Ethics and integrity – moral implications

‘In Australia, using or claiming the work or ideas of someone else as your own

without acknowledgement is wrong.’

 

Support or refutethe above statement, making reference to existing and credible research on the topic to provide a strong basis for your argument position.

 

When answering this style of essay you are to consider the above topic statement from more than one point of view and provide supported, crediblyreferenced arguments for and against the main ideas and draw a conclusion.

 

Suggested(but not limited to)areasfor your research and argument;

  • Ethics and integrity – moral implications
  • Trust issues – breach of trust – fellow students, teachers, employees, customers, community
  • Academic issues – reasons for referencing, academic capability, idea development
  • Legal issues – Intellectual Property, Copyright, Trademarks, Brand damage, crime
  • Societal issues cultural issues, advancement / continuing development of knowledge

 

Your response should show evidence of having consulted a wide range of credible referencesources(minimum of six) including textbooks, peer reviewed journals, business periodicals and reputable websites to assist you in your discussion.

 

This assessment task is to be presented in essay format.  Time will be provided in tutorials to assist you with the essay research, planning and writing process, so it is vital that you attend all classes.

 

All information sources used in your essay must be acknowledged by referencing (in-text and references list).  William Angliss Institute uses the APA referencing system.  A link to WAI’scomplete guide for this referencing style is provided below:

 

The word limit of 1200 words(+/- 20%) for the full essay and 500 words for the essay planshould be adhered to; any variation of more than 20% will result in penalties being applied or work not being marked.  Please refer to the marking rubric for clarification on the different assessment result outcome requirements.

 

 

 

Assessment 5(Part B)

Assessment Method: Full Argumentative Essay (see topicquestion on previous page)

Weighting: 30%

Word limit or equivalent: 1200 (+/- 20%)

Due Week 12: Online VersionSunday, October30thby 11.50pm (Turnitin)

 

 

The essay plan and full essaymust be submitted through TURNITIN by the due dates and adhere to turnitin requirements as explained on Page 6 of this schedule.Noessays will be marked unless they have been submitted through TURNITIN. Appropriate penalties will be applied for late submission.

 

To assist you in understanding the areas required in your essay plan and essay, marking rubrics have been provided on the following pages.

 

 


 

Assessment 5: Argumentative Essay (Full) Marking Rubric Guide

  1. Limitations

 

(0) Does not meet 1200 word length (+ / – 20%) excluding Reference List
(1) Meets 1200 word length (+ / – 20%) excluding Reference List

 

 

 

  1. In-text Referencing

 

(0) Does not contain anyin-text references, relying only on opinion
(1) Paper has in-text referencing errors such asnot having the minimum number (6) of crediblereferences, APA referencing format errors(i.e. quotes missing page number, missing citation information), and/or references that do notalso appear in the Reference List
(2) Meets minimum number (6) of credibleAPA references, each correctly APA formatted and all exist in Reference List
(3) Contains more than minimum number of crediblereferences, each correctly APA formatted and all exist in Reference List

 

 

  1. Reference List

 

(0) Paper does not contain a Reference List
(1) Paper contains a Reference List with errors such as references that do not appear in-text, not meeting required minimum number (6) of credible references and APA referencing format errors
(2) Meets the minimum number(6) of credibleAPA references,all of which appear in-text and each are correctly APA formatted
(3) Contains more than minimum number ofcredible references, all of which appear in-text and each are correctly APA formatted

 


 

 

  1. Reference Credibility / Relevance

 

(0) Paper does not use relevant or academically credible references (i.e. Wikipedia, Dictionaries, popular media) to support or begin position discussion
(1) Paper uses mostly relevant and credible research (i.e. professional or non-peer reviewed journals) to provide basic support or beginning for position discussion
(2) Paper uses highly relevant and credible research (i.e. peer reviewed academic journals) to provide strong support for position discussion

 

 

  1. Style and Mechanics

 

(1) Many errors in English expression detract from clarity of discussion and academic conventions not applied
(2) Errors in English exist, but use is sufficiently adequate for meaning to remain clear. Errors exist in usage of academic conventions (i.e. word contractions)
(3) Minimal to no errors in English expression and academic convention application, expression is clear

 

 

  1. Format / Structure

 

(0) The paper is not constructed correctly and does not follow an academic essay structure
(1) The paper contains introduction, body, conclusion, but parts not correctly sequenced or linked
(2) The paper follows correct essay structure with each part linking to the next and parts correctly sequenced

 

 

  1. Position

 

(0) The thesis position of the paper is unclear and/or not stated and does not exist in both the introduction and the conclusion.
(1) The thesis position of the paper neither supports nor refutes topic statement
(2) The thesis position of the paper is clearly definedand stated in both the introduction and the conclusion
(3) The thesis position of the paper is persuasive and stated in both the introduction and the conclusion


 

 

  1. Discussion Context

 

(0) Discussiondoes not support the position of the paper or contain both opposing and supporting ideas
(1) Discussion addresses position, but loses focus and includes ideas that are contextually incorrect (i.e. plagiarism as a legal issue) or does not contain both opposing and supporting ideas
(2) Discussion addresses position, is contextually correct, contains both opposing and supporting ideas, but is not developed
(3) Discussion is focused, contextually correct,expanded upon and insightful andcontains both opposing and supporting ideas

 

 

  1. Argument

 

(0) The Paper does not contain an argument
(1) The overall argument within the paper is weak, is based upon numerous unsubstantiated claims and does not set context of argument (i.e. academia or legal)
(2) Communicates a descriptive summary of the major research findings, which at times presents as opinion
(3) Demonstrates an ability to draw upon the literature to present major findings and to substantiate claims made
(4) Demonstrates an ability tosynthesise relevant literature to build an argument that shows a good understanding of the complexity of the topic
(5) Demonstrates a sophisticated structural control in presenting, critiquing and synthesising the literature to develop a clear and concise argument and in reaching a strong conclusion

 

 

 

Analytical Score Conversion Grade
23 to 25 HD
19 to 22 Distinction
14 to 18 Credit
9 to 13 Pass
Less than 9 Fail

 

 

 

 

 

 

find the cost of your paper