HI5003 Economics for Business

Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines

Trimester

Trimester 2 2019

Unit Code

HI5003

Unit Title

Economics for Business

Assessment Type

Written report and presentation

Assessment Title

Group assignment

Purpose of the assessment (with ULO Mapping)

Students are required to work in groups to analyse an industry and its relevant issue then apply their knowledge in the unit to write a report and make a presentation (Learning Outcomes 1, 2, 3, 5).

See Assignment Specifications for detailed requirements

Weight

40% of the total assessments

Total Marks

40

Word limit

Not more than 2500 words

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, single spacing, 12-pt Arial font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of the page with appropriate section headings and page numbers.

Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Harvard referencing style.

Table of content

Executive Summary (Optional)

Introduction

Industry background

Market structure

The industry’s associated issue

Impacts of the issue on the industry and on the Australia economy

Government policy Conclusion

List of References.

Criteria

Excellent (>=80%)

Very good (70-79%)

Good (60-69%)

Satisfactory (50-59%)

Unsatisfactory (<50%)

Background of the industry (5 marks)

Excellent description about the industry with comprehensive and updated data.

Very good description about the industry with some updated data.

Good description about the industry with few updated data.

Fair description about the industry with a limited amount of data provided.

Poor description about the industry.

Identification of the industry’s market structure

(5 marks)

Correct identification of the market structure, supported by extensive evidence about the approximate number of firms in the market, market share, market leaders, product homogeneity / heterogeneity, ect.

Correct identification of the market structure, supported by good evidence about the approximate number of firms in the market, market share, market leaders, product homogeneity/ heterogeneity, ect.

Correct identification of the market structure, supported by some evidence about the approximate number of firms in the market, market share, market leaders, product homogeneity / heterogeneity, ect.

Address the question about market structure but mis-identify the structure or correctly identify the market structure but do not provide good evidence to support.

Wrong identification of the market structure with poor evidence to support.

A description of the relevant issue (5 marks)

Excellent description of the issue, supported by comprehensive data.

Very good description of the issue, supported by some good data

Good description about the issue, supported by few good data.

Fair description about the issue, supported by limited about of data.

Poor description about the issue, supported by hardly any data.

An analysis of the impacts of the relevant issue on the industry and the economy (10 marks)

Excellent analysis on the likely impacts of the issue, supported by good evidence (statistics, studies or articles that discuss the actual or likely impacts).

Very good analysis on the likely impacts of the issue, supported by some good evidence (statistics, studies or articles that discuss the actual or likely impacts).

Good analysis on the likely impacts of the issue, supported by limited evidence (statistics, studies or articles that discuss the actual or likely impacts)

Reasonable analysis on the likely impacts of the issue, not supported by good evidence

Poor analysis on the likely impacts of the event on the market, not supported by any good evidence

The degree of research, the format, structure, presentation, and writing of the report

(5 marks)

- Evidence of comprehensive and relevant research with correct referencing.

- Meet format requirements to a high standard, including clear structure, headings, word count (close to approximation) and excellent presentation.

-Evidence of very good and relevant research with correct referencing.

-Meet format requirements to a very good standard, including clear structure, headings, word count (close to approximation) and very good presentation.

-Evidence of good and relevant research with correct referencing.

-Meet format requirements to a good standard, including clear structure, headings, word count (close to approximation) and good presentation.

-Evidence of reasonable research with some mistakes in referencing. -Meet format requirements to a reasonable standard, but could be improved with a clearer structure, headings, or may have better met word count approximation) and fair presentation.

-No good and relevant research with many mistakes in referencing. -May not have followed key question selection guidance, or may not meet format requirements, such as clear discussions, titles or headings, word count, or poor presentation.

Excellent (3.54 marks)

Very good (3.0-3.5 marks)

Good (2.5-3.0 marks)

Satisfactory (2.0-2.5 marks)

Unsatisfactory (0 - 2.0 marks)

Presentation skills

The presentation is cohesive & very professionally presented

The presentation is mostly cohesive & professionally presented

The presentation is somewhat cohesive & professionally presented

The presentation is cohesive & professionally presented at times

The presentation is not cohesive nor professionally presented