Advanced Financial Reporting

Faculty of Business and Law

Department of Accounting and Finance

BA/BSc Honours Degree

Academic Year 2019-20

Assignment Brief

Advanced Financial Reporting

ACFI3221

Assessment Learning Outcomes

Following completion of this assignment students should be able to/have:

• Consider the financial reporting standards applicable to reporting the results of individual and business combinations
• Evaluate the current developments to the financial reporting framework and the implications of those developments
• Critically review financial reporting standards in issue and evaluate the associated commercial issues
• The ability to apply appropriate skills to filter, analyse and evaluate data and draw reasoned conclusions and made appropriate recommendations.
• The ability to learn independently and self manage learning needs
• The ability to communicate in a manner appropriate to the intended audience

In line with the module learning outcomes.

Assessment Transferrable Skills

This assessment has been developed to ensure students have the ability to:

• synthesis large volumes of information to develop a cohesive argument for or against a specific accounting treatment
• follow guidance and comply with regulations
• work within a set timeframe to respond to a given task
• present information without an overreliance on visual support

Assignment Brief

Prepare a transcript and record a five minute podcast to discuss the following issues

In May 2018 the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) asking the international accounting community for clear guidance on how crypo-assets should be treated in the financial statements.

Their commentary noted that crypo-assets could be treated in one of four ways depending on which of the current accounting standard are consider to be relevant.

https://www.aasb.gov.au/admin/file/content102/c3/AASB_ASAF_DigitalCurrency.pdf

Requirement

Select one of the four relevant accounting standards per the AASB and critically evaluate whether crypto-assets should be accounted for in accordance with the guidance provided in the accounting standard.

Submission date

Thursday 12^th December 2019.

Assessment Criteria	%
Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions	30
Breadth / Depth / Integration of Literature	15
Analysis /Critical evaluation /Discussion /Exposition/Reflection	30
Balanced response	5
Presentation and structure	10
Bibliography/Citations/Harvard referencing	10
	100

Detailed analysis of the marking criteria is provided on pages 3 and 4 of the module assignment brief and additional supporting information is provided on blackboard.

Submission:

Students are required to submit one electronic copy of their transcript and their podcast through Turnitin before 11:59am on 12^th December 2019.

To allow us to match your podcast and your transcript together please references your files with A_ or T_ and your p number. Your files should be referenced as follows:

A_1234567 (audio file)

T_1234567 (transcript)

Students are reminded that midday is the latest time that the podcast and transcript can be submitted not the only time.

Failure to submit both components in the correct format by the deadline will be classed as late submission and will eb treated in accordance with the university regulations for late submission.

It is the student’s responsibility to retain a copy of the assignment and the Turnitin digital receipt which is timed and dated as proof of submission.

Late hand-in:

Penalties will be imposed for unauthorised late hand-in of work, as follows:

• Up to 14 days late without permission Max. mark 40%
• More than 14 days late without permission 0%

Extensions:

Permission for an extension can only be obtained from the Module Leader (Lisa Wakefield) on presentation of an appropriately completed Coursework Extension Form (available from the Student Advice Centre) with the necessary written evidence attached.

• Do not phone or email to ask for an extension as only a formal written request is acceptable.
• These forms will be signed by the Module Leader as the only official approval of late hand-in.
• No other authorisation process has any official status and students will be penalised for not following this procedure when requesting extra time for assignments.
• Do not leave an extension request until the day of submission as it is unlikely to be administered in sufficient time to be valid.

PODCAST	Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions/ Calculations	Breadth / Depth / Integration of Literature	Analysis /Critical evaluation /Discussion /Exposition/Reflection	Balanced response	Presentation & structure	Use of resources & Harvard Referencing (transcript only!)
Task details	Content	Integration & application of information	Line of argument, development of discussion	Appropriate response to all elements of the requirement	Follows structure & keeps to time limit of 5 minutes +/- 1 minute	Follows Harvard style for in-text citation & Reference List
/marks	/30 Marks	/ 15 Marks	/ 30 Marks	/ 5 Marks	/ 10 Marks	/ 10 Marks
80-100 Outstanding	Outstanding… Exploration of topic showing excellent knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate research. Impressive choice and range of appropriate content.	Outstanding… Business and technical insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data/real world examples into work.	Outstanding… Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Highly developed/ focused work. All discussion supported with high quality evidence	Outstanding… Exceptionally clear and well established response to all three components of the assignment. Response weighting is considered to be appropriate in terms of content and analysis..	Outstanding… structure with flowing prose and engaging tones. Podcast is easy to follow and an enjoyable and informative listening experience.	Outstanding… Standard of referencing within text & reference list consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.
70-79 Excellent	Excellent … Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Evidence of appropriate reading. Covers all relevant points & issues.	Excellent … Business and technical insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data/real world examples into work. .	Excellent… Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection clearly developing points in the appropriate way with thorough consideration of all possibilities. All discussion supported with quality evidence	Excellent … Clear and well established response to all three components of the assignment. Response weighting is considered to be appropriate in terms of content and analysis.	Excellent … structure with flowing prose and engaging tones. Podcast is easy to follow and an enjoyable and informative listening experience. Only minor stumbles and breaks in the content.	Excellent… Standard of referencing within text & reference list reference list consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.
60-69 Very Good	Very good… Level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated. Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations.	Very good… Business and technical insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data/real world examples into work.	Very good… Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection & a few ideas/points could benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison. All discussion supported with evidence	Very good… shows awell thought out response to all three components of the assignment. Response weighting is considered to be appropriate in terms of content and analysis. .	Very good… structure with flowing prose and engaging tones. Podcast is the majority easy to follow and an enjoyable and informative listening experience. Some stumbles and breaks in the content.	Very good… Standard of referencing within text & reference list consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.
50-59 Good	Good… Grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented. Knowledge & understanding is demonstrated. Minor errors / omissions in content/ calculations.	Good… Business and technical insight & application. Breadth, depth & integration of literature/data/real world examples into work. .	Good… Level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be addressed /developed further. Majority of discussion supported with third party evidence	Good… shows athorough response to all three components of the assignment. Response weighting is considered to be appropriate in terms of content and analysis. .	Good… structure with flowing prose and engaging tones. Podcast is in places hard to follow but remains an enjoyable and informative listening experience. Some stumbles and breaks in the content. .	Good… Standard of referencing within text & reference list consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.
40-49 Satisfactory	Satisfactory… Content / level of knowledge of the topic. Addresses part of the task. Some errors / omissions in content/ calculations. May benefit from further research.	Satisfactory… Business and technical insight & application. Limited integration with literature/ data. Use of literature/data/real world examples but limited in breadth OR depth.	Satisfactory… Basic evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points superficially made so need further development. Some attempt to link discussion with third party supporting evidence	Satisfactory… shows an attempt at responding to all three components of the assignment. Response weighting is not considered to be appropriate in terms of content and analysis.	Satisfactory… structure with clear prose and varying tones. Podcast is hard to follow but remains an informative listening experience. Stumbles and breaks in the content impact the overall effect. .	Satisfactory… Basic referencing within text & reference list consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list.
30-39 Marginal Fail	Weak… Limited content / knowledge/ calculations. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.	Weak… Unsatisfactory evidence of business or technical application & insight Work needs to show better links between practical application & theory.	Weak… Limited evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. More development & comment needed. May need to do more than describe.	Weak… Attempt at responding to all three components but lacks a depth of understanding required at this level. Response is unbalanced/Doesn’t answer all components appropriately.	Weak… structure is monotonous. Podcast is hard to follow with minimal flow or informative content.	Weak…Use of Harvard referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied. Limited referencing within the text.Limited accuracy of in-text references compared to those in the final Reference list.
20 – 29 Clear Fail	Inadequate… Lacking in relevant content/ knowledge/calculations. Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does not meet all the learning outcomes.	Inadequate… Lacks evidence of business application, technical understanding & insight. Some literature but irrelevant to topic.	Inadequate… Lacking / inadequate level of discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive. Must see CLASS	Inadequate… Response shows a lack of understanding of the topic. Response does not consider all three elements	Inadequate… structure is unclear and monotonous in content. Podcast does not flow and breaks in the narrative impact the content and desire of the listener to continue listening.	Inadequate… Use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or inconsistencies. Must see CLASS
1 – 19 Little or Nothing of merit	Nothing of merit… Unsatisfactory level of knowledge demonstrated. Content used irrelevant / not appropriate/ to the topic. Does not meet the learning outcomes.	Nothing of merit… No evidence of appropriate business application, technical understanding or insight.	Nothing of merit… Unsatisfactory level of discussion/analysis/critical evaluation &/or reflection Must see CLASS	Nothing of merit…No clear answer to the question provided.	Nothing of merit… No clear flow or engagement with the podcast process.	Nothing of merit… No or little attempt to use the recommended Harvard referencing system. Must see CLASS