Module Code: CPUF002

Assessment 1 Brief

Module Code: CPUF002

Module Title: Digital Literacy

Assignment: S1: Reflective Portfolio

Contribution to Module Mark: 60%

Submission Deadline: 9th September 2024, 23:59

The Brief

The Reflective Portfolio asks you to complete a series of three (3) evaluations of computing technologies and software, which are submitted together in a Portfolio. The evaluations will consist of an objective and thorough review, and a reflective commentary.

The completed portfolio must be submitted by the deadline, however, each of the evaluations may be submitted for formative feedback at earlier review points. The portfolio is to be created using Canva or similar software that is intended for this purpose.

Each of the evaluations is to be created individually, although you may discuss your observations and compare conclusions with your peers.

Deliverables

Your portfolio will include the following 3 software evaluations:

Analysis of a business/productivity application

How are common productivity applications organized?

Considering what the application is used for, does the interface make it easier to perform the most common tasks?

Many applications have been around for decades, and although they have improved, they still have their roots in an old design. Does it still work?

Choose a business or productivity application and evaluate its interface and effectiveness.

Comparison of mobile vs web/desktop version

How does the mobile version of software need to differ from the desktop version?

Many applications designed for large screens are available for mobile devices with very small screens. How has the design changed to still offer the same functionality? Or has some functionality been removed?

Choose mainstream desktop software that has a mobile version to thoroughly compare and evaluate.

Design improvement of software you commonly use

How would you improve the usability and effectiveness of a software tool or application you commonly use?

Using design tools of your choice, reimagine the user interface, layout, colour palette or other aspects of the software

Use text to describe the limitations you are seeking to overcome, and the rationale behind your choices

Choose a software product that you use to analysis and design improvements

Submission

If using Canva, you will create and submit your portfolio as a single webpage. Sign up for a free account if you don't already have one or log in to your existing account.

Your portfolio will be made up of titles, text, images, videos and links to external assets such as interface mock-ups created with Draw.io or similar tools. How you create and style the webpage is up to you, but it should clearly identify the three evaluations. To understand the Step-by-Step Guide to Create a Single-Page Portfolio Website in Canva, refer to the guideline document that has been uploaded to Moodle in the Assessment folder. Many other online tutorials exist as well.

Please follow the submission instructions below. Work that is submitted incorrectly may not be accepted or could incur a points penalty.

Before submitting have you

Checked that any digital work is functioning as expected?

Spell-checked and grammar-checked any written work that accompanies your digital work? Please make an appointment with the Writing and Learning Centre or speak to your tutor if you are experiencing challenges in this area.

Formatted your written work to the specification below?

Referenced all sources of information accurately? Please refer to www.citethemrightonline.com (Harvard) for guidance.

Your work must be submitted via Turnitin in Moodle/VLE using your BSU account. Please adhere to the following method:

Open your Canva Project.

Once your portfolio webpage is ready, you export your portfolio webpage in PDF format.

Save the exported file to your PC.

Log into VLE, go to the Assessment folder and submit your portfolio export file via the appropriate assignment submission link.

Marking Criteria: Assessment 1

Criteria 0-19%

Low Fail 20-39%

Fail 40-49%

Third 50-59%

2:2 60-69%

2:1 70-79%

First 80-89%

High First 90-100%

Outstanding

Effectiveness of analysis and evaluation 70% Very limited portfolio that demonstrates little or no evaluation. Structure is unacceptable. A poor attempt at evaluation which is descriptive and without analysis. Writing lacks coherence with poor spelling and grammar. Basic portfolio that offers only minimal information. Evaluation is limited in depth and likely has no connection to taught material. Structure is acceptable. Writing is basic and may lack coherence with spelling and grammar that likely contains several errors. A fair attempt that provides key information and evaluation. Portfolio structure is acceptable and presented logically. A fair level of writing that may lack coherence at times. Spelling and grammar are good though scope for refinement is present. A good portfolio that is well presented and offers a clear overview and thorough evaluations. References to conceptual materials are present but may lack relevance or be limited in depth. Portfolio structure has only minor issues. Writing is good, though a few minor errors may be present within the spelling and grammar. Very good portfolio that is well presented in a clear and logical order. Evaluations are well considered and reference correct terminology and concepts. Portfolio structure has only minor issues. Writing is very good, and spelling and grammar errors are minor if present. An excellent portfolio that provides a high level of insight and analysis. Evaluation is highly critical and detailed, with references made to relevant wider material. Portfolio is very well presented in coherent logical order and contains elements beyond the expectations of the brief. Writing is of an excellent standard and spelling and grammar is free from error. Beyond expectations for this level of study.

Reflective commentaries 30% A very limited attempt at reflective writing. Key elements may be missing. Little to no detail is present. A poor attempt at reflective writing. Concepts and may be superficial and described weakly. A basic set of reflective writings that provide key information yet lack depth and critical review. A fair attempt at reflective writing that provides useful insights in some sections but perhaps not in others. A good piece of writing that demonstrates clear understanding of the concepts. A very good attempt at reflective writing with appropriate analysis and demonstrates a clear personal understanding of the discussed concepts. An excellent set of reflective commentaries that provide a sophisticated overview of the concepts involved. An insightful level of personal critique. Beyond expectations for this level of study.

Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs)

ILO Assessed

Deconstruct user interfaces and identify key interface concepts and paradigms. S1, S2, F2

Appreciate and employ appropriate software to gather, organise and present information. S1, S2, F1, F2

Explain core underpinning concepts of cyber security and personal data security. S2, F2

Mark penalties may be applied to late submissions without prior approval of an extension. Please ensure that you prepare and submit your work in good time to allow for any issues that may arise.

Assessment 1 Brief

Module Academic and Career Foundation

Submission Format Report

Submission Deadline 9th September 2024, 23:59

Contribution towards overall module mark 50%

Word Count 3000 words equivalent

Learning Outcomes This assignment will enable you to demonstrate your ability to:

Effectively manage your time and reflect on your organisational strategies and learning processes within the context of the Computer Science Foundation Year.

Integrate and evaluate relevant computer science literature, demonstrating a clear understanding of academic integrity.

Assignment Task

Your assignment is to prepare a detailed report that addresses the following components:

Section 1: Personal Time Management Analysis

Provide a thorough analysis of your personal time management techniques. Discuss the challenges you have faced in balancing academic, personal, and possibly professional commitments and how you have overcome these challenges.

Section 2: Literature Review and Application

Conduct a literature review of two academic articles that discuss key theories or models in computer science that you find applicable to your studies or professional life. Discuss the pros and cons these models and discuss how they have influenced your approach to your coursework and any professional activities.

Format and Structure

Your report should adhere to the following structure:

Title Page: Contains your full name, student ID, course title, and date of submission.

Table of content

Introduction: Outline the scope of the report and briefly describe what each section will cover.

Main Body: Organised into two main sections, each corresponding to the assignment tasks outlined above.

Conclusion: Draw together your analyses and reflect on your learning and development across the year.

References: Provide a full list of all sources cited in your work, adhering to the Harvard Referencing Style.

Appendices

Submission Guideline

The report should be typed and formatted in Arial, size 12 font, with 1.5 line spacing.

Ensure that your report is thoroughly proofread and free of grammatical errors.

Submit your final report in PDF/MS Word format via the Turnitin Link in ULTRA before the deadline.

Assessment Criteria

Criterion 1: Time Management and your organisational strategy 40%

Criterion 2: Integration of Computer Science Literature 40%

Criterion 3: Understanding and Application of Academic Integrity 10%

Criterion 4: Quality of Writing and Presentation 10%