Showing posts with label marketing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marketing. Show all posts

Wednesday, 9 September 2020

Ethical Case Study

UK assignment helper

 





Ethical Case Study Project Guidelines

Overview

You write a case study based on your own experience related to an ethical issue within an organization; or you may choose to write about an emerging ethical issue within your current or planned industry. The case study can be fully anonymous to protect those within your organization, and you may choose to identify your role in the case study or not. Your case study will be submitted for a grade in parts throughout the term with the entire final document as the last deliverable. Please review these general tips and guidelines. How to approach writing your case:

• Assume you are one of the leaders in the organization. Write with clarity and confidence on the topic based on what you have learned prior to and during this course.

• Pretend that the audience reading this case study knows nothing about the situation or ethical philosophy, decision-making, etc. Provide enough detail to give readers enough information to draw conclusions, but remain succinct.

• Explain, as needed, the context, evaluate the evidence, and make a decision concerning the appropriate course of action, and support your conclusion through arguments and counter-arguments.

• Take a clear and decisive position – What would you do in this case? What ethical decision-making framework did you use? What most influenced your decision?

Formatting Requirements

The formatting of this document should be as follows:

• Use consistent formatting throughout (12 pt font, Times New Roman, single-spaced).

• Do review your paper thoroughly for grammatical issues and typographical errors!

• Use cover page and references

• Cite your sources (do not use Wikipedia or Blog, etc.) and list them in a reference page per APA style.

• At minimum 5 resources that are published no more than five years ago. Choose scholarly resources (i.e., peer-reviewed journal, sources from your industry/organization, and (sparingly) the textbook.

• 9-12 body pages (single-spaced, not including cover page and references).

Project Timeline

• Week 3: Choose an ethical issue and a topic. See the assignment for details.

• Week 4: Part 1 and Outline of Case

• Week 5: Part 2

• Week 6: Part 3

• Week 7: Final Document

• Week 8: Final Presentation

Ethical Case Outline

Part 1: Describe the case (3-4 pages):

• Identify the parties involved, their rights, their responsibilities

• Identify the salient ethical and/or legal issues of the case

• Identify the relevant factual issues, conceptual issues, social constraints, and any additional information necessary for an accurate understanding of the case.

• If needed, conduct research about the issue from multiple perspectives and include relevant ethical theory, legal requirements, and technical details about the case to ensure that the case can be solved.

• See OWL Sample Outlines for formatting information.

Part 2: Critically analyze the case (3-4 pages):

• Identify the primary “ethical dilemma (or question)” in the case.

• Formulate possible courses of action.

• Discuss any role that information technology or context played in creating the special circumstances of the case.

• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of those actions.

• Analyze different courses of action, are they based on a consequential or non-consequential approach? Are these courses of action ethical?

• Weigh the pros and cons of each action.

Part 3: Solve the case (3-4 pages):

• Indicate which course of action you would choose, and why. If you were personally involved in the scenario, you can detail what you DID do compared to what you WOULD do given what you have learned in this course.

• Provide your own opinions: do not rephrase the opinions of others, create your own, unique viewpoint based on your ethical philosophy, ethical decision-making framework, and the context and scenario of the case.

• Clearly demonstrate and explain how the pros of your solution outweigh the cons.

• Use the facts of the case and supporting resources to convince your readers of the soundness of your ethical point of view

Final Document

• All parts due as one cohesive document.

• Be sure to have addressed any issues or concerns that were brought to your attention from each individual part.

Final Presentation

• Create a 8-10 minute narrated presentation that is limited to 10 slides

Thursday, 3 September 2020

DATABASE ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN

UK assignment helper





IT 8100 DATABASE ARCHITECTURE IT 8100 

 DATABASE ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN


 Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 

“Whole Sale Food Market”

3

Department Department Department

Product

Code Code

Aisle

Number Number

Price Price

Unit of Unit of Unit of Measure Measure

Produce Produce Produce

4081

1

0.35

lb

Produce Produce Produce

4027

1

0.90

ea

Produce Produce Produce

4108

1

1.99

lb

Butcher Butcher

331100

5

1.50

lb

Butcher Butcher

331105

5

2.40

lb

Butcher Butcher

332110

5

5.00

lb

Freezer Freezer

411100

6

1.00

ea

Freezer Freezer

521101

6

1.00

ea

Freezer Freezer

866503

6

5.00

ea

Freezer Freezer

866504

6

5.00

ea

Whole Sale Food Market Whole Sale Food Market Whole Sale Food Market Whole Sale Food Market Whole Sale Food MarketWhole Sale Food Market Whole Sale Food Market

User View 1 User View 1 User View 1 User View 1 User View 1 User View 1 User View 1 -Price Update List Price Update List Price Update List Price Update List


5

Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF Normalize User Views and Create a Final 3NF solution

UNF

1NF

2NF

3NF

CHALLENGES CHALLENGES

Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market” Group Activity 1 “Whole Sale Food Market”

Wednesday, 2 September 2020

Research, Ethics, and Professionalism in Computing

UK assignment helper

 





Resit coursework

IMAT5262: Research, Ethics, and Professionalism in Computing

1.     Relevance

This re-submission coursework is of relevance to students who deferred or failed the Research Proposal component of the IMAT5262_1920_502 module and need to re-sit or re-submit their Research Proposals ONLY. Students who failed individual components of the original coursework but received an overall mark greater than or equal to 50% do not need to re-submit the Research Proposal.

Marking of all re-sit submissions are capped at 50%. Students who deferred the Research Proposal Component of the May 2020 coursework are eligible for the full range of marks, that is, their re-submissions are not subject to the cap of 50% as applied to students who failed the coursework component in May 2020.

IMPORTANT: For students who are re-submitting due to a failed result in the Research Proposal submitted in May 2020: Please do not be deterred from submitting a high-quality Research Proposal, because of the 50% cap. You are strongly advised to aim for the highest mark achievable in order to attain the 50% pass mark in this re-submission.

Please pay special attention to your individual feedback on the failed component of the coursework as well as the general feedback on Research Proposal submissions, to be found in the Announcements folder.

The Research proposal component comprises 60% of the Final module mark with the other two components, namely, (1) the Weekly Readings and (2) the Group Presentation each comprising 20% of the Final Module mark:

Final Mark = 0.6 (Research Proposal) + 0.2 (Weekly Readings) + 0.2 (Group Presentation)

2.     Task Description

In order to cover the topics of the module, this re-sit coursework will consist of an extended research proposal. The topic of the proposal is to be suggested by the student. If you would like to consult on the topic, please do not hesitate to contact me by email before 27 July 2020 at (mayen.cunden@dmu.ac.uk). The topic must be within the broad area of the module, i.e. social and ethical consequences of computing and information technology. Students may re-submit a Research Proposal based on a different topic of the coursework to that originally submitted in May 2020.

Students should then do more detailed research on the topic, undertake a literature review that shows the relevance of the topic and develop a suitable methodology that would enable a suitable structured, scientific approach to follow in proposing to answer the research question.

The structure of the proposal should include:

·       Title

·       Abstract

·       Table of Content

·       Background / introduction

·       Research question (should be clear, focused, unambiguous, achievable)

·       Review of relevant literature, which demonstrates that the research question covers a gap in the literature

·       Critical review of applicable research methodologies, which discusses available methodologies with regards to the research question, issues of data collection and analysis. Choice of methodology should be clearly justified

·       Detailed project plan

·       Relevant references

·       Appendices

o   (appendices should be used to provide the research instrument or equivalent, e.g. a survey, case study protocol, interview plan, observation plan etc.)

o   Consideration of ethical issues should also be included in appendices (use of the ethical review forms available in the Research Proposal Folder

The project proposal should be approximately 3000 words long, excluding references and appendices. It should use the Harvard style of referencing and it CANNOT use Internet references (this does not rule out academic journal references which are accessible through the DMU resources and library web site). The proposal must be submitted in electronic form to the plagiarism detection system “Turnitin” built into Blackboard.

You are strongly advised to re-consider your re-sit submission if the Turnitin index returns a score greater than 20%.

Required Readings:

The module readings can be used as a starting point to define the research question and give an overview of methodology:

Oates, Briony (2005): Researching Information Systems and Computing. SAGE

Himma, Ken & Tavani, Herman (eds.) (2008): Handbook of Computer and Information Ethics. Wiley

Journals:

1.     Information, Communication, Ethics and Society

(www.emeraldinsight.com/info/journals/jices/jices.jsp)

2.     ETHICOMP Journal (http://www.ccsr.cse.dmu.ac.uk/journal/)

3.     International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction

 (http://www.swetswise.com/eAccess/viewTitleIssues.do?titleID=324829)

3.     Further detail

Submission deadline:              4th September 2020, midday (12 noon)

Student support: The module leader will be available by email until 27 July 2020 and after 28th August 2020.


4.               The Research Proposal Re-Submission for IMAT5262: Research, Ethics, and Professionalism in Computing 

 

Student Name………………………………….………………Title:…………..………………………………………………

 

 

 

0-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

70-80

80-90

90-100

Topic

15%

 

 

Definition

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Relevance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Novelty

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Content

30%

 

 

conforming to academic standards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

clarity of argument

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Coherence

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

abstract, key words (5-10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Structure

20%

 

 

balance / logic of the argument

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

knowledge displayed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

quality of resources

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

headings (level, numbering)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

15%

 

 

fit with argument

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

own view

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

critical reflection

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formalities

20%

 

 

References (no Internet references)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Style

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Language

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(The percentages show the approximate weighting, they are not intended for mathematical exactness)

 

Comments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Marks (worth 60% of overall mark)