Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines

Trimester

T1 2026

Unit Code

MDA513

Unit Title

ICT Practices

Assessment Type

Formative Assessment 1 – Individual

Assessment Title

Ethical and Professional Issues in ICT Planning, Entrepreneurship, and Cyber Security

Purpose of the  assessment (with  ULO Mapping)

Students should be able to demonstrate their achievements in the following unit learning outcomes:

a. Explain concepts of management, leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship in the ICT industry.

b. Apply appropriate business communication in relation to decision-making, and apply academic standards in writing reports and in the presentation of research.

Students must be able to generate ideas at abstract levels and support their arguments with strong reasoning.

Weight

10%

Total Marks

100

Word limit

800-1200

Due Date

Week 3 – Thursday – 2 April 2026 – 11:59 PM

Submission

Guidelines

including the

use of GenAI

Tools

• GENERATIVE AI TOOLS MAY BE USED WITH PRIOR PERMISSION Students are permitted to use advanced automated tools for this formative assessment only for understanding, learning, and research purposes. Using GenAI tools to write assignments for you will be considered academic misconduct, and it will be penalized. If students are using any of the information from GenAI, then you must cite or attribute the use of the GenAI in their assessment.

a. All work must be submitted on Moodle by the due date along with a completed Assignment Cover Page.

b. The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11-pt Calibri (Body) font, and 2.54 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate section headings.

c. Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using the IEEE referencing style.

Extension

If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration Application must be submitted directly on AMS. You must submit this application three working days prior to the due date of the assignment. Further information is available at:

Academic

Misconduct

Academic misconduct is a serious offense. Depending on the seriousness of the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at:

For further information, please refer to the Academic Integrity Section in your Unit Description.

Students with ID ending with

Answer scenario number

0 or 5

0

1 or 6

1

2 or 7

2

3 or 8

3

4 or 9

4

Aspects

Description of the section

Marks

Introduction

(100-150 words)

Provide an overview of your chosen case. Briefly explain the key concepts of management, leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship relevant to the case.

20

Literature Review

(400-500 words)

The literature review should focus on:

a. Theoretical and practical perspectives on the technology or issue.

b. A discussion of ethical considerations, focusing on the challenges introduced by the technology. c. How management, leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship are involved in addressing these ethical issues.

25

Critical Reflection

(300-400 words)

a. Critically reflect on the role of ICT in addressing or exacerbating the ethical issues in your chosen case.

b. Analyze how the concepts of management, leadership, innovation, and entrepreneurship can influence decision-making in this context.

c. Reflect on how businesses can adopt ethical leadership and innovation to address challenges effectively.

25

Conclusion and

recommendations (100-150 words):

Summarise your findings and provide

recommendations for industry leaders based on your research.

20

Reference style

Follow IEEE reference style consistently

10

Total

100

Criteria

Excellent

(80-100%)

Good (60-79%)

Satisfactory

50-59%

Needs

Improvement  0-49%

Weight

Introduction

Demonstrates a  thorough

understanding

and integration of  management,

leadership,

innovation, and  entrepreneurship  in the ICT

industry.

Concepts are

excellently

applied to the

chosen case.

Demonstrates

a solid

understanding of  the concepts with  clear application  to the case. Minor  gaps in integration  or explanation.

Demonstrates

basic

understanding of  the concepts, with  some unclear or  incomplete

application to the  case.

Lack of

understanding of  key concepts;

concepts not

integrated well

with the case.

20%

Research and

Literature Review

Comprehensive  literature review,  using a wide

range of high

quality, relevant  academic

sources.

Demonstrates

deep research

and synthesis of  the literature.

Good literature  review with a

variety of relevant  sources. Research  is solid but may  lack depth in some  areas.

Basic literature

review with

limited sources.  Some sources

may not be highly  relevant or high  quality.

Poor literature

review with few or  irrelevant sources.  Research lacks

depth or

relevance.

25%

Critical Reflection  and Analysis

Exceptional

critical reflection  on the impact of  technology on

business practices  and ethics. Well reasoned insights  on leadership,

decision-making,  and innovation.

Good

reflection,

offering

meaningful

insights into the  impact of

technology on

business and

ethics, though

some areas could  be explored more  thoroughly.

Adequate

reflection with

some meaningful  insights, but

lacking depth or  critical thinking in  places.

Minimal

reflection; lacks  critical analysis or  insight into the  impact of

technology and  ethics.

25%

Conclusion and  Recommendations

Insightful and

concise

conclusion with  strong, practical  recommendations  based on findings.  Clear, actionable  insights.

Good conclusion  with practical

recommendations.  Some aspects may  lack depth or

clarity.

Conclusion is basic  and somewhat

weak.

Recommendations  are not fully

developed or

actionable.

Conclusion is

vague or missing.  Recommendations  are lacking or  irrelevant.

20%

Reference

Style

Excellent use of a  variety of

relevant, high

quality sources  (5+). Proper

citation in the

correct format

(IEEE style).

Good use of

sources (4-5).

Minor issues with  citation format or  source quality.

Adequate use of  sources (34).

Some issues with  citation format or  source quality.

Few or irrelevant  sources (less than  3). Significant

citation issues.