1
Unit BISY1001/ISY1000/ISY100 Professional and Ethical Practice
Assessment Type Group Report
Assessment Number Two
Assessment Name
Weighting
Part 1
15%
Alignment with Unit
and Course
Unit Learning Outcomes Graduate Attributes Assessed
ULO 1: Describe and discuss the principles of ethical
practice as they pertain to the information technology
and business sectors.
ULO 2: Demonstrate comprehension of professional
IT dilemmas such as privacy, computer crime,
systems reliability, intellectual property, copyright, the
impact of technology on the society.
ULO 3: Demonstrate and understanding of basic
problem solving and decision-making skills.
ULO 4: Identify and discuss the regulatory obligations
elating to an IT environment.
ULO 5: Describe issues su
ounding professional
codes of ethics, file sharing, infringement of
intellectual property, security risk assessment, internet
crime, identity theft, etc.
GA 1: Communication
GA 2: Critical Thinking
GA 3: Ethical Behaviour
GA 4: Collaboration
GA 5: Flexibility
Due Date/Time Week 3
Online Moodle Submission: Friday, 5pm (AEDT)
Assessment
Description
This group report assesses students’ ability to assess information, formulate arguments
and critically evaluate different alternatives to issues or problems.
You are required to write a report of 2,000 words in response to the case
study in page 3.
Your report should be a synthesis of ideas researched from a variety of sources and
expressed in your own words. It should be written in clear English and be submitted at the
end of week 7 in electronic format as either a Word document of a pdf file. This electronic
file will be checked using Turnitin for any evidence of plagiarism. You are expected to use
eferences in the normal Harvard referencing style.
2
Detailed
Submission
Requirements
Online Moodle Submission via Turnitin.
Special
consideration
Students whose ability to submit or attend an assessment item is affected by sickness,
misadventure or other circumstances beyond their control, may be eligible for special
consideration. No consideration is given when the condition or event is unrelated to the
student's performance in a component of the assessment, or when it is considered not to
e serious.
Students applying for special consideration must submit the form within 3 days of the
due date of the assessment item or exam.
The form can be obtained from the AIH website (https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/cu
ent-
students/student-forms/) or on-campus at Reception.
The request form must be submitted to Student Services. Supporting evidence should be
attached. For further information please refer to the Student Assessment Policy and
associated Procedure available on
(https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/about-us/policies-procedures/).
Referencing and Plagiarism It is essential to use IN TEXT referencing. If you are using
the exact words from a reference then you must use quotation marks. You can use
Harvard Style referencing, with a listing at the end of the report.
http:
www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing Remember that this is a Turnitin
assignment and plagiarism will be subject to severe penalties. Please refer to the AIH
Academic Misconduct Policy: https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2017/11/StudentAcademic-Misconduct-Policy.pdf
DO NOT COPY AND PASTE FROM THE INTERNET OR COPY OTHER STUDENTS’
WORK!
Detailed
Submission
Requirements
Before submission, students ensure the submitted work satisfies the following
equirements:
• The assignment is to be written in a report format. It must have separate
sections for each of the THREE tasks above.
• The report should additionally, include an Introduction, Conclusion and
References
• Submit as a PDF or Word document through the Turnitin assignment
submission tool on Moodle.
• Include a title page that has your name, subject, date, report title and
WORD COUNT. Please do not include an assignment cover page as this
will match with other students at AIH.
• The assignment should not exceed 2,600 words with a minimum of 2,500
words, excluding references.
https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/cu
ent-students/student-forms
https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/cu
ent-students/student-forms
https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/about-us/policies-procedures
http:
www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing
https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/StudentAcademic-Misconduct-Policy.pdf
https:
aih.nsw.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/StudentAcademic-Misconduct-Policy.pdf
3
CASE STUDY
Dylan is a manager at a leading consumer electronics company. In his role, he must frequently interact with
industry partners and customers. One day, Dylan met with a customer of one of his company’s custom
products. The custom product was a special chip for an electronic appliance that was cu
ently in its final
stages of review before market release. During the meeting, the customer wanted to know the method of
making the chip, a process which was not specified in the given datasheet. The client claimed this information
was needed to ensure that the chip would function properly when it was integrated with electronic appliances.
At first, Dylan was uncertain. He wanted to give his customer more details if it was for the benefit of his client’s
final product, but, at the same time, was concerned because the requested information was protected under
his company’s non-disclosure agreement (NDA).
Dylan decided to discuss the matter with his supervisor; however, Dylan’s manager was overseeing many
projects and, knowing that Dylan was capable and experienced, entrusted him to take care of the situation.
When he returned to work the next day, Dylan received an email from his customer. The message stated that,
if the chip’s manufacturing methodology was not disclosed, the customer would cease further investments in
the product.
Shocked, Dylan believed that if the customer could not abide by the NDA, he should tell the contract should
e
oken off. However, doing so would mean losing a significant amount of profit they had intended on
garnering from selling the chip. On the other hand, sharing confidential information with his customer could
cause negative repercussions, especially if his company were to discover the legal
each.
Although it is highly unlikely that the extra chip information would be used by Dylan’s client for malicious
purposes, its disclosure could potentially affect his company’s reputation, lead to mistrust in the company and
compromise Dylan’s position.
From the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at Santa Clara University.
Question
Based on your knowledge of the ACS Code of Professional Conduct (see Session 1), what should Dylan do?
Ru
ic for Report (15 marks)
Requirements Total High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Pass Fail
Depth and Breadth of
Coverage
10
marks
A convincing and
well-defined report
ased on the given
case study, that
draws on the ACS
Code of Professional
Conduct.
A well-defined
eport based on the
given case study,
that draws on the
ACS Code of
Professional
Conduct.
A report based on
the given case study,
that draws on the
ACS Code of
Professional
Conduct.
A limited report
ased on the
given case
study, that
draws on the
ACS Code of
Professional
Conduct.
A report that is
neither coherent
nor based on the
given case study,
and does not draw
on the ACS Code
of Professional
Conduct.
Structure, Language and
Conventions & Report
Format
5
marks
All aspects of the
eport conform to
a high academic /
professional
standard.
Most aspects of
the report
conform to a high
academic /
professional
standard.
Most aspects of the
eport conform to
an acceptable
academic /
professional
standard.
The report
displays
asic
structure.
The report is not
of an academic /
professional
standard.
3
ACS Code of Professional Conduct
ACS |Code of Professional Conduct V.2.1 April 2014 Page 1
ACS Code of Professional Conduct
Professional Standards Board
Australian Computer Society
April 2014
ACS |Code of Professional Conduct V.2.1 April 2014 Page 2
ACS Code of Professional Conduct
Version History
Date Document
Version
Revision History (reason for change) Author /Reviser
XXXXXXXXXXV.2 Corporate Identity Changes Ruth Graham
XXXXXXXXXXV2.1 Removed reference to Code of
Professional Practice
Graham Low
Approvals
Date approved Version Approved By Date in force Date of Next
Review
2005 V.1 Professional
Standards Board
2005 To be confirmed
2014 V2.1 Michael Johnson 4 April 2014 To be confirmed
Custodian title &
e-mail address:
XXXXXXXXXX
Responsible
Business Group:
Professional Standards Board
Distribution:
General (no restriction on distribution)
Content Security:
Unclassified
ACS |Code of Professional Conduct V.2.1 April 2014 Page 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACS Code of Professional Conduct .........................................................................................
1.1. PREAMBLE............................................................................................. XXXXXXXXXX4
Relevance To