Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style. Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high- quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.

Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented, the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence. Engages the audience, demonstrates cultural sensitivity. Carefully and well prepared presentations aids are used. Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic, demonstrates high levels of cultural sensitivity Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi- media.

Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Analyses, establishes, and justifies governance processes for business process management change to ensure key stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process management sources.

Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Establishment and justification of governance processes for business process management change to ensure that all stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions 35% Fails to analyse, establish or justify governance processes for business process management change. Confuses logic and emotion. Business process management Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Lacks evidence from the view point of business process management experts. Analyses governance processes for business process management change but resembles a recall or summary of business process management. Conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with business process management information from the research/course materials. Attempts to synthesise citation from business process management sources. Viewpoints of business process management experts are taken as fact with little questioning.

Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Supports personal opinion with evidence from reliable business process improvement sources. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply business process improvement concepts. Identifies logical flaws in the evidence from business process management sources. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process improvement sources. Capacity to explain and apply business process improvement concepts is supported by robust evidence from research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, rigor and adaptability. Critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process improvement sources substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts and offers critical analysis of information taken from outside sources.

Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Evaluation of Business Process improvement 35% Confuses logic and emotion. Business process improvement information is taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Lacks evidence from the view point of business process management experts. Resembles a recall or summary of business process improvement. Conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with business process improvement information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Attempts to synthesise citation from business process management sources. Viewpoints of business process management experts are taken as fact with little questioning.

Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style. Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high- quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.

Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence 10% Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style. Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Well exercised on critical analysis techniques: broke down the complex processes into understandable steps, supported with detailed explanation; Good evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings. Evaluation criteria or matrix are presented and followed. Various evaluation applied, including one of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Some discussion questions prompt to encourage further discussion. Professionally exercised on critical analysis techniques: broke down the complex processes into understandable steps, supported with detailed explanation, evidence and validated external sources; Objective evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings with NO confirmation bias. Evaluation criteria or matrix are presented and followed. Various evaluation applied, including but not limited to Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Valuable discussion questions prompt to encourage further discussion.

Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Critically analysis on the process mapping 35% NO basic critical analysis techniques exercised No evaluation provided to comment on either mappings; NO evaluation criteria designed. Basic evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings; Briefly explained evaluation criteria. Various evaluation applied, including one of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Use basic critical analysis techniques, supported with detailed explanation; Evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings. Briefly explained evaluation criteria. Various evaluation applied, including some of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc.

Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Designed process maps as per requirements, used various shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies; Both process mappings are supported with a explanation, evidence and justification; Extra research conducted to complement course materials. Exercised critical analysis with brief interpretation. Nicely designed process maps, accurately utilised specific shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies; Well presented BOTH mappings supported with a explanation, evidence and justification; Capacity to explain and apply business process management concepts, their associated risks and implementation processes is supported by robust evidence from research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, rigor and adaptability. Professionally designed process maps, accurately utilised specific shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies;

Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Process Mapping: As-Is and To-Be 35% Fail to design process maps as per requirements, NO particular shapes, flows, symbols used; NO further evidence and justification provided to explain business or project processes; NO critical analysis with brief interpretation. Designed process maps as per requirements, used various shapes, flows, symbols; Both process mappings are supported without further explanation, or evidence and justification; Limited critical analysis with brief interpretation.

Learning Rubrics – Assessment 1 Part A: Business Process Analytical Plan (As-Is and To-Be Process Mapping) Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Business or Project Process Briefing 20% Failed to write about business or project brief; NO business or project process information provided Business or project briefing is provided; Descriptions covered business or project background and other basic information; Good business or project briefing written in formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives; Well written business or project briefing provided, using formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives current issues experienced, challenges faced. Professionally written business or project briefing provided, using formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives current issues experienced, challenges faced.

Hello, I need to do PART A 1500w + 500w templates. No theory. based on PMBOK and Wysocki position + 3 another good references Is for master degree - PROJECT GLOBAL MANAGEMENT Subject: Bussiness MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Let me know if you want me download slides from classes and books