

The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements specified, demonstrates insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts. The student’s performance could be described as competent in relation to the learning requirements specified.

Pass:

The student’s performance satisfies all of the basic learning requirements specified and provides a sound basis for proceeding to higher-level studies in the subject area. The student’s performance could be described as satisfactory in relation to the learning requirements specified.

Fail:

The student’s performance fails to satisfy the learning requirements specified.

May 22, 2026

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning Literacy and Numeracy in Context

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning

Literacy and Numeracy in Context

Task Summary

Title	Assessment 1: Literacy in Practice.
Type & length	Explanation, Analysis, and Teaching Plan: 2000 words.
Due Date	Week 3, 24/05/2026, 11.59 pm AEST Sunday.
Weighting	50%.
Academic Integrity	GenAI May Be Used within the limits specified.
Submission	Completed template document submitted to Turnitin.
Unit Learning Outcomes	This assessment task maps to the following ULOs: explain a theory-based understanding and knowledge of the role of literacy and numeracy in education. analyse the literacy and numeracy demands upon students together with other available data to identify areas of individual need. develop teaching plans that embody literacy and numeracy focuses, incorporating the effective use of literacy and numeracy strategies and assessment tasks to inform teaching, as well as developing specific strategies for students who require additional support. evaluate the role of digital technologies for effective teaching with literacy and numeracy for all students including students with disability or additional learning needs.

Task Rationale

This section describes the purpose of the assessment task (the ‘why’).

Task Description

This section provides a brief description of the assessment task (the ‘what’).

Task Instructions

This section provides step-by-step task instructions (the ‘how’).

You will complete three components: an explanation, an analysis, and a teaching plan. These will be completed using the template provided and uploaded to TurnItIn as a single document.

Part A: Explanation of the Role of Literacy Learning within Education (700 words ±10%)

Why do we teach literacy? Explain the role of literacy learning within contemporary Australian education. Your explanation must:

Be in written (paragraph) form.
Be specific to your future teaching context (Primary / Secondary).
Consistently integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your explanation, including the unit’s key readings.
Be clear and present specific points (avoid generalisations).
Include discussion about the curriculum-wide relevance of literacy learning.
Include discussion about how literacy capabilities are relevant both to students’ learning within school, and life beyond school.
(Optionally) connect to the relevant Australian Professional Standards for Teachers.

Part B: Analysis of Student Literacy Capabilities (700 words ±10%)

How do we know our students’ literacy capabilities? Analyse the literacy capabilities evident within a student work sample. Your analysis must:

Be in written (paragraph) form.
Use the Australian Curriculum (V9) General Capability: Literacy to determine the student’s literacy levels.
Explicitly identify the literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s) that your analysis is focusing on (these should be the ones most relevant to the selected work sample).
Explicitly identify the literacy Level(s) within the Sub-element(s) that are evidenced, and what part(s) of the sample evidence them.
Identify both strengths and areas for future targeted teaching evident in the sample.
Consistently integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your discussion, including the unit’s key readings.

Part C: Teaching Plan for Literacy (600 words ±10%)

Be completed in the table (see the template).
Explicitly identify the Year Level that this teaching will be delivered to.
Explicitly identify the Key Learning Area (e.g., English, Geography, PDH/PE, Science, etc.).
Explicitly identify a Content Descriptor from within that Key Learning Area (code and statement).
Succinctly explain the focus of the lesson (aligned to part / all of the Content Descriptor).
Explicitly identify the Australian Curriculum (V9) General Capability: Literacy Element, Sub-element, and Level Statements that will be integrated within this learning (use a row for each different Element / Sub-element / Level Statement heading grouping). These must represent achievable challenges for your students.
Explain the specific teaching and learning strategies that will be used to achieve the identified Literacy learning, within the larger Key Learning Area learning (focus on the literacy learning, but ensure it is clear how this fits within the larger learning experience). Include examples of specific foci (e.g., spelling, vocabulary, punctuation, grammar, expressive technique, etc.) and some use of teaching resources (e.g., model texts, scaffolds / templates, classroom wall charts, etc.).
Explicitly identify opportunities for collaborative learning. Explain how the literacy learning can integrate pair, group, or whole class interactions that will boost learning and engagement.
Explicitly identify digital technologies that can be used to enhance the literacy learning (noting that watching a video is not an example of meaningful digital technology use).
Integrate high-quality and relevant academic literature to support your planning decisions, including the unit’s key readings.

Formatting and style

Use Arial or Calibri font and 1.5 line spacing – see SCU QuickGuides for formatting guidance.

Referencing

You may elect to integrate sources from beyond the unit, however this is not required. Note: if you do integrate sources from beyond the unit, this must be done in addition to drawing upon the key readings provided within the unit (not in place of).
Adhere to APA 7th style throughout – see the SCU Library APA 7th referencing guide.

Task Submission

This section explains how you will submit your assessment.

Please note that you are required to use the Assessment Template. This unit provides a template for both Assessment 1 and Assessment 2 – ensure you use the correct one for each task.

AC_Logan.M_EDUC5003_A1
NESA_Logan.M._EDUC5003_A1
WA_Logan.M_EDUC5003_A1

This document must be uploaded to TURNITIN. The submission link can be found in the Assessment Tasks and Submission Tab in the EDUC5003 Blackboard Site.

Academic Integrity

This section explains the rules surrounding academic integrity for this assessment task, procedures for safe compliance, and possible penalties.

At SCU the use of GenAI tools is acceptable, unless it is beyond the acceptable limit as defined in the Assessment Item by the Unit Assessor.

LIMITATIONS WHEN USING GenAI:

GenAI may be used for this assessment within defined limits:

You may use Grammarly Premium to help you undertake simple editing to improve the spelling and grammar of your written work.

ACKNOWLEDGING GenAI:

MEASURES FOR ENSURING COMPLIANCE:

Based on the Assessment, Teaching and Learning Procedures, Section 3 (clause 16), the following steps may be taken to verify your compliance with the defined limits of GenAI usage in this assessment:

Invited to attend a Zoom meeting with the Unit Assessor and asked to share your understanding of the assessment task/s and associated concepts; and/or
Invited to share an explanation of the processes and a list of any digital tools that were used.

This should not be considered an accusation of wrongdoing; however, if there is an unsatisfactory outcome, a formal academic integrity breach may be lodged for further investigation.

SUGGESTED PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS FOR STUDENTS:

The following are suggestions to safeguard yourself if you are asked to demonstrate your compliance with the assessment conditions:

Ensure your use of GenAI is within the defined limits for this assessment task before using it.
If you are not sure, ASK the Unit Assessor prior to using the digital tool.
If you use GenAI tools for learning, ensure that you DO NOT copy and paste entire sections of text. You may take the ideas but cannot copy.
Keep a list of the digital tools and applications that you used to complete this assessment, and clear evidence of exactly how you used it (see the above GenAI may be used for this assessment within defined limits section of this document for more details).
Take screenshots of your progress when completing your assessment (undertaking research as well as writing), include the date and e in the screenshot. Save these in case they are required.

Special Consideration

This section explains the procedure for applying for a Special Consideration Assessment Extension.

For further information, please refer to the Special Consideration section of the relevant SCU Policy.

Late Submissions & Penalties

This section explains the rules relating to assessments submitted after the due date.

A penalty of 5% of the total available marks for the assessment task will be deducted from the awarded mark at one minute after the time listed in the due date.
A further penalty of 5% of the total available marks for the assessment task will be deducted from the awarded mark achieved on each subsequent calendar day until the mark reaches zero.

For more information, see the Assessment, Teaching and Learning procedures policy.

Grades and Feedback

This section explains how your assessments will be marked.

Task Rubric

Marking Criteria	High Distinction +	High Distinction	Distinction	Credit	Pass	Marginal Fail	Fail	NA
Criterion 1: Explanation 30%	Flawless explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, complete with extremely high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and inarguable statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Expertly provides unfailingly clear and specific points, always supported through integration of an expansive range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear, specific, and accurate connection to the APST. Explanation could be used in the Australian Curriculum V10!	Highly distinctive explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including very high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and extremely convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Masterfully provides very clear and specific points, nearly always supported through integration of a broad range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear, specific, and accurate connection to the APST.	Distinctive explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including high-level discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and very convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Skilfully provides clear and specific points, consistently supported through integration of a range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings). Made clear and accurate connection to the APST.	Creditable explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including commendable discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and convincing statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Effectively provides largely clear and specific points, mostly supported through integration of several high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Passable explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education, including some discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Adequately provides somewhat clear and specific points, sufficiently supported through integration of a limited range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Insufficient explanation of the role of literacy within contemporary Australian education that includes discussion about the importance of teaching literacy across all parts of the curriculum, and statements about the relevancy of literacy learning to all other school learning and life beyond school. Does not adequately provide clear and specific points supported through integration of a range of high-quality and relevant academic literature (including the unit’s key readings).	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 2: Analysis 30%	Faultless analysis of a suitable work sample, including perfect identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and inarguable determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Ideally identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Expertly identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Unfailingly integrates high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements. Overall, analysis is an exemplar of practice.	Highly distinctive analysis of a suitable work sample, including exceptionally high-level identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and outstandingly accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Extremely clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Masterfully identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Highly commendable and consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Distinctive analysis of a suitable work sample, including high-level identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and very accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Very clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Skilfully identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Commendable and consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Creditable analysis of a suitable work sample, including effective identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and largely accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Effectively identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Largely consistent integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Passable analysis of a suitable work sample, including adequate identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and somewhat accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Sufficiently clearly identifies specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Somewhat effectively identifies the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Sufficient integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Inadequate analysis of a suitable work sample, including identification of relevant Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Element(s) and Sub-element(s), and sufficiently accurate determination of the student’s Level(s) within them. Does not adequately clearly identify specific elements of the sample that were used to make these determinations. Does not effectively identify the student’s strengths and areas for future targeted teaching. Insufficient integration of high-quality and relevant academic literature to support theoretic statements.	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 3: Teaching Plan 30%	Presents an entirely classroom-ready planning outline. Perfect and complete identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Perfect and complete identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are inarguably suitable for the students and context. Expert planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are perfectly conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with ideal examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Exemplary, specific, and perfectly realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Superlative, specific, and perfectly appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this is a paragon of literacy planning!	Presents a highly distinctive planning outline. Extremely thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Exceptional identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are very highly suitable for the students and context. Masterful planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are highly conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with very effective examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Masterful, specific, and exceptionally realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Masterful, specific, and highly appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning would produce an invaluable learning experience!	Presents a distinctive planning outline. Very thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Very effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are highly suitable for the students and context. Skilful planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are conducive to achieving the specified learning, complete with effective examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Skilful, specific, and highly realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Skilful, specific, and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning is ready for classroom use!	Presents a creditable planning outline. Thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Largely effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are suitable for the students and context. Mostly effective planning that specifically outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are largely conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with mostly suitable examples of specific literacy foci and learning resources. Effective and largely realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Effective and largely realistic and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, with some refinements, this planning is ready for classroom use!	Presents a passable planning outline. Somewhat thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Adequately effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are sufficiently suitable for the students and context. Somewhat effective planning that outlines literacy learning strategies / activities that are adequately conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with passably suitable examples of literacy foci and learning resources. Sufficiently realistic and appropriate consideration of opportunities for collaborative learning. Sufficiently realistic and appropriate consideration of how digital technologies can be used to meaningfully enhance this learning. Integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, with several key refinements, this planning could produce a solid learning experience!	Does not present a passable planning outline. Inadequately thorough and appropriate identification of a specific Year level, Key Learning Area, Content Descriptor (code and statement), and learning focus. Inadequately effective identification of Australian Curriculum General Capability: Literacy Elements, Sub-elements, and Level Statements that are suitable for the students and context. Insufficiently effective planning that outlines literacy learning strategies / activities conducive to achieving the specified learning, supported with suitable examples of literacy foci and learning resources. Insufficient consideration of realistic and appropriate opportunities for collaborative learning. Insufficient consideration of realistic and appropriate integration of digital technologies to meaningfully enhance this learning. Insufficient integration of high-quality academic literature to support your planning decisions. Overall, this planning is not ready for classroom use.	Submission does not meet the requirements of this criterion.	Not addressed / Not applicable.
Criterion 4: Academic and professional literacy 10%	Faultless academic literacy demonstrated with ALL present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Perfect use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Correctly formatted in-text citations. Correctly formatted reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Outstanding academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Perfect use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Correctly formatted in-text citations. Correctly formatted reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Distinctive academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Nearly faultless use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Near-perfect formatting of in-text citations. Near-perfect formatting of reference list. Exactly followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Creditable academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Skillful use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Commendable formatting of in-text citations. Commendable formatting of reference list. Closely followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Passable academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Correct word count (+/- 10%). Adequate use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Sufficiently well formatted in-text citations. Sufficiently well formatted reference list. Largely followed template instructions. Always clearly distinguishes between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Insufficient academic literacy demonstrated with MOST present: Incorrect word count (+/- 10%). Inadequate use of writing conventions (grammar, punctuation, spelling, structure, clarity of expression). Insufficiently well formatted in-text citations. Insufficiently well formatted reference list. Did not follow template instructions. Did not clearly distinguish between AI-assisted and original work with acknowledgement of all sources and an appendix that includes the prompts used and outputs generated.	Does not demonstrate academic literacy at the expected level.	Not addressed / Not applicable.

Description of SCU Grades

High Distinction:

Distinction:

The student’s performance, in addition to satisfying all of the basic learning requirements, demonstrates distinctive insight and ability in researching, analysing and applying relevant skills and concepts, and shows a well-developed ability to synthesise, integrate and evaluate knowledge. The student’s performance could be described as distinguished in relation to the learning requirements specified.

Credit:

Pass:

Fail:

The student’s performance fails to satisfy the learning requirements specified.

May 22, 2026

In this assessment, you will develop a professional Classroom Management Plan that connects observed classroom practice with institutional expectations, designed for a specific group of students.

Assessment Brief 1

EDUC3032 Classroom Management

Unit Code and Title	EDUC3032 Classroom Management
Assessment Number	Assessment 1
Assessment Type	Written Classroom Management Plan
Due Date	Week 3, Sunday 24th May, 11:59pm (AEST)
Grades Release	Week 4, Sunday 31st May, 11:59pm (AEST)
Weight	50%
Length / Duration	1500 words
Individual / Group	Individual
Unit Learning Outcomes (ULOs)	This assessment evaluates your achievement of the following Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO 1, ULO 2, ULO4

Task Overview

In this assessment, you will develop a professional Classroom Management Plan that connects observed classroom practice with institutional expectations, designed for a specific group of students.

You will begin by selecting one of two videos, one set in a primary school context, and one set in a secondary school context. Links to both videos are provided in Step 4 of this task brief. Select the video that best reflects your teaching context. You will then carefully observe your chosen video and critically analyse the teacher’s strategies across seven focus areas, identifying what the teacher does, interpreting why, and considering its impact on students. Using this observational evidence alongside the supplied class scenario, you will design and evaluate a practical classroom management plan for your own teaching context.

For each focus area, you must decide whether to adopt the observed strategy, adapt it for your context, or change it, and justify your decision by integrating relevant classroom management theory, institutional policy, and the needs of the students in your scenario. Your plan must demonstrate knowledge of relevant institutional policies and classroom management theory and explain how these inform and shape your behaviour management decisions and classroom practices.

Your plan must demonstrate how observed practice, relevant classroom management theories, and institutional policy expectations, such as safety, inclusion, and wellbeing, inform a safe, predictable, and resilient learning environment.

Rationale

Developing the capacity to plan for effective classroom management is a critical professional skill for beginning teachers. This assessment provides an opportunity to analyse authentic classroom practice and apply key classroom management concepts to a realistic teaching scenario. By observing and interpreting strategies used in the classroom video, you will examine how teachers establish routines, communicate expectations, build positive relationships, and create safe and supportive learning environments that promote student engagement and wellbeing.

The task requires you to connect theory, institutional policy, and observed practice to design a practical Classroom Management Plan for a diverse class context. Through this process, you will demonstrate your understanding of proactive behaviour management, inclusive practice, and the use of structured routines and strategies that support positive learning behaviours, developing the knowledge and skills addressed in the Unit Learning Outcomes.

The scenario-based approach encourages you to consider how classroom management decisions must respond to the needs of all learners, including students requiring targeted or intensive support, and how proactive processes foster student engagement, self-regulation, and cooperation. The Classroom Management Plan you produce may also serve as a useful professional resource, supporting your development as a reflective practitioner and contributing to your future teaching portfolio.

Resources

To complete this task, you will need access to the following resources:

Classroom video: Two classroom videos are provided in the links below. One set in a primary school context, and one set in a secondary school context. Select the video that best reflects your intended teaching context and watch it in full. Note timestamped examples for each focus area.

Primary classroom video: Task 1 Primary Literacy Review.mp4 (sign in with your SCU account to access)

Secondary classroom video: Task 1 Secondary Year 10 Geography.mp4 (sign in with your SCU account to access)

Unit readings and lecture materials: These provide the classroom management theories and whole person approaches you will reference in your plan.
Relevant education policy documents: For example, NSW Department of Education policies relating to behaviour, wellbeing, or inclusion.
APA 7th edition referencing guide: Available through the SCU Library website.

Instructions for Writing Your Classroom Management Plan

Using the classroom video and the class scenario provided, write a professional Classroom Management Plan in continuous prose. Your plan must follow the seven focus area headings listed below. Do not use dot points or tables. Use academic writing conventions and APA 7th edition referencing throughout.

Your Classroom Management Plan must be 1500 words (±10%), including a brief introduction and conclusion and excluding the reference list. Each focus area should be approximately 200 words.

Step 1: Review the School and Class Context

Before you begin planning, carefully review the school and class context. Your Classroom Management Plan must be designed for the class and students described below. Generic strategies that could apply to any classroom will not meet the required standard. You must specifically refer to Marcus and Lily where relevant across your plan.

School Context

You are a classroom teacher at a government school in NSW that implements a Positive Behaviour for Learning (PBL) framework, with the three core expectations: Be Safe, Be Respectful, Be a Learner. The school community is culturally and linguistically diverse and follows the NSW Department of Education’s policies related to student behaviour, wellbeing, and inclusion.

Class Context – 25 Students

Your class includes students from a range of cultural and linguistic backgrounds, with approximately one-third speaking a language other than English at home. The school draws from a low-to-mid socioeconomic area and participates in the Nationally Consistent Collection of Data (NCCD). Most students are settled and responsive to consistent routines, though five students require varying levels of additional support.

Step 2: Review Focus Students and Multi-Tiered System of Support Levels

Student Context – Focus Students

For this assessment, you will focus on two students, Marcus and Lily, whose profiles are provided in the table below.

Student	Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)	Profile
Marcus	Tier 2	Marcus has difficulty sustaining attention during extended seated tasks. He frequently calls out, leaves his seat, and distracts nearby students. He is on a Tier 2 check-in/check-out (CICO) monitoring plan reviewed daily with his teacher. No diagnosis: parents are informed and supportive.
Lily	Tier 3	Lily has a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (Level 1) and an Individual Education Plan (IEP). She finds unstructured transitions highly distressing and responds to unexpected changes with withdrawal or refusal. Lily works well in structured, predictable tasks but becomes overwhelmed in noisy group activities.

Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS)

Your plan should demonstrate strategies at different levels of support.

Tier	What This Means in Your Plan	Students
Tier 1: Universal	Foundational strategies for ALL 25 students, routines, expectations, instruction, and environment every student experiences.	All students
Tier 2: Targeted	Additional support built into your plan. For example: movement breaks, structured task sequences, daily check-ins.	Marcus
Tier 3: Intensive	Individualised support embedded in your plan. For example: visual schedules, advance warning of transitions, sensory adjustments.	Lily

Note: At the start of your plan, clearly state your chosen year level, subject area, and school context (early childhood, primary or secondary school setting).

Step 3: Understand the Seven Focus Areas

Before watching the classroom video, review the seven focus areas that will guide your observations, analysis, and planning. Each focus area should be addressed in approximately 200 words.

#	Focus Area	What to Address	MTSS Connection	Descriptor
1	Routines and Transitions	How will you use routines and transitions to maximise learning time, maintain focus, and create predictability? Include any adaptations for Marcus or Lily.	Tier 1 foundation for all students. Tier 3: advance transition warnings for Lily.	Your analysis must clearly identify and explain how the teacher uses routines and transitions to maximise learning time and maintain student focus. This should include how these routines help maintain clear expectations for behaviour and support positive student engagement, drawing on specific examples from the video.
2	Explicit Teaching and Reinforcement of Expectations	How will you explicitly teach and reinforce behaviour expectations? How will you differentiate this for students requiring additional support?	Tier 1 for all. Tier 2: additional reminders and prompts for Marcus.	Your response must include an analysis of how the teacher clearly communicates expectations for behaviour and ensures students understand them. This should explain how these expectations are consistently reinforced over time, using strategies such as direct instruction, modelling, or reminders.
3	Effective Instruction and Feedback	How will your instruction and feedback strategies support all learners? How will you reduce cognitive load, maintain student engagement, and encourage active participation during learning activities?	Tier 1 for all. Tier 2/3: targeted feedback and task adjustments for Marcus and Lily.	You must explain how the teacher uses clear instructions, effective questioning, and specific feedback to support student engagement and understanding. Your analysis should highlight how these strategies maintain focus, prevent confusion, and reduce cognitive load.
4	Positive Relationships and Classroom Climate	How will you build and maintain positive relationships and a supportive classroom climate, including for students with identified needs?	Tier 1 for all. Tier 2: rapport-building check-ins for Marcus. Tier 3: trusted adult relationship for Lily.	Your analysis must explain how the teacher builds positive relationships with students, using respectful communication, maintaining a calm and supportive tone, and acknowledging student efforts. You should highlight how these positive interactions support student motivation, confidence, and positive behaviour.
5	Modelling Desired Behaviours	How does your professional conduct serve as a proactive management tool? How does modelling help students understand and adopt positive behaviours?	Tier 1 for all. Consider how modelling explicit expectations supports Marcus and Lily.	Your response must describe how the teacher demonstrates and models the behaviour they expect from students. Your analysis should explain how this modelling helps students understand and adopt positive behaviours, making expectations clear and consistent.
6	Proactive Behaviour Management	What proactive strategies will you use to prevent disruption and support sustained student engagement through clear routines, structured activities, and active participation in learning? Include any targeted monitoring or individualised support for Marcus and Lily. Where appropriate, explain how these proactive strategies support student engagement, cooperation, and the development of self-regulation.	Tier 1 for all. Tier 2: CICO check-ins for Marcus. Tier 3: structured predictability for Lily.	Your analysis must show how the teacher uses proactive strategies, such as pre-corrections, reminders, and calm redirections, to maintain focus and prevent misbehaviour. You should explain how these strategies maintain a positive and focused learning environment.
7	Creating a Safe and Predictable Environment	How will you design the physical environment to be safe, predictable, and accessible? Include any environmental adjustments for Lily or Marcus.	Tier 1 for all. Tier 3: physical and sensory adjustments for Lily.	Your response must describe how the teacher maintains a consistent and predictable classroom environment, including clear rules, logical room arrangements, and consistent use of materials. Your analysis should explain how these choices help students feel safe, confident, and ready to learn, promoting a structured and supportive learning space.

Step 4: Watch the Classroom Video

Two classroom videos are provided in the links below. One set in a primary school context, and one set in a secondary school context. Select that video that best reflects your intended teaching context and watch it in full.

Primary classroom video: Task 1 Primary Literacy Review.mp4 (sign in with your SCU account to access)
Secondary classroom video: Task 1 Secondary Year 10 Geography.mp4 (sign in with your SCU account to access)

As you watch the video:

For each focus area, identify a moment where the teacher demonstrates a relevant strategy.
Note the timestamp for each example (for example, 4:12 or 4:12–4:45).
Consider the impact of each strategy on student behaviour, engagement, and learning.

These timestamped observations will form the evidence base for your analysis and planning.

Step 5: Analyse and Apply Strategies

For each focus area:

Record your timestamped observation, describing what the teacher did and its impact on students.
Decide whether you will:

o Adopt: Use the same strategy because it suits your school and class context

o Adapt: Modify it to better suit your class, Marcus, or Lily

o Change: Use a different strategy because the observed approach is not suitable, explaining why

Outline your strategy, ensuring you:

o Justify it with at least one policy and one theory and/or whole-person approach

o Explain how it supports Marcus (Tier 2) and/or Lily (Tier 3) if relevant

Step 6: Write Your Plan Using the Seven Focus Areas

Each focus area should be addressed in continuous prose (approximately 200 words each). Include timestamps from the video where relevant. Connect your strategies to the students’ needs where appropriate. Maintain a professional academic style with APA 7th edition referencing.

Step 7: Conclusion

End your plan with a brief conclusion (3–5 sentences) that summarises how your Classroom Management Plan supports positive behaviour, student engagement, and maintains a safe and inclusive learning environment.

Presentation Requirements

Written in continuous prose using the seven focus area headings
Approximately 1500 words, including the introduction and conclusion (excluding references)
APA 7th edition referencing throughout
At least one policy document referenced across the plan
At least one classroom management theory or whole-person approach referenced across the plan
Timestamps from the video cited where relevant
Professional academic writing style

Referencing

You are required to use APA 7. Refer to the SCU Library Guides for further guidance.

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) Guidelines

This assessment is classified as GenAI use Level 2: May be used for specific assessment tasks or purposes as identified and scaffolded by the Unit Assessor.

✅ You may use GenAI to research topics, generate ideas, and develop an outline. Acknowledge this use.
✅ You may use GenAI tools such as Copilot and Grammarly for grammar and readability checking. Acknowledge this use.
❌ You may not use GenAI to write your assessment or produce your submission.

For further information see Generative AI for Students.

GenAI Declaration

You must include one of the following statements with your assessment submission:

If you DID use GenAI, include this statement:

I acknowledge that I have used Generative AI tools to complete this assessment in accordance with the conditions outlined in the Assessment Brief. I used [insert name of GenAI tool(s)] to [briefly describe how the tool(s) were used, e.g., generate ideas, check grammar, develop an outline].

If you DID NOT use GenAI, include this statement:

I acknowledge that I have not knowingly used GenAI to complete this assessment.

Note: The Unit Assessor may ask you to explain or demonstrate how GenAI tools were used and how your use complied with the assessment guidelines. Please ensure you are prepared to discuss this if requested.

Submissions

You must submit the following item(s):

Submit your assessment via the Assessment Tasks & Submission area on the Blackboard unit site. Follow the on-screen instructions to upload your file(s).
1500 Word Classroom Management Plan as a Word document to Turnitin via the Assessment portal. Include a Cover page at the start of your document, and a reference list at the end of your document.
A penalty of 5% of the available marks will be deducted from the actual mark at one minute after the due date. A further 5% will be deducted for each subsequent calendar day until the mark reaches zero. Refer to the Assessment, Teaching and Learning Procedures, Section 4 for more information.

All submissions must be clearly labelled. Include the unit code, assessment number, full name, student ID. For example, EDUC3032_A1_FullName_ID123456.

If you are unsure how to submit an item, refer the following support resources: SCU How To Guide: How to Submit an Assignment in Turnitin in Blackboard Ultra for Students

Rules Relating to Assessment and Examination

For information regarding extensions, special consideration, late submissions, resubmissions, grades, appeals, and academic integrity, refer to:

Rules Relating to Awards — Rule 3 — Coursework Awards — Student Assessment and Examinations
How to apply for Special Consideration
Final Grades

Academic Integrity Declaration

By submitting this assessment, I declare that:

I have read and understood SCU’s Academic Integrity policies and referencing guidelines. I am aware of the consequences of academic misconduct and confirm that this submission is my own original work, referenced appropriately, and has not been previously submitted. I authorize its reproduction for authentication purposes and understand the implications of a false declaration. I have adhered to guidelines regarding Generative AI.

Assessment Criteria

Criteria	High Distinction (HD) 85-100%	Distinction (D) 75-84%	Credit (C) 65-74%	Pass (P) 50-64%	Fail (F) Below 50%
Classroom Management Plan 40% ULO 1, ULO 2	Plan is expertly crafted across all seven focus areas. Video observations, policy, and theory are critically evaluated and seamlessly integrated. Each strategy is analytically justified and clearly supports student engagement and participation in learning activities.	Plan is well-developed across all seven focus areas. Video observations, policy, and theory are evaluated and clearly integrated throughout with strong analytical justification.	Plan is adequately developed across all seven focus areas. Some analysis and evaluation of video observations, policy, and theory is evident. Some areas may lack depth or specificity.	Plan addresses all seven focus areas at a basic level. Video observations, policy, and theory are present but may be loosely integrated or unevenly connected to practice.	Plan is incomplete or does not address the class scenario. Fewer than five focus areas are addressed. Video observations, policy, and theory are largely absent or not meaningfully applied.
Tiered Support and Inclusive Practice 30% ULO 2, ULO 4	MTSS is applied with precision and critically evaluated. Universal strategies are analysed for their effectiveness. Targeted support for Marcus and intensive support for Lily are evaluated against their profiles and relevant policy and purposefully embedded across the plan.	MTSS is applied and evaluated clearly across all three tiers. Universal strategies are analysed. Support for Marcus and Lily is well-reasoned and evaluated against their individual contexts.	MTSS is applied coherently across the three tiers within an inclusive practice framework. Universal strategies address the needs of all students and reflect a whole-person approach to classroom management. Targeted support for Marcus and intensive support for Lily is present and responsive to their student profiles.	MTSS is referenced. Basic support for Marcus and Lily is present. Universal strategies are identified but may be underdeveloped.	MTSS is absent or mentioned only superficially. Support for Marcus and Lily is absent or not responsive to their profiles.
Proactive Strategies, Engagement and Self-Regulation 20% ULO 4	Proactive processes for engagement, self-regulation, and cooperation are purposefully embedded and critically evaluated across the plan. Strategies are analytically justified and show sophisticated understanding of how proactive management prevents disruption and sustains learning.	Proactive processes for engagement, self-regulation, and cooperation are clearly applied across the plan. Strategies show clear understanding of how they prevent disruption and support sustained engagement.	Proactive strategies for student engagement and self-regulation are present across the plan. Strategies are identified and applied with some justification of how they support positive learning behaviour and prevent disruption.	Some proactive strategies are present but basic or inconsistently applied. The connection to self-regulation or cooperation may be limited or unclear.	Proactive strategies are absent or not meaningfully applied. No clear connection to preventing disruption or supporting learning behaviour is evident.

May 22, 2026

Career exploration and discovery The purpose of this assessment is to select five (5) journal articles related to the discipline of business and to learn from them with respect to your own career wishes and desires. Your job
Instructions

Information

Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessments must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Important academic integrity breaches include plagiarism, collusion, copying, impersonation, contract cheating, data fabrication and falsification. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment. Format

Instructions

Assessments must be in MS Word format with no spacing, 11-pt Calibri font and at least 2cm margins on all four sides with appropriate section headings and page numbers. You must name your file with the Unit Code and Group Number (e.g. “HI5000 Group 4”). Check that you submit the correct document, as special consideration is not granted if you make a mistake. Student IDs need to be indicated on the cover page. Non-contributing students do not receive marks. Penalties All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time, along with a completed Assessment Cover Page. Late penalties apply. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing. Penalties are associated with incorrect citation and referencing.

Career exploration and discovery The purpose of this assessment is to select five (5) journal articles related to the discipline of business and to learn from them with respect to your own career wishes and desires. Your job is to: identify issues, gather data, analyse the forces at play in each of the five journal articles that is related to career development and recommend appropriate courses of action that will benefit your career.

How to proceed and write the Journal Article Review

In this assessment the objective is to, “…build learner capacity to identify, gather, summarise and reference academic research papers related to the discipline of business.”

The way you can think about this is that you will be taking another person’s text and:

understand it, summarize it, and write in your own words your opinion about that text and whether it impacts or is influential with respect to your career.

Keep in mind that YOUR opinion matters as much as does the author who wrote the text. You are reviewing their work! They are not reviewing YOUR work!

10 Tips for Writing Holmes Institute Assignments and Score A++ grades in Australia

Now, how do you write this?

Step 1: Pick a Journal Article #1 (say 10 pages) that is about career development or the career you want to have when you graduate from Holmes.

Step 2: To get an idea of what the topic is about, “look at the abstract”! Read it very carefully.

Step 3: WARNING! Don’t start writing until you are fully aware of what the journal article is about.

Step 4: Read through the article and extract and write a summary of the main points of the article. Write them on a separate piece of paper.

Step 5: Make certain that supporting facts to the main points are also summarized. If you see words you do not understand just use your dictionary!

Step 6: Read through the article AGAIN – you should really understand the article now.

Step 7: Go back to # 4 above and expand the summary of the main points that you have written – and any facts that were used to support them. BUT, this is a summary of the author’s arguments, thoughts and views – NOT YOURS!

Repeat steps #1 to 7 using five different journal articles selected by the group.

Remember! Use short and simple sentences such as:

“The author thinks that there are strong career opportunities in XXXX.”

“ He also thinks that there are not many opportunities in the banking industry.”

So, in summary short sentences not more than 10 words to a sentence!

OK, now you should understand what the article is about as you have summarized the main points and have created some paragraphs about the main points.

So, you can NOW start to express your main thoughts using this structure:

Title – keep it short and interesting, e.g. “Career opportunities in the IT industry in XXX”

Citation, please use Holmes Institute adapted Harvard referencing

Section A: Journal Article #1

Journal Article #1: Introduction

Use it to simply state the main points of the argument. If there are 4 main points, then simply speak about these in 4 short sentences – remember less than 10 words per sentence. So, in total it will be about 40 words. (Include reasons for your choice if the case)

Summarize the main points of the article. Highlight reasons for choosing this article

Your opinion on Journal Article #1

Go back to #7 and use that expanded summary to discuss what your opinion is of the author’s ideas. This is YOUR opportunity to say what YOU THINK! Write in your own words, maximum of 10 words to a line and maximum of 4 sentences to a paragraph.

Reflect on the author’s ideas in your own words. Keep sentences concise, not exceeding 10 words each. Limit each paragraph to a maximum of 4 sentences.

Critique of Journal Article #1

This is your chance to say what you think of what the author said. Is it reasonable or unreasonable? So, you could say, “The author is disappointed about banking employment. (7 words) But he does not offer evidence.” (6 words). (Include identification of Unit issues in the chosen case)

Evaluate the reasonableness of the author’s arguments. Provide concise critiques, not exceeding 10 words per sentence. Identify any issues with evidence or reasoning.

Impact on your career- Journal Article #1

Possible impact on your career of the discussion in the journal article

Discuss potential implications of the article on your career. Keep responses brief and to the point. Repeat the Above Steps in Section A for the Remaining Journal Articles to create Sections B to E for Journal Articles #2 to #5. Follow the same structure and guidelines for each article.

Section F: Overall Summary of the Five Journal Articles:

Summarize key findings and insights from all articles. Reflect on the collective impact of the articles on career exploration. Conclude with any overarching observations or lessons learned. PROOFREAD, make certain all grammar, spelling, upper & lower cases are correct.

Penalties may reduce your actual mark, as follows:

Late submissions -5% per day. No cover sheet OR inaccuracies on the cover sheet -10% Inaccuracies in referencing OR incomplete referencing OR not in Holmes-adapted-Harvard style -10% No appendix at end indicating which student wrote which section, or incomplete details entered in appendix -10% Submission is not all in one single document -10% Assessment Citation and Referencing Rules

Holmes has implemented a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following rules apply: 1. Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources that provide full-text access to the source’s content for lecturers and markers.

The reference list must be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled: “References”.

The reference list must include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged A-Z alphabetically by author surname with each reference numbered (1 to 10, etc.) and each reference MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source. For example:
1. Hawking, P., McCarthy, B. & Stein, A. 2004. Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf 4. All assignments must include in-text citations to the listed references. These must include the surname of the author/s or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of the content, and paragraph where the content can be found. For example, “The company decided to implement an enterprise-wide data warehouse business intelligence strategy.
May 22, 2026

HI6025 Group Assignment T1 2026 Group Assignment Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T1 2026 Unit Code HI6025 Unit Title Accounting Theory and Current Issues

HI6025 Group Assignment T1 2026

Group Assignment

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester	T1 2026
Unit Code	HI6025
Unit Title	Accounting Theory and Current Issues
Assessment Type	Group Assignment
Weight	40 %
Word Limit	3000 words ± 500 words Please use “word count” and include the word count in the assignment cover page
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 unless otherwise specified.
Academic Integrity Information	Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessments must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.
Penalties	This assessment must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time, as late penalties apply (refer Student Handbook). Assessment submitted without a completed Assessment Cover Page will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. This assessment must be submitted in Microsoft Word format (unless otherwise explicitly specified in the assessment instructions). Submissions which breach this requirement will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. A twenty percent (20%) penalty will be imposed for all single student (solo) group assessment submissions. Assessments submitted to Blackboard via a Virtual Private Network will receive a fifty percent (50%) penalty. Assessment submitted to Blackboard via an overseas IP address is a direct breach of the Holmes’ Student Academic Conduct and Integrity Policy and will be reported for academic misconduct with associated penalties imposed. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing method. The use of an incorrect reference method, and/or missing/incorrect citations will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. For all other penalties, please refer to the Group Assessment Instructions listed on Blackboard.

Group Assignment Guidelines and Specifications

Choose a company listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) here:

https://www.marketindex.com.au/asx-listed-companies and register your chosen company with your Lecturer (in your campus) in the class or via email by Week 9. No student can use the same company as another student, so register your company early.

10% will be deducted if your group did not register your chosen company with your Lecturer in your campus.

Provide the following details if emailing your Tutor to register your company:

Group Number
Campus you are registered (Sydney/Melbourne/Brisbane/Gold Coast)
The name of the company as your 1st choice, 2nd choice & 3rd choice.

[If your 1st choice is taken, you will get your 2nd choice etc.]

Part A: (25 marks)

Executive Remuneration and Positive Accounting Theory

Obtain the latest annual report of your group’s chosen company (2025 or 2024 only if 2025 isn’t available), and critically evaluate its executive remuneration structure using Positive Accounting Theory (PAT).

Required:

1. Identification of Remuneration Structure (6 marks)

Identify and clearly explain the key components of the executive remuneration package, including:

Fixed remuneration (salary)
Short-Term Incentives (STI)
Long-Term Incentives (LTI)

For each component, include any relevant performance measures (if applicable) (e.g., profit, EPS) used to determine payouts.

Present your answer in a table format, with clear explanations for each component.

All information must be supported with appropriate references to the company’s Remuneration Report.

HI6025 Group Assignment T1 2026

2. Evaluation Using Positive Accounting Theory (14 marks)

Using the identified remuneration structure in (1), critically evaluate how it may influence managerial behaviour by applying:

Bonus Plan Hypothesis
Debt Covenant Hypothesis
Political Cost Hypothesis

Students must:

Support your answer using at least three (3) relevant academic journal articles.
Link specific remuneration components (e.g., STI, LTI, performance targets) to each PAT hypothesis
Explain how these incentives may lead to specific accounting choices or earnings management behaviour
Support arguments with examples from the company’s Remuneration Report

This is the core of the assignment — marks are awarded for critical analysis rather than description, and arguments must be supported with relevant academic literature.

3. Overall Evaluation, Conclusion and Recommendations (5 marks)

Assess whether the remuneration structure:

Aligns managers’ interests with shareholders
Encourages or discourages opportunistic behaviour

Based on your evaluation, propose two (2) recommendations to improve the remuneration structure.

Recommendations should be realistic and supported by relevant academic literature. Answers that demonstrate such support will achieve higher marks.

Additional Instructions for Part A:

Students must explicitly link remuneration components to managerial incentives and accounting behaviour using Positive Accounting Theory.
Use at least three academic journal articles in Q2.
Students must use the most recent Annual Report.
Your chosen journal articles must be published from year 2010 onwards.

For academic journal articles, you can search online using Google Scholar (not Google) or access relevant Accounting and Auditing Journals via the ProQuest Database.

Some journals can be accessed in ProQuest by clicking on the links below:

Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal
Journal of Applied Accounting Research
The Accounting Review
Journal of International Accounting Research

HI6025 Group Assignment T1 2026

Log-in details in ProQuest Username: HOLMES2004; Password: PQLogin2025@

Accounting journals can also be accessed via the ProQuest Database link available via the Student Login page in the Holmes website.

Search and read several articles before you select the article you will use here.

The chosen articles must be referenced using the Holmes Adapted Harvard Referencing style, with the article’s hyperlink added to the reference list.

Avoid using ChatGPT generated material and submit them as your assessment. Ensure your assessment submitted for marking are from reliable sources, properly referenced, and is your own work, not the output, or a copy from generative AI, such as ChatGPT.

Part B: (12 marks)

“Professional judgment plays a central role in the application of accounting standards in financial reporting.”

Using your group’s allocated company listed on the ASX, critically discuss this statement with reference to any two (2) of the accounting standards discussed in class.

Choose from the following:

AASB 116: Property, Plant and Equipment
AASB 138: Intangible Assets
AASB 119: Employee Benefits and
AASB 16: Leases

Required:

1. Professional Judgement Disclosures (4 marks)

Using the latest financial report, select any two (2) relevant disclosures (one for each chosen accounting standard) where professional judgment is applied.

For each disclosure:

Clearly identify and explain the disclosure.
Provide clearly labelled screenshots (including any relevant notes to the financial statement) to support your answer.

2. Evaluation of Transparency (4 marks)

Evaluate whether the company’s disclosures provide sufficient transparency for stakeholders to understand those professional judgments. Provide specific examples to support your answer.

3. Conclusion and Justification (4 marks)

Clearly state whether you agree or disagree with the statement and justify your position with reference to your analysis, relevant accounting standards, and two (2) relevant academic accounting literature.

Your chosen academic journal articles must be published from year 2010 onwards.

Assignment Structure:

The assignment should include the following components:

The assignment cover page which clearly states your group members’ names and student numbers, and all other required details.
Executive summary
Table of contents
A brief introduction or overview of what the assignment is about
Body of the assignment with appropriate section headings
Conclusion
List of References (follow the Holmes Adapted Harvard Referencing guidelines)

Marking Criteria	Weighting
Part A
1. Identification of Remuneration Structure Identify and clearly explain the key components of the executive remuneration package, including: Fixed remuneration (salary) Short-Term Incentives (STI) Long-Term Incentives (LTI) For each component, include any relevant performance measures (if applicable) (e.g., profit, EPS) used to determine payouts. Present your answer in a table format, with clear explanations for each component. All information must be supported with appropriate references to the company’s Remuneration Report.	6%
2. Evaluation Using Positive Accounting Theory Using the identified remuneration structure in (1), critically evaluate how it may influence managerial behaviour by applying: Bonus Plan Hypothesis Debt Covenant Hypothesis Political Cost Hypothesis	14%
3. Overall Evaluation, Conclusion and Recommendations Assess whether the remuneration structure: Aligns managers’ interests with shareholders Encourages or discourages opportunistic behaviour Based on your evaluation, propose two (2) recommendations to improve the remuneration structure. Recommendations should be realistic and supported by relevant academic literature. Answers that demonstrate such support will achieve higher marks.	5%
Part B
1. Professional Judgement Disclosures Using the latest financial report, select any two (2) relevant disclosures (one for each chosen accounting standard) where professional judgment is applied. For each disclosure: Clearly identify and explain the disclosure. Provide clearly labelled screenshots (including any relevant notes to the financial statement) to support your answer.	4%
2. Evaluation of Transparency Evaluate whether the company’s disclosures provide sufficient transparency for stakeholders to understand those professional judgments. Provide specific examples to support your answer.	4%
3. Conclusion and Justification Clearly state whether you agree or disagree with the statement and justify your position with reference to your analysis, relevant accounting standards, and two (2) relevant academic accounting literature. Your chosen academic journal articles must be published from year 2010 onwards.	4%
Overall Presentation of Assignment	3%
TOTAL Weight	40%

Student Assessment Citation and Referencing Rules

Holmes has implemented a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following rules apply:

Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources that provide full-text access to the source’s content for lecturers and markers.
The reference list must be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled: “References”.
The reference list must include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged A-Z alphabetically by author surname with each reference numbered (1 to 10, etc.) and each reference MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source. For example:1. Hawking, P., McCarthy, B. & Stein, A. 2004. Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
All assignments must include in-text citations to the listed references. These must include the surname of the author/s or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of the content, and paragraph where the content can be found. For example, “The company decided to implement an enterprise-wide data warehouse business intelligence strategy (Hawking et al., 2004, p3(4)).”

Academic Integrity

Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity, as it is integral to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of Academic Integrity breaches. If you have questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources can also be found through the Study Skills link on Blackboard.

Academic integrity breaches are serious offences punishable by penalties ranging from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.

Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches

Plagiarism	Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is known as self-plagiarism.
Collusion	Working with one or more other individuals to complete an assignment, in a way that is not authorized.
Copying	Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied, this may also be considered an offence.
Impersonation	Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as oneself, in an in-person examination.
Contract cheating	Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task, generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment.
Data fabrication and falsification	Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false conclusions, including manipulating images.
Source: INQAAHE, 2020

Marking Rubric

Part A

Marking Criteria	Excellent (HD)	Very Good (D)	Good (C)	Satisfactory (P)	Unsatisfactory (F)
1. Identification of Remuneration Structure (6%)	Accurately identifies all components (fixed, STI, LTI) with clear explanations. Performance measures well integrated. Excellent table format and strong evidence from Remuneration Report.	Clear identification and explanation with good use of evidence. Minor omissions.	Adequate identification; explanations somewhat descriptive. Limited integration of performance measures.	Basic identification with minimal explanation. Weak structure or limited evidence.	Incomplete or incorrect identification. Little or no supporting evidence.
2. Evaluation Using Positive Accounting Theory (14%)	Excellent critical evaluation applying all three PAT hypotheses. Strong linkage between incentives and managerial behaviour. Insightful analysis.	Good application of PAT with clear links. Minor gaps in depth.	Adequate application; some analysis but partly descriptive.	Basic understanding with weak or unclear application. Mostly descriptive.	Poor or incorrect application of PAT. No meaningful analysis.
3. Overall Evaluation, Conclusion and Recommendations (5%)	Strong evaluation with well-justified conclusion. Recommendations are realistic, insightful, and supported by academic literature.	Good evaluation and conclusion. Recommendations supported but less insightful.	Adequate evaluation; recommendations somewhat general with limited support.	Limited evaluation and weak recommendations. Minimal literature support.	Little or no evaluation. No meaningful recommendations or support.

Part B

Marking Criteria	Excellent (HD)	Very Good (D)	Good (C)	Satisfactory (P)	Unsatisfactory (F)
1. Professional Judgement Disclosures (4%)	Accurately identifies two relevant disclosures with clear explanation. Screenshots well-labelled and effectively integrated. Strong evidence.	Good identification and explanation. Screenshots included with minor issues.	Adequate identification; explanation lacks depth. Screenshots present but not well integrated.	Limited explanation and weak use of screenshots.	Incorrect or missing disclosures. No meaningful evidence.
2. Evaluation of Transparency (4%)	Insightful evaluation of transparency with strong examples. Demonstrates critical understanding.	Good evaluation with relevant examples.	Basic evaluation; limited critical insight.	Minimal evaluation; largely descriptive.	No meaningful evaluation.
3. Conclusion and Justification (4%)	Clear, well-justified position. Strong integration of analysis, accounting standards, and ≥2 academic articles (2010+).	Clear position with good justification and use of literature.	Position stated but limited justification or weak integration of sources.	Unclear position with minimal support.	No clear position or supporting evidence.

Overall Presentation

Marking Criteria	Excellent (HD)	Very Good (D)	Good (C)	Satisfactory (P)	Unsatisfactory (F)
Presentation (3%)	Excellent structure, clarity, formatting, and referencing. Professional presentation.	Well-presented with minor issues.	Adequate presentation; some formatting issues.	Poor structure or inconsistent referencing.	Very poor presentation; difficult to follow

May 22, 2026

HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026 Assessment Guidelines Group Assignment Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T1 2026 Unit Code HI6026 Unit Title Auditing, Assurance and Compliance
HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026 Assessment Guidelines Group Assignment

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines Trimester T1 2026 Unit Code HI6026 Unit Title Auditing, Assurance and Compliance Assessment Type Group Assignment Weight 40% 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 unless otherwise specified.

Academic Integrity Information Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessments must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment. Penalties This assessment must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time, as late penalties apply (refer Student Handbook). Assessment submitted without a completed Assessment Cover Page will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. This assessment must be submitted in Microsoft Word format (unless otherwise explicitly specified in the assessment instructions). Submissions which breach this requirement will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. A twenty percent (20%) penalty will be imposed for all single student (solo) group assessment submissions. Assessments submitted to Blackboard via a Virtual Private Network will receive a fifty percent (50%) penalty. Assessment submitted to Blackboard via an overseas IP address is a direct breach of the Holmes’ Student Academic Conduct and Integrity Policy and will be reported for academic misconduct with associated penalties imposed. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing method. The use of an incorrect reference method, and/or missing/incorrect citations will receive a twenty percent (20%) penalty. For all other penalties, please refer to the Group Assessment Instructions listed on Blackboard. HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Group Assignment Guidelines and Specifications

Reference requirements

Adapted Harvard Referencing

Adapted Harvard Referencing approach example and guidelines:

Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources which provide full text access to the source’s content for lecturers and markers. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled: References. It should include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged alphabetically A-Z by author surname and each referenced numbered (1 to 10 etc.). In addition, each reference MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source.
1. Hawking, P., McCarthy, B. & Stein, A. 2004. Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf All assignments will require additional in-text reference details which will consist of the surname of the author/authors or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of the content, paragraph where the content can be found. For example, “The company decided to implement an enterprise-wide data warehouse business intelligence strategy (Hawking et al, 2004, p3(4)).”
Non-Adherence to Referencing Guidelines

Where students do not follow the above guidelines:

Students who submit assignments which do not comply with the guidelines, a 20% penalty will be applied. Later penalties will apply, as per the Student Handbook each day, after the student/s have been notified of the resubmission requirements. HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Students who comply with guidelines and the citations are “fake” will be reported for academic misconduct.

Assignment Requirements – Questions

Groups must be formed by members from the same class. Each group has been allocated a subject company for completing this assignment. In the excel file “Find Your Company” under “Assessments” on Blackboard, you will find the listed company you have been allocated for completing this assignment.

As a group, your assignment should be based on the company allocated to your group (Refer to the information given above). Your assignment will not be marked if you use a different company than the one you have been allocated, or you will be asked to resubmit your assignment using the correct company. Students are not allowed to complete the assignment using the same company as used by another group.

Go to the website of your allocated company. Then, go to the Investor Relations section of the website. This section may be called: “Investors”, “Shareholder Information,” or similar titles. In this section, find the company’s annual report and other related reports. Download the firm’s latest annual report and other related information and reports and save it to your computer. For example, these reports may be dated 30 June 2024 or 30 June 2025.

Requirements – Questions

As a group, assume that you have been appointed as the external auditor for your allocated company for the financial year ending June 2024 or 2025. Prepare a report to adequately address the following:

Part 1

As external auditors for the assigned company, prepare a report on this part that includes the following:

Describe the key characteristics of the company and its business strategy, including the industry in which it operates, and the market conditions it faces. Identify the major business risks and threats facing the company and assess their potential impact on its operations and financial reporting, particularly in relation to audit planning and risk assessment. Assess the likelihood of material misstatements in the company’s financial statements by analyzing factors contributing to inherent and control risks. Additionally, explain the concept of detection risk and its significance within the audit process (15 marks) HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Part 2

Sustainability Assurance Engagements in Australia: mandatory ESG reporting

Australia has recently introduced mandatory climate-related financial disclosures and is progressively moving toward mandatory assurance of sustainability (ESG) information.

Critically evaluate the importance of mandatory sustainability and ESG reporting and assurance in the Australian context and check if your allocated company is compliant.

In your response:

Analyze how mandatory ESG reporting enhances transparency, accountability, and decision-usefulness for stakeholders. Critically examine the challenges and limitations associated with mandatory ESG reporting and assurance, including issues related to measurement uncertainty, greenwashing, and auditability of non-financial information. Evaluate the implications for the auditing profession, particularly in terms of: audit evidence, professional judgement, assurance levels (limited vs reasonable), and the expansion of the auditor’s role. Discuss whether mandatory ESG reporting is likely to reduce or widen the audit expectation gap, providing justification for your argument. (15 marks)

The assignment structure must be as follows:

HolmesInstitute Assignment Cover Sheet – Full Name, Student No., Contribution. Executive Summary The Executive summary should be concise and not involve too much detail. It should make commentary on the main points only and follow the sequence of the report. Write the Executive Summary after the report is completed, once you have an overview of the entire text. The Executive Summary appears on the first page of the report. Contents Page – This needs to show a logical listing of all the sub-headings of the report’s contents. Note this is excluded from the total word count. Introduction – A short paragraph that includes background, scope and the main points raised in order of importance. There should be a brief conclusion at the end of the Introduction. Main Body Paragraphs with numbered subheadings – Detailed information that elaborates on the main points raised in the Introduction. Each paragraph should begin with a clear topic sentence, then supporting sentences with facts and evidence obtained from research and finish with a concluding sentence at the end. Conclusion – A logical and coherent evaluation based on a thorough and an objective assessment of the research performed. Appendices – Include any additional explanatory information which is supplementary and/or graphical help communicate the main ideas made in the report. Refer to the appendices in the main body paragraphs, as and where appropriate. (Note this is excluded from the total word count.) HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Group Formation and Group Assignment

To ensure that all students participate equitably in the group assignment and that students are responsible for the academic integrity of all components of the assignment. You need to complete the following Group Assignment Task Allocation table, relevant evidence (authenticity of your assignment) which identifies which student/students are responsible for the various sections of the assignment.

This table needs to be completed and submitted with the assignment as it is a compulsory component required before any grading is undertaken. Students that are registered in a solo group are not required to fill this table.

Both assessment items must be submitted on Blackboard. The written assignment must be in a report format and submitted through safe assign prior to final submission. The originality percentage should be as low as possible. The written submission must be double-checked, edited and rephrased if the originality percentage and plagiarism risk is noted as high, as per safe assign.

Marking Criteria

Group Assignment Marking Criteria Weighting • Executive Summary 2% • Introduction and Main Body of the Report 30% • Overall Presentation, Evidence of research and use of appropriate refencing in the assignment 8% Total Weight of the Report 40% Assignment Section Student/Students HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Academic Integrity

Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic integrity is integral to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of Academic Integrity breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these resources can also be found through the Study Sills link on Blackboard.

Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or Unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment.

Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches

Plagiarism Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is known as self-plagiarism. Collusion Working with one or more other individuals to complete an assignment, in a way that is not authorized. Copying Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied, this may also be considered an offence. Impersonation Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as oneself, in an in-person examination. Contract cheating Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task, generally in exchange for money or other manners of payment. Data fabrication and falsification Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false conclusions, including manipulating images. Source: INQAAHE, 2020 HI6026 Group Assignment T1 2026

Marking Rubric

Excellent HD Very Good D Good C Satisfactory P Unsatisfied F Executive Summary (2 marks) Very effectively written synopsis with clear communication of the main points in concise paragraph. Competently composed a strong synopsis. The main points are communicated well. Synopsis is professionally written with all the expected points raised. Synopsis is clearly written, but it is brief or has some errors. Synopsis is deficient and poorly written. Too brief. Main Body Including Introduction (30 marks) Main points are logically ordered, sharp sense of structuring and arrangement of key information. Supporting details are specific to the points and adequate facts and other evidence are provided and well-articulated. There are valid points raised with a good argument. Paragraphing is noted, and the points in the introduction are explained in more detail with supporting evidence. Structure is professionally organised. There are valid points raised. Paragraphing is noted, and the points in the introduction are explained in more detail with some supporting evidence. Structure is well organised. There are valid points raised. Paragraphing is noted, and the points in the introduction are explained in more detail with some supporting evidence. Satisfactory organization: main points are there but they are disjointed. Structure is adequately well organised. Poorly organized. no logical progression; beginning and ending vague. No structure. Lacks substance. No research noted. Overall Presentation, Evidence of research and use of appropriate refencing in the assignment (8 marks) Total (40) References are consistently correct using Adapted Harvard style. No missing citations. A strong reference list with relevant and credible sources used. Evidence of extensive research. And excellent presentation References are consistently correct using Harvard style. No missing citations. References used are good, but not extensive. However, a very good prestation report Generally correct referencing using Harvard style. More references are required. However, a good prestation report Some References are used but not used consistently. Not enough research done. References are missing or do not comply with correct referencing style. Note: This report is provided as a sample for reference purposes only. For further guidance, detailed solutions, or personalized assignment support, please contact us directly.
May 22, 2026
Case study: Does working from home work? James Smith is the HR director of Atrip, a travel agency with 90 call centre employees. In order to reduce office rental costs, he has recently implemented a HR policy that allows the call center staff

Assessment 2 Description Assessment 2: Case study

Assessment Description

Weighting: 2,000 words (50%)

For Assessment 2, you are required to analyze the dataset provided here (Telework data for Assessment 2 (S1 2026)-1-1.xlsx Download Telework data for Assessment 2 (S1 2026)-1-1.xlsx; Telework data for Assessment 2 (S1 2026)-1-1.sav Download Telework data for Assessment 2 (S1 2026)-1-1.sav) and write a research report that addresses the following questions embedded in the case study below. The data can be accessed from the course site.

Case study: Does working from home work?

James Smith is the HR director of Atrip, a travel agency with 90 call centre employees. In order to reduce office rental costs, he has recently implemented a HR policy that allows the call center staff to work from home (i.e., telecommuting). However, he is not sure about how allowing employees to work from home would impact employees’ productivity. In view of this uncertainty, James would like to conduct survey-based research among all the home workers to ascertain the impact of a telework-related job characteristic (i.e., work autonomy, organizational support and work flexibility) on employee productivity.

Peter Winterton is a research analyst from a large business consulting firm. He is hired by James to carry out the above-mentioned survey research.

In James’ conversation with Peter, he raised several points.

“Peter, I am a strong supporter of telecommuting for call centre staff. I must show my boss that this remote work arrangement has made positive impact in terms of improving employees’ productivity. So, can you provide research findings that support this position?” “Peter, we are in a hurry. We need your research report completed in two days.” “The call center manager is also interested in how his subordinates responded to this survey. Can you share the raw survey data with him?” “We are interested in how our competitors will react. Have you ever done research for them?” Your task is to write a research report based on the survey data that addresses the following:

For each of the statements made by James Smith (see the four dot points above); Identify the ethical issues that Peter needs to consider in his response Use the ethical principles introduced in the course to explain these issues and why they are important. Conduct a regression analysis to see which variables (including work autonomy, organizational support and work flexibility) can significantly predict employee work motivation. Explain this finding with theory or academic literature. Conduct a regression analysis to detect which variables (including work autonomy, organizational support, work flexibility and employee work motivation) can significantly predict employee productivity. Explain this finding with theory or academic literature. Based on regression results from the previous two questions, calculate the indirect effect of work autonomy (predictor) on employee productivity (outcome) through employee work motivation (mediator). Explain this indirect effect with theory or academic literature. (Tips: Please follow the 4-step procedure here to calculate the indirect effect: How to test indirect effects Download How to test indirect effects) Make research-based recommendations for improving the productivity of these home workers. Your report should be structured in the following manner:

Title Table of contents Executive summary This is normally completed after the body of the report has been written. It is a short overview of the entire report, including the title of the report, the major issues addressed by HR analytics in the current report, a summary of the findings and recommendations Introduction Introduce the HR issues that will be discussed in the report. Discuss the ethical issues embedded in the four statements made by James Smith Analyse the key data, present and interpret your resu lts from the data analyses Propose recommendations Make appropriate recommendations Provide justifications for recommendations Conclusion References: You need to use at least EIGHT academic references from reliable sources. Use APA referencing conventions to cite any external sources used.

May 22, 2026
Assessment Information and Rubric Subject Code BUS610/ ICT610 Subject Name Applied Project Assessment Number and Title Assessment 3 – Final Report Assessment Type Individual Length
Assessment Information and Rubric Subject Code BUS610/ ICT610 Subject Name Applied Project Assessment Number and Title Assessment 3 – Final Report Assessment Type Individual Length / Duration 4,000 words Weighting % 30% Total Marks 100 Submission: Upload on Moodle Due Date Sunday, Week 11 at 23:59 Format A written report using Microsoft word format (1.5 line spacing and 11 font – no PDF) Assessment Description and Instructions Assessment 3 is a continuation from Assessment 2. Therefore, the structure will remain similar but with extension on all sections of the final report. In Assessment 3 students are required to prepare and submit their specified applied research/project final report using the following structure:

Section Purpose Tips & Typical Length

1 Executive Summary (≤ 250 words) Highlight aim, methods, key findings, actionable recommendations. Write last; keep it punchy. 2 Introduction (refined) Update briefly from A2—context, aim, objectives. Max 500 words; refer to A2 for detail instead of repeating. 3 Literature Review (expanded synthesis) Integrate A2 annotations into a flowing narrative; highlight research gaps your study fills. 800–1 000 words. 4 Methodology (final version) Present the definitive paradigm, data collection tools, sampling, analysis techniques, and ethics approvals. 600–800 words; cross-reference A2. 5 Industry Challenges, Strategies & Framework (NEW) Map industry-specific issues, illustrate with mini-case vignettes; propose conceptual/technical frameworks. 600–800 words; include figures/tables if helpful. 6 Data Analysis & Findings (NEW) Present results (stats, coded themes, prototypes, etc.); link each finding to a research question. 900–1 100 words; visuals encouraged. 7 Discussion & Recommendations (NEW) Interpret findings, compare with literature, propose concrete actions for stakeholders, outline future research. 600–700 words. 8 Conclusion (NEW) Summarise contributions, acknowledge limitations, close with final insight. 250–300 words. 9 Reference List (APA 7th) Only cite works appearing in this report. — Appendices Instruments, extended tables, ethics approval letters, extra figures. Optional, not in word-count. Assessment 3 Marking Criteria and Rubric Marking Criteria Not Satisfactory (0–49%) Satisfactory (50–64%) Good (65–74%) Very Good (75–84%) Excellent (85–100%)
1. Research Background & Context 10% Background unclears; context weak or irrelevant. Clear background: context stated. Contemporary topic: context outlined. Contemporary, theory-linked topic with research gap. Contemporary, theory-linked topic; gap clearly valuable and applied.
2. Literature Review (own synthesis) 20% Little relevant literature; weak linkage to problem. Sufficient literature; links to problem. Good range of authentic sources; clear linkage. Very good critical synthesis in own words. Excellent, insightful synthesis integrating gaps and theory.
3. Research Questions, Methodology & Methods 10% Methods inappropriate or unexplained. Methods partly appropriate; some explanation. Methods appropriate; good alignment to questions. Very good alignment; justifications clear. Rigorous, paradigm-consistent design; exemplary justification.
4. Analysis & Interpretation 30% Little/no data; analysis absent or off-target. Basic data presented; limited linkage to objectives. Good data: analysis aligns with objectives. Very good analysis: interpretations tightly linked to objectives. Sophisticated analysis demonstrating deep insight and clear solutions.
5. Findings, Contribution & Argumentation 15% Findings weak; arguments unconvincing. Findings linked to objectives; arguments somewhat unclear. Findings achieve objectives; good arguments. Findings well-developed; strong, logical arguments. Findings compelling; arguments persuasive and original, delivering high impact.
6. Academic Writing, Structure & Referencing 15% Disorganised; poor language; referencing absent. Basic structure; many language/APA issues; limitations/future work noted superficially. Clear writing; minor APA errors; limitations & future work sensible. Polished style; consistent APA; strong limitations & future work. Professional, concise prose; flawless APA; limitations & future research expertly framed. Note: This report is provided as a sample for reference purposes only. For further guidance, detailed solutions, or
May 22, 2026
Integrative Case 3.1. Walmart The purpose of this assignment is to navigate Walmart’s cash flow statements, extract critical information

Integrative Case 3.1. Walmart

The purpose of this assignment is to navigate Walmart’s cash flow statements, extract critical information from each section, and understand the distinction between net income and cash.

Refer to financial statements for Walmart in Exhibit 1.19 (Balance Sheets), Exhibit 1.20 (Statements of Income), and Exhibit 1.22 (Statement of Cash Flows).

Required

Explain why depreciation and amortization appear as an addition when net income is converted to cash flow from operations.

For 2020, Walmart shows an adjustment for inventories of negative $2,395 million. However, on the balance sheet, inventories increased from $44,435 million to $44,949 million, a difference of $514 million. Explain the $2,395 million adjustment in the operating section of the statement of cash flows and offer examples of why the adjustment might differ from the change in the inventory balance.

Estimate the amount of cash received from customers during 2020.

Discuss the relation between net income and cash flow from operations for each of the three years.

Discuss the relations among cash flows from operating, investing, and financing activities for each of the three years. © Cengage

May 22, 2026
Eleven-year-old Bobby is white and lives with his dad and nine-year-old brother in a rural area outside of a small town. There is one small discount store that carries everything from groceries to toys to bath towels.

Scenario One: Eleven-year-old Bobby is white and lives with his dad and nine-year-old brother in a rural area outside of a small town. There is one small discount store that carries everything from groceries to toys to bath towels. Bobby’s mom recently died from breast cancer. The medical bills created financial difficulties for the family. Bobby’s dad began working the night shift at the local turkey processing plant to obtain the shift premium, which paid $5 more per hour. Bobby and his brother often skip breakfast if their dad doesn’t get home in time to make breakfast before the boys get on the bus. Bobby is a picky eater and frequently skips lunch. On the way home from the bus stop, Bobby may purchase nachos or a hot dog at the gas station convenience store. Scenario Two: Twelve-year-old Annie is African American and lives with her two moms in a downtown condo is in an affluent area overlooking the lake. Their condo is close to Annie’s school and the restaurants where the women work. One is a chef; the other is a server. To be able to afford rising rent, the women work long hours, often late into the night. For dinner, Annie usually eats meals that her moms bring home from the restaurant. Annie gets coffee and a sweet treat at the convenience store on her way to school.Describe three applicable SDOH for Bobby (Scenario One). B. Describe three applicable SDOH for Annie (Scenario Two). C. Explain how one of the SDOH affects Bobby and Annie similarly, using specific examples from the scenarios. D. Explain how one of the SDOH affects Bobby and Annie differently, using specific examples from the scenarios. E. Analyze how one of the SDOHs from part A could be detrimental to Bobby’s health outcomes, using a current, relevant, credible source to support your response. F. Analyze how one of the SDOHs from part B could be detrimental to Annie’s health outcomes, using a current, relevant, credible source to support your response. Note: All sources cited should be published within the past five years. G. Acknowledge sources, using in-text citations and references, for content that is quoted, paraphrased, or summarized. H. Demonstrate professional communication in the content and presentation of your submission.

May 22, 2026

Blog

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning

Assessment Brief EDUC5003 Teaching and Learning

Assessment Brief 1

EDUC3032 Classroom Management

HI6025 Group Assignment T1 2026

Section Purpose Tips & Typical Length