COMPUTING ASSESSMENT 1: Presentation Module Leader: Dave Cobb Contribution towards overall module mark 50% Date set 17 October 2022 Marked work returned by 9 January 2023 DEADLINE...

COMPUTING
ASSESSMENT 1: Presentation
Module Leader: Dave Co
    Contribution towards overall module mark
    50%
    Date set
    17 October 2022
    Marked work returned by
    9 January 2023
    DEADLINE DATE
    12 December XXXXXXXXXX59am
Assessment 1: Presentation
The Brief
You will create and deliver a presentation that introduces and discusses a cu
ent Computing topic. The presentation must be well-researched, organized and delivered effectively.
Individual presentations will be recorded in advance and submitted as a na
ated video. You will also be asked to
iefly summarize your topic and key points in class.
Deliverables
The deliverables for this assessment are as follows:
· A recorded presentation
· Presentation slides, in PowerPoint, Slides or PDF format, submitted via Turnitin
The Presentation
Clear and concise communication is the primary tool that will serve you well throughout university and after graduation.
Your presentation will begin with an introduction to the topic to provide context. The bulk of the presentation should focus on cu
ent issues and activities in the area. Lastly, you should conclude with potential future developments and where the concept might eventually lead.
The presentation must be between 4-5 minutes in total. You will need to decide how to utilize the time efficiently and convey the most important information whilst ensuring clarity.
Presentation Slides
Your presentation slides must be well written and organized using a proper presentation software such PowerPoint, Slides or Keynote. Slides should utilize supporting information and communication elements such as graphs, charts and imagery to emphasize your points. Presentations must be spell checked and include an appropriate title page, including a link to the video, as noted below. References should be included as appropriate on the final slide(s).
Submission
Please follow the submission instructions below. Work that is submitted inco
ectly may not be accepted or could incur a points penalty.
Before submitting have you…
· Checked that any digital work is functioning as expected?
· Spell-checked and grammar-checked any written work that accompanies your digital work? Please make an appointment with the Writing and Learning Centre or speak to your tutor if you are experiencing challenges in this area.
· Formatted your written work to the specification below?
· Referenced all sources of information accurately? Please refer to www.citethemrightonline.com (Harvard) for guidance.
Your work must be submitted via Turnitin and Google drive using your BSU account. Please adhere to the following method:
· Log into your university Google Drive account.
· Create a folder for your project. Call it something meaningful.
· Upload your work to your new folder.
· Right click your folder, select ‘?Get Link’, change the ‘General Access’ setting to ‘Bath Spa University’ and change the role to ‘editor’. Now copy the URL provided. If you do not do this your work can not be marked and maybe capped as a late submission.
· Paste the URL into the title page of the presentation file (Powerpoint, Keynote, Slides, etc). Please do not include your name for the purposes of anonymous marking).
· Log into Minerva, go to the Assessment folder and submit your presentation file via the appropriate Turnitin link.
Format
All written work must conform to university styling and submission guidelines.
· Slides must be spell-checked, clear, and well presented.
· You may use any presentation software - but you must hand in a copy of your slides for assessment.
· Your slides should be accurate in referencing. See Bath Spa guidelines and the Harvard system described at www.citethemrightonline.com.
Marking Criteria
Assessment 1: Presentation will be marked against the following criteria:
1. Quality and depth of Information
2. Delivery of information: organization and clarity
3. Research and Referencing
    Criteria
    Weighting
    Mark Range Description
    Mark Range
    Information quality and depth.
    60%
 
    Little to no relevant or useful
information presented. Shows little
understanding of the topic.
    0 - 19
(Low Fail)
    
    
    Poor or incomplete information, showing poor understanding of the topic.
    20 - 39
(Fail)
    
    
    Basic information presented with adequate depth and insight.
    40 - 49
(Third)
    
    
    A fair attempt to provide substantive information, with consistent depth.
    50 - 59
(2:2)
    
    
    Good information is communicated, with clear awareness of key aspects of the topic and appropriate detail.
    60 - 69
(2:1)
    
    
    A very good attempt showing a good understanding of the topic and significance of key factors.
    70 - 79
(First)
    
    
    An excellent attempt showing deep and thorough understanding of the topic.
    80 - 89
(High First)
    
    
    Beyond expectations for this level of study.
     XXXXXXXXXX
(Outstanding)
    Delivery of information
    30%
    No presentation or very poo
presentation, with inadequate visual
aids and delivery.
    0 - 19
(Low Fail)
    
    
    Limited presentation, supported by
mostly inadequate visual aids, that
lacks coherent structure and delivery.
    20 - 39
(Fail)
    
    
    A basic presentation, with some
suitable supporting visual aids. Requires further development in terms of structure or clarity of communication.
    40 - 49
(Third)
    
    
    A fair presentation. There is a sense of structure with some sound use of
visual aids. Confidence and clarity of communication may require
improvement.
    50 - 59
(2:2)
    
    
    A good, well-structured presentation, supported by appropriate use of visual aids. Delivered in a well-paced, clear manner.
    60 - 69
(2:1)
    
    
    A very good presentation that is
professional, illustrative and
well-timed. Visual aids are well
designed and the presentation
structure is very good.
    70 - 79
(First)
    
    
    An excellent presentation. Timing is
well judged, and the presentation
structure is impeccable. Communication is polished.
    80 - 89
(High First)
    
    
    Beyond expectations for this level of study.
     XXXXXXXXXX
(Outstanding)
    Research and Referencing
    10%
    No evidence of research or attempt to reference information sources.
    0 - 19
(Low Fail)
    
    
    A poor piece of research with little to no substantiation of information. Serious referencing e
ors.
    20 - 39
(Fail)
    
    
    A basic level of research undertaken. Very few sources are drawn on, or credibility of sources is poor. Referencing has major e
ors.
    40 - 49
(Third)
    
    
    A fair piece of research that introduces key sources. Referencing is adequate but lacks attention to detail.
    50 - 59
(2:2)
    
    
    A good piece of research that includes some key references for the topic. Minor referencing e
ors.
    60 - 69
(2:1)
    
    
    A very good piece of research that deploys a range of credible sources. Only the very slightest e
ors in reference formatting.
    70 - 79
(First)
    
    
    An excellent, well substantiated piece with multiple high-quality references. Precise referencing.
    80 - 89
(High First)
    
    
    Beyond expectations for this level of study.
     XXXXXXXXXX
(Outstanding)
Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs)
    ILO
    Assessed
    Knowledge of the core features of contemporary computing systems
    ✓
    Skills in interpreting, manipulating and representing data
    ✓
    Engagement with the key social, ethical, cultural and legal consequences of computing
    
    An ability to locate, assess and consolidate information in the field of computer science from print and online resources
    ✓
Mark penalties may be applied to late submissions without prior approval of an extension. Please ensure that you prepare and submit your work in good time to allow for any issues that may arise.