Assessment 2- Online Tutorial
An essential online tutorial, available from week seven (7), on report writing skills is compulsory before you attempt to write the report. This is a formal report and requires all the parts of this type of document: title page, executive summary, contents page, introduction, discussion of assignment requirements, conclusion, recommendations and references.
Assessment 3 – Instructions
1. After completing Assessment 2, select one or more topics that are interesting to YOU from this list or identify your own area of interests:
The physical work environment
The workplace culture
Cross-Cultural Relations and Workplace Diversity
Ethical behaviour including: Work ethic
Interpersonal skills including relationship building skills
Work Procedures or Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)
Eg: Stock handling/stock control
2. In your report address the criteria in the assessment rubric your report MUST be in the formal report format introduced in your online tutorial in WEEK 7 this tutorial is compulsory
Include the following in your report:
Examples of good practices you have identified in your workplace. Explain why they are good practices, using academic literature and your WAI studies to support your opinion.
Examples of bad practices you have identified in your workplace. Explain why they are bad practices, using academic literature and your WAI studies to support your opinion.
Recommend improvements to your workplace to achieve better business outcomes. Use academic literature and your WAI studies to support your recommendations.
There must be a minimum of 10 high quality academic sources including journal articles and academic text references. These must be less than five (5) years old.
The APA or Harvard AGPS system of referencing
Alternately, you can Google APA Referencing guide and use guides from other universities.
HE708-WIL2: Marking Rubric – Assessment 3: Report weighting 70%
Category Unsatisfactory Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
General An unsatisfactory attempt at the report. Does not demonstrate the adequate research of a topic and the application of self-learning. No evidence of critical analysis involved with the issue under study.
Reflections and implications are nave and superficial. An adequate to fair report. What has been researched/investigated is evident and consideration given to the process used. Evidence of critical analysis of information/data involved in the learning. Some attempt at forming informed opinions and critical analysis. Implications and relevance of what has been learnt with regard to the student and the workplace generally are covered but may not be in depth. Good to very good reporting of both the issue under investigation and the process of self learning. Implications for both the learner and the workplace. Has demonstrated critical analysis of information/data, and been able to form opinions, make assertions, and support these from credible sources.
Implications and relevance of what has been learnt with regard to the student and the workplace generally are covered are covered in some depth and reasonably well thought through. An excellent report, well structured, well expressed and demonstrates learning both in terms of the topic/issue under research/investigation and in the process required. Demonstrated excellent critical analysis of information/data. Opinions, recommendations and assertions, are well constructed and discussed from different viewpoints and supported by credible sources.
Implications and relevance of what has been learnt with regard to the student and the workplace generally are covered are well considered and expressed. An excellent report, well structured, well expressed and demonstrates understanding beyond the requirements of investigation. required. Demonstrated excellent critical analysis of information going into deeply thought recommendations and conclusions. Discussion is broad and considers different viewpoints.
Sources are authoritative and well placed. With regard to the workplace, this student understands processes and management theory applications very well.
The following are not covered: the reports purpose, methodology, main findings, and conclusions and recommendations. Important information is omitted. No distinction between the different outcomes with which the report deals.
Generally clear but limited definitions/summaries of the reports purpose, methodology, main findings and conclusions. May lack clarity in defining the reports staring point and direction. Differentiation between the outcomes is clear. Clearly defines /summarises the reports purpose, methodology, main findings and conclusions. Provides necessary information for a clear starting point and direction of the report. The different outcomes can be clearly discerned. Clearly and concisely defines/summarises the reports purpose, methodology, main findings and conclusions. Includes all relevant details to provide a clear starting point and direction of the report. Different outcomes are clearly distinguished and their relationship. Comprehensive and thoroughly summarises all important aspects of the report. Give a clear review of all the necessary aspects of the report leaving the reader motivated to read the full report.
10% Introduction does not contain a clear purpose for the report. Details concerning the framework for the report are not included. Context analysis is unclear in that it does not represent an understanding of the implementation of the theory and its relationship to the workplace. No attempt at describing methodology
Contains a clear purpose statement setting out the different aspects to be covered by the report. Context analysis is adequate but refers mostly to obvious relationships between the implementation of the theory issue and the workplace. Some attempt to outline methods and sources of information/data to be used. Clearly sets the framework for the report. Contains well expressed purpose statement, differentiates between the different topics that will be covered. Distinguishes between the areas to be covered in the report.
Context analysis shows understanding of the issue in relation to the workplace and the issue under investigation. Methods and sources of data/information to be used are clearly outlined. Clearly and concisely sets the framework for the report. Clearly distinguishes between the areas that will be covered and i.e. the issue under investigation and the process used. Context analysis is clear and demonstrates deep understanding of the relationship between the workplace and the research topic. Methodology is appropriate and well structured.
A well-structured introduction leading the reader with little topic knowledge with a clear understanding of the detail of the investigation to be covered in the rest of the report.
60% Generally subjective observations without supporting evidence. Statements appear haphazard and the connection to the issue under investigation is superficial and/or unclear. Literature review lacks variety and depth as does consultations with key persons. Examples are vague or absent. Outlines research findings in a generally clear and considered manner but tends to be broad and disjointed. Analysis of information/data at times is superficial. Source of information including literature review is adequate but lacks depth and variety. One or two superficial examples. Research findings are expressed well and in a logical sequence. Good analysis of information/data. Supporting evidence/sources of information including literature is credible, relevant with some depth. Three or more clearly defined examples. Research findings are well expressed, relevant and demonstrate a well structured thought process. Critical analysis of relevant information/data is rigorous and from a variety of credible sources. Three or more detailed, current and relevant examples.
The discussion is very well structured, easy to follow and understand and is critically sound with supporting references and examples. Expression, grammar and use of figures, tables and illustrations are all excellent.
Conclusions and Evaluation
10% Summary of report findings both in terms of what has been learned and the process is not present or is insufficient. Generally clear summary of the reports findings both in terms of what has been learned and the process.
Clear and concise summary of the reports findings both in terms of what has been learned and the process. Very clear and concise summary of the reports findings in logical order both in terms of what has been discovered and the process. The recommendations and conclusions are logically sound and follow as deductive outcomes of the investigation. Well expressed and easy to understand.
Organisation, referencing and presentation
10% Contents page does not include key information or is incorrectly formatted.
Headings or numbering system are incorrect. There is no logical order to the placement of the sections. Many errors both grammatical and in expression make it difficult to understand, Lacks clarity of thought and many statements are unsubstantiated. Lacks organization of ideas/paragraph structures. Poor or references not to Harvard standard.
Contents page is adequate might contain small errors, but an attempt has been made to co-ordinate the papers structure.
Some inconsistencies in headings and numbering system, however there is a logical order of sections and of ideas/discussion points. Some explanations although adequate are not well expressed. There is some attempt at consistent spacing and paragraphing and acceptable spelling and grammatical errors. Contents page is well set out and denotes the structure of the report. A consistent heading and numbering system is used throughout with minimal errors. A mostly well considered, cohesive and logical organisation of sections and ideas/discussion points. Spacing and paragraphing is correctly formatted and minimal spelling and grammatical errors. Contents page indicates considerable thought given to the structure of the paper and is correct in all areas.
A consistent heading and numbering system is used throughout. Skillful presentation. A mostly well considered, cohesive and logical organization of sections and ideas/discussion points. Spacing and paragraphing is correctly formatted and practically no spelling and grammatical errors. The Harvard AGPS referencing system is well understood and demonstrated by correct in-test referencing and in the reference list. There are no errors and all references are from credible sources, including A grade journals.
Word count originality and reference compliance Word count more than 10% +/-
Originality score above 20%
Originality match/s above 6% to one source resubmit required
Academic references below 10 Word count under 10% +/-
Originality score equal to or below 20%
Originality match/s equal to or below 6% to one source
Academic references 10 or more
Please find below some more tips for completing your reports based on some common questions received recently.
You may use either APA or Harvard method for your referencing.
Please remember that only the introduction, body and conclusion are included in the word count. Other elements such as tables, diagrams, contents page executive summary, reference lists, etc are not included.
3000 words is not a lot of words for a report and despite concerns most students will find it difficult to keep the word count down. Remember that your report will need to have enough research and discussion to support for your investigation and recommendations.
As mentioned previously, When selecting topics, it would be advantageous for you to select a topic that you are interested in and is relevant to your work experience thus far. You can select multiple topics, but it would be beneficial for these topics to be relevant to each other. For example, recruitment and training can fall under Human Resources and can be discussed interchangeably in your report.
Remember that the topics in the Subject Delivery Schedule are just a guide and you are encouraged to come up with your own topics. Each students workplace is different which is why we have given you the freedom to select your own topic to tailor this to your experiences.
Do not select too many topics as your report will not have the depth in discussion to support your investigation and recommendations.
In your discussion, you will be focusing on your investigation and addressing the points from the assignment brief in the Subject Delivery Schedule. Do not select a topic such as Customer Service and write everything you find about Customer Service. The idea of a report is for your to conduct an investigation and form recommendations which could be beneficial to an organisation.
Whilst you will be submitting your report to WAI, a report would usually be a document you would present to a key stakeholder such as a manager. Therefore, you need to ask yourself would I be able to present this report to my manager and is my investigation strong enough for that manager to accept some of the findings and implement my recommendations?
Please be assured that all submissions will not be shared outside of the Institute. For those concerned about naming your organisation within your assessments, you may instead wish to identify the organisation as an alias such as Company A.