Assessment Brief: BIS3002 E-Commerce E-Business Applications
Trimester 3, 2022
Assessment Overview
| Assessment Task | Type | Weight | Length | Due | ULOs Assessed |
| Assessment 1: Quiz Online quizzes assess students’ ability to understand theoretical materials. The quiz will be multiple choice questions which are relevant to the lecture materials. Each quiz will be out of 10 marks. |
Individual Invigilated |
30% | 10 mins (equiv. 750 words) |
Week 3, 6, 9 (During Class) |
ULO1 ULO2 ULO3 ULO4 |
| Assessment 2: Reflections Journal As part of their weekly learning, students are required to submit learning reflections based on their weekly individual tutorial work and group contributions to weekly tasks. Each reflection should no more than 150 words, attracting 1 mark, with a total of 10 reflections required. |
Individual | 10% | Reflections (equiv. 1500 words) |
Weeks 2-11 (Due Every Mon) |
ULO1 ULO2 ULO3 ULO4 |
| Assessment 3: Report In this assignment students will perform a critical analysis of selected website attributes including the e-commerce business model for a number of E commerce websites. |
Individual | 25% | 2000 words | Week 6 (Due Mon) |
ULO1 ULO2 |
| Assessment 4: E-commerce Site In groups of two, students will develop an e-commerce business plan for a client based on a given case study, and subsequently design a limited prototype using the WordPress platform. |
Group | 35% | Report 4000 Words (equiv. 2000 words per student) + WordPress E-Commerce Prototype 10 Pages |
Week 12 (Due Mon) |
ULO1 ULO2 ULO3 ULO4 |
equiv. – equivalent word count based on the Assessment Load Equivalence Guide. It means this assessment is
equivalent to the normally expected time requirement for a written submission containing the specified
number of words.
Assessment 1: Quiz
| Due date: | Week 3, 6, 9 (During Class Time) |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count/Time provided: | 10 mins (equiv. 750 words) |
| Weighting: | 30% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1, ULO2, ULO3, ULO4 |
Assessment 1 Detail
Online quizzes assess students’ ability to understand theoretical materials. The quiz will be
multiple choice questions which are relevant to the lecture materials.
1. Week 3 quiz will test student knowledge from topics 1 and 2.
2. Week 6 quiz will test student knowledge from topics 3, 4 and 5.
3. Week 9 quiz will test student knowledge from topics 6, 7 and 8.
Assessment 1 Marking Criteria and Rubric
The marking criteria are as follows.
• For each quiz will be worth 10 (ten) possible marks from 10 questions.
• The quizzes will be marked automatically online via the LMS.
• Each correct answer will score 1 (one) mark and no marks will be awarded for an incorrect
answer.
• The assessment will be marked out of 30 (thirty) marks which is the combined total of all 3
quizzes and will be weighted to be 30% of the total unit mark.
Assessment 2: Reflections Journal
| Due date: | Weekly 2-11 (Due Every Monday 11:59pm) |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count/Time provided: | equiv. 1500 words |
| Weighting: | 10% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1, ULO2, ULO3, ULO4 |
As part of their weekly learning, students are required to submit learning reflections based on
their weekly individual tutorial work and group contributions to weekly tasks.
Assessment 2 Marking Criteria
Assessment 2 will be weighted 10% of the total unit mark. The marking criteria are as
follows.
• A journal entry is required for each of the 10 (ten) topics in the course.
• Each journal entry will be worth 1 (one) mark.
• Each reflection should no more than 150 words
Assessment 3: Report
| Due date: | Week 6 (Monday 11:59pm) |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count/Time provided: | 2000 Words |
| Weighting: | 25% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO 1, ULO 2 |
Assessment 3 Detail
For this assignment students will perform a critical analysis of selected e-commerce websites.
1. https://arngren.net
2. https://www.walmart.com/
3. https://www.victorianfarmersdirect.com.au
4. https://www.macys.com/
5. https://www.bestbuy.ca/en-ca
6. https://www.thebay.com/
7. https://www.homebase.co.uk
8. https://www.target.com/
9. https://www.nykaa.com
10. https://www.etsy.com/
PART A: Scoping Literature Review
Perform a short scoping literature review of what makes what is e-commerce sites successful
and what are important critical factors that make e-commerce sites successful. As part of
your research, you should cite at least five reference articles in your review. You may include
factors listed in the Australian Post report on e-commerce (link below).
https://auspost.com.au/content/dam/auspost_corp/media/documents/inside-australian-onlineshopping-ecommerce-report.pdf
Part B: Critical Factors
For example in your review you may include but not limited to factors such as the web site
design, ease of use, information quality, trustworthiness, security, payment options and social
network presence. You need to clearly list each factor and discuss why each factor is
important, with some links to websites that reflect that factor.
Part C: Evaluation Matrix
Create an evaluation matrix based on the factors you uncovered in your literature review.
You should group similar attributes in a few key categories. It is important to include a
quantitative method for evaluating each attribute such as a score out of 5. Use your
evaluation matrix to critically appraise ONLY the e-commerce sites listed in this
assignment.
Please read the following article on how to setup a scoring matrix:
https://www.lucidchart.com/blog/how-to-make-a-decision-matrix
This task is worth 30% of the entire mark therefore make sure you address it.
Part D: Discussion of Sites and Scores
After completing the matrix for each of the sites, you need to justify why you gave the scores
including examples of best practice, and comparisons between the same attributes on
different sites. As part of the discussion, you may refer to additional sources and provide
links to appropriate sections of those sites to highlight good or bad design.
Part E: E-Commerce Site Improvements
For the lowest scoring website in your analysis in Part B, suggest a number of improvements
to the e-commerce site. You should address the criteria which have scored the lowest points,
for example you could suggest improvements to their home page layout or improve the
shopping trolley purchase experience. You must demonstrate in this task a good
understanding of the criteria and be able to justify the improvements you have suggested.
This task is worth 30% of the entire mark therefore make sure you address it.
Academic Skills:
The report should be presented professionally, have a cover page, table of contents,
introduction include Part A literature review and Part B evaluation of the 10 websites. In the
appendix you should place your final evaluation matrix. References should be included using
the Harvard method.
Academic Integrity:
Please be aware that Assignments with a similarity rating above 25% will be investigated and
may result into reporting for academic misconduct with a risk of a fail grade for the
assignment and/or the subject. Always create your own work and do not use any other work
with proper paraphrasing and referencing.
Assessments 3 Marking Criteria and Rubric
• The assessment will be marked out of 100 marks and will be weighted 25% of the total unit
mark.
• The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.
Assessment 3 Marking Criteria and Rubric
| Marking Criteria | Not Satisfactory (0-49% of the criterion mark) |
Satisfactory (50-64% of the criterion mark) |
Good (65-74% of the criterion mark) |
Very Good (75-84% of the criterion mark) |
Excellent (85-100% of the criterion mark) |
| Part A: Literature Review (10 marks) Literature review of state of the art in E Commerce. |
Limited evidence of reading and/or poor synthesis of information. The attributes identified are poorly linked to E-commerce. |
A satisfactory attempt is made to synthesise existing research relating to E commerce, and to identify attributes for success. Some major gaps in the depth and scope of the literature review. |
A thorough attempt is made to synthesise existing research relating to E commerce, and to identify important attributes for success. Some gaps in the depth and scope of the literature review. |
The literature review is comprehensive, relevant and demonstrates the ability to synthesise information and to critically reflect on existing research. The identified attributes are well connected to E-commerce and to the synthesis of the literature. |
The literature review is extremely comprehensive, relevant and demonstrates an outstanding ability to synthesise information and to critically reflect on existing research. The identified attributes are very clearly connected to E commerce and to the synthesis of the literature. |
| Part B: Critical Factors (5 marks) Identification and discussion of selected critical factors |
Critical factors not identified, or they are very poorly related to E commerce. |
A few critical factors identified and connected to E-commerce with some brief discussion. |
Several critical factors identified with clear connection to E-commerce and includes some reasoning for decisions. |
Several critical factors identified with clear connection to E-commerce, good reasoning for decisions, and good references to literature. |
Many critical factors identified with excellent connection to E-commerce, high quality reasoning for decisions and very well referenced to literature. |
| Part C: Evaluation Matrix (30 marks) Construction and completion of evaluation matrix, with categories for selected factors and a scoring system. 10 sites are evaluated. |
Matrix contains less than 5 general factors that do not give a useful outcome. Scoring system is not present or is ineffective. |
Matrix is basic with a small number (around 5) of general factors and an adequate scoring system. |
Matrix contains a good number (5-10) of factors and a mixture of specific and general factors. Scoring system is effective. |
Matrix contains a good number (around 10) of mostly specific factors and an effective scoring system. |
Matrix is very well constructed with over 10 logical and specific factors and a very effective scoring system. |
| Part D: Discussion of Sites and Scores (15 marks) Effective discussion of pros/cons of each site |
Scores and discussion are poorly aligned or missing. Very little explanation provided for scores. |
Scores and discussion are somewhat aligned with some discussion of the reasons for scores. |
Scores and discussion are mostly well aligned with some basic justifications provided for scores. |
Scores and discussion are very well aligned with good justifications provided for scores. |
Scores and discussion are perfectly aligned with strong justifications provided for scores. |
| Part E: E-Commerce Site Improvements (30 marks) Suggested improvements/best E-commerce practice |
Few or no improvements provided. No links made to evaluation or E-commerce practice. |
Some improvements discussed in relation to the evaluation and basic connections made to E commerce practice. |
Good discussion of the evaluation and improvements; some useful links made between the evaluation and E-commerce practice. |
Thorough discussion of the evaluation and improvements; clear links made between the evaluation conducted and best practice in E-commerce. |
Comprehensive discussion of the evaluation and findings; In-depth improvements such as use of storyboards and new design work, where ideas are directly drawn from the evaluation conducted and E commerce best practice. |
| Academic skills (10 marks) Quality of writing and referencing |
Poor ability in report writing, with several gaps in the quality of written expression and presentation. Several major referencing errors or absent referencing. |
Some major gaps evident in the quality of written expression and presentation. Significant further work needed in report writing technique, improvement needed in the formatting of references and citations. |
Some gaps evident in the quality of written expression and presentation. Further work needed in report writing technique, including some minor issues formatting of references and citations. |
Quality of written expression and presentation mostly conforms to academic standards relating to clarity of expression, syntax, grammar, and punctuation. No significant gaps in referencing technique using the Harvard referencing system. |
Quality of written expression and presentation is excellent and conforms fully to academic standards relating to clarity of expression, syntax, grammar, and punctuation. No gaps in referencing technique using the Harvard referencing system. |
Assessment 4: E-commerce Site
| Due date: | Week 12 (Monday 11:59pm) |
| Group/individual: | Group |
| Word count/Time provided: | Report 4000 Words (equiv. 2000 words per student) + WordPress E Commerce Prototype containing 10 Pages |
| Weighting: | 35% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO 1, ULO 2, ULO 3, ULO 4 |
Assessment 4 Detail
In groups of two, based on a given case study, you will develop an e-commerce business plan
for a client in the attached case study. Your group will subsequently design a limited
prototype website according to this plan.
Based on the combined expertise you have gained from your Assignment 3 Critical
Evaluations; in this assignment you will produce an e-commerce design plan and a small 10-
page e-commerce prototype running on the WordPress platform. Your goal is to create an
online store that will complement the case study organisations business model.
PART A:
Your group should produce an e-commerce design plan that includes:
1. SWOT analysis of the business environment
2. Marketing strategy which describes the target customer, proposes a social media campaign
and SEO
3. Discussion of key features the site will implement
4. Site customer-centric design, including storyboards for each page and the content to be
included on the site.
PART B:
Your group will implement you proposed design on the WordPress platform
(wordpress.com). There is no need to purchase hosting, you will create a free tier account
which will permit you to create 10 site pages, select an appropriate template, and lay out the
site. See your tutor if you need help in creating the account.
You need to register a free account on wordpress.com site and email the address of your
site together with your names/student number for your group before starting the
project.
The WordPress platform requires minimum knowledge of HTML programming, all the tools
on the backend are WYSIWYG. You may visit the support section for additional tips of how
to use the WordPress platform: https://wordpress.com/support/
PART C:
Importantly so we can award you’re a grade for fair and equal work, your team should keep a
detailed log of each student’s contributions to the overall assignment. This work log should
be included in a table at the end of your report and include details of the work undertaken
such as the date, person, work task and time taken. You can also include meetings you have
done with your team. Failure to complete this section may result in grades not given.
Academic Skills:
The PART A report should be presented professionally, have a cover page, table of contents,
introduction and required sections. References should be included using the Harvard method.
Academic Integrity:
Please be aware that Assignments with a similarity rating above 25% will be investigated and
may result into reporting for academic misconduct with a risk of a fail grade for the
assignment and/or the subject. Always create your own work and do not use any other work
with proper paraphrasing and referencing.
Assessments 4 Marking Criteria and Rubric
• The assessment will be marked out of 100 marks and will be weighted 35% of the total unit
mark.
• The marking criteria and rubric are shown on the following page.
Assignment 4 CASE STUDY
Progressive Insurance
https://www.progressive.com/
In the 1980s, Progressive was a small auto insurance company that sold most of its policies
to people who had poor driving records and could not qualify for the standard rate policies
sold by other insurers. Progressive charged higher premiums for these policies, which the
insurance industry calls substandard policies. Often, other insurers who could not write
standard polices for customers would refer those customers to Progressive. The combination
of high premiums and the lower cost of its smaller sales force enabled
Progressive was the first auto insurance company to launch a Web site (in 1995) and was the
first to sell policies online (in 1997). Knowing that most potential insurance buyers shop
multiple Web sites to find the best rate, the company began showing its competitors’ rates on
its Web site in 2002, allowing potential customers to compare prices without leaving
Progressive’s site. The site displays these rates even when Progressive’s rate is higher than a
competitor’s rate on a particular policy.
As consultant to the company visit the Progressive Web site and assume you are a potential
customer who needs insurance for a used car you plan to buy. Evaluate the usability of the
site be sure to record specific site features that were or were not helpful and conclude with
an overall impression of the site’s effectiveness.
Progressive’s management has expressed a belief that people prefer to buy insurance from
honest companies who offer the best prices. They would like to introduce a female character,
“Mary,” who embodies openness, honesty, and a devotion to low prices. Redesign their site
so Mary is featured prominently on its Web site.
Assessment 4 Marking Criteria and Rubric
| Marking Criteria | Not Satisfactory (0-49% of the criterion mark) |
Satisfactory (50-64% of the criterion mark) |
Good (65-74% of the criterion mark) |
Very Good (75-84% of the criterion mark) |
Excellent (85-100% of the criterion mark) |
| PART A: SWOT and Marketing Strategy (20 marks) SWOT analysis of the business environment. Marketing strategy which describes the target customer, proposes a social media campaign and SEO. |
SWOT is incomplete or irrelevant to the topic. Marketing strategy elements are missing or lack basic explanations. |
SWOT is completed but is mostly general with minimal links to the case study. Marketing strategy elements are identified and there are some basic explanations. |
SWOT is completed with some relevant details from the case study. Marketing strategy elements are identified and well explained. |
SWOT is detailed and researched with reference to the case study. Marketing strategy elements are identified and defined with detailed proposals. Information is well documented with some citations. |
SWOT is detailed and well researched with close reference to the case study. Marketing strategy elements are identified clearly, defined in detail, and specific and effective proposals are provided. Information is comprehensively and logically documented with several citations. |
| PART A: Design Plan and Key Features (20 marks) Discussion of key features the site will implement. Proposed site customer-centric |
The design description is not adequately explained so that it can be understood by a client. Minimal storyboards included. Inconsistent design with no consideration of elements such as navigation. |
The design description is adequately explained so that it can be understood. Several storyboard details are missing. More consideration needs to be given to elements such as navigation. Some inconsistency between pages. |
The design description is clear and effective. Some storyboard details missing. Good layouts for pages with navigation and media elements included but with some minor inconsistencies |
The design description is very clear, specific and effective. All storyboards for each page provided but some minor details missing. Well balanced, visually pleasing layout with good consideration of navigation and media elements. |
The design description effectively and accurately explains all of the system so that it can be completely understood. Storyboards provide descriptions of media, user and interaction, including their use/purpose/objective. Elements are grouped in logical positions. Navigation is very clear and logical. |
| design, including storyboards for each page and the content to be included on the site. |
|||||
| PART B: Site template design and page layouts (20 marks) WordPress site template customised for case study design as per part A, containing a unique design. Pages created containing information as per the storyboards, layout according to E-Commerce conventions. |
Minimal theme implementation. Critical or major elements are not relevant or missing. Poor layout and navigational design. Major layout inconsistencies found between screens. No consideration for E commerce conventions or case study requirement |
Basic theme (downloadable) with little customisation. Some missing details but overall adequate coverage of major functions. Basic layout with some inconsistencies. Colour scheme, fonts and navigation have been considered but could be improved to better suit the topic. |
Theme has been customised to suit the case study. Some minor missing details but overall good coverage of major functions. Good layout with some minor inconsistencies. Colour scheme, fonts and navigation have been well thought out and suit the topic. |
Consolidated, consistent theme with major customisation to suit the case study well. Most of the required functions and elements included. Very good layout and design considerations such as logos have also been included. Colour scheme, fonts and navigation have been very well thought out to suit the case study and E-commerce conventions. |
Unique and attractive theme closely aligned to case study. All required functions and elements are represented. Excellent layout and unique additions such as a customised logo. Consistent between screens, well integrated, logical intuitive placement of elements according to E commerce conventions. |
| PART B: Page contents and media (20 marks) Examples of appropriate media included such as photographs or videos. A number of product pages containing example products and descriptions. Additional support or descriptive pages such as “about us” |
Few or no media elements include to enhance the theme. Inadequate number of pages included to demonstrate the site. Content is poorly written and/or not relevant to the case study. |
Some basic media elements that enhance the theme and add to the user experience. Adequate number of pages to demonstrate the main features of the site. Basic content on each page that is somewhat relevant to the case study. Content lacks detail and may contain a small number of errors. |
A few good media elements that enhance the theme and add to the user experience. A good number of pages included that demonstrate most of the features of the site. Well written but simple content on each page that is mostly relevant to the case study. Minor writing errors. |
Several good media elements that enhance the theme and add to the user experience. 10 pages included that demonstrate most of the features of the site. Well written and quite detailed content on each page that is very relevant to the case study. Few writing errors. |
Several excellent media elements that enhance the theme and add to the user experience. 10 pages included that demonstrate all of the features of the site. Professionally written and detailed content on each page that is highly relevant to the case study. Error-free writing. |
| PART C: Project Log (10 marks) A spreadsheet or journal is regularly updated with each student’s contribution to the assignment. |
Minimal detail – not possible to understand each student’s contributions to the assignment. |
Adequate explanation of each student’s contribution but lacking details and dates completed. Each student’s contribution can be understood to some extent. |
Good explanation of each student’s contribution with some detail provided including some dates of completed elements. Each student’s contribution can be understood. |
Detailed explanation of each student’s contribution including dates completed and suggestions for improvement. Clearly shows each student’s contribution. |
Very detailed and descriptive log of all student work, descriptions of work conducted, and dates completed. Improvements and revisions are also noted. Very clearly shows each student’s contribution. |
| Academic skills (10 marks) Quality of writing and referencing. |
Poor ability in report writing, with several gaps in the quality of written expression and presentation. Several major referencing errors or absent referencing. |
Some major gaps evident in the quality of written expression and presentation. Significant further work needed in report writing technique, improvement needed in the formatting of references and citations. |
Some gaps evident in the quality of written expression and presentation. Further work needed in report writing technique, including some minor formatting of references and citations. |
Quality of written expression and presentation mostly conforms to academic standards relating to clarity of expression, syntax, grammar, and punctuation. No significant gaps in referencing technique using the Harvard referencing system. |
Quality of written expression and presentation is excellent and conforms fully to academic standards relating to clarity of expression, syntax, grammar, and punctuation. No gaps in referencing technique using the Harvard referencing system. |