| Category | PPT | Subject | Computer Science |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Yoobee College of Creative Innovation | Module Title | CAI402 Foundation of Machine Learning |
Course – CAI402 Foundation of Machine Learning (15 Credits)
Weighting within the course: 100%
This course aims to enable ākonga to build on knowledge and skills in machine learning, collaboration, and fundamental programming concepts.
This assessment evaluates your ability to research, select and summarise key concepts in machine learning and automation using credible sources, and to present your findings clearly as a team.
LO1 Research and summarise key concepts of machine learning and automation using information from credible sources.
Graduate Profile Outcomes (GPOs) covered
GPO1 Locate, select and analyse relevant information from a variety of sources, and apply this information by working independently and collaboratively, on context-relevant tasks and problems
GPO2 Construct a well-reasoned and researched argument relevant to their chosen field(s) and communicate it, using appropriate modes and media.
Get Solution ofCAI402 Foundation of Machine Learning Assessment before Deadline
Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized Assignment| Learning Outcome | Task Component | Mapped GPOs | Weighting (%) |
| LO1: Research and summarise key concepts of machine learning and automation using information from credible sources | 1. Research and Understanding of Key Concepts | GPO1, GPO2 | 30% |
| 2. Application to Real World Industries | GPO1, GPO2 | 30% | |
| 3. Reflective Summary on Research | GPO1 | 20% | |
| 4. Credible Sources, Referencing and Critical Evaluation | GPO1 | 15% | |
| Presentation Structure and Visual Aids | GPO2 | 5% | |
| Total | 100% |
The final grade will be determined by the score achieved in this assessment based on the following table. In order to meet the requirements of this course, ākonga | learners must achieve a minimum grade of 50% for all assessments. All assessments must be passed independently; marks are not aggregated or averaged across assessments. Ākonga | learners are permitted one attempt per assessment task.
If an ākonga | learner does not achieve a passing grade on the first attempt, they may be provided with one opportunity to re-sit. To be eligible to re-sit a grade between 40 – 49% on the first attempt is required. 50% is the maximum grade awarded for a re-sit.
Failure to achieve a passing result after the re-sit may result in non-completion of the course and you may need to re-enrol in the course to progress in the programme of study.
| Grade | Range | Pass/Fail |
| A | Meet all course requirements, range (80+) | Pass |
| B | Meet all course requirements, range (65-79%) | Pass |
| C | Meet all course requirements, range (50-64%) | Pass |
| D | Did not meet all course requirements, range (40-49%) | Fail |
| E | Did not meet all course requirements, mark range (0-39%) | Fail |
This assessment is an open-book activity, you can use your own course and review notes as well as offline or online resources, such as textbooks or online journals.
You can always ask your tutor if you need further explanation about forming a group or if the instructions are unclear.
Your work should not be plagiarised. Plagiarism includes copying material without acknowledging it, copying from another student, getting another person to help you with your assessment, using material from commercial essays or assignment services, or using AI to create the answers.
The purpose of this assessment is to assess your knowledge. In the event Yoobee suspects collusion, this will be addressed. For more information on plagiarism, please refer to the Student Handbook.
Marks and feedback will be returned within 15 days of the submission date.
By completing and submitting an assessment you are authenticating that the work is original and does not violate plagiarism or copyright law. Authenticity is checked where any breaches of academic integrity are suspected. Please refer to the Student Handbook for further information
Please submit the following to your LMS (Learning Management System) by the due date:
Group Presentation
o Video presentation (.mp4 format), 10-12 minutes in length for groups of 2 or 15-18 minutes in length for groups of 3.
o Copy of the presentation slides in PDF or .pptx format
| Week | What needs to be done | What needs to be submitted |
| Week 1 | Assessment released on LMS.
Form groups of 2-3, assign roles and responsibilities, and begin research. |
—- |
| Week 2 | Continue research, draft slides | ——– |
| Week 3 | Complete reflective summary and record audio narration.
Format referencing in APA style, and ensure all tasks are addressed. |
———– |
| Week 4 | Finalise and submit assessment. | Group presentation (.mp4 format) plus copy of presentation slides (.PDF or .pptx format) submitted on the LMS |
Form a group of 2 or 3 to prepare and deliver a presentation exploring machine learning and automation in real life. Each group member must participate equally in the research, and present for at least 5 minutes.
Your presentation should be delivered showing good presentation principles, including:
1. Research and Understanding of Key Concepts:
i. Explain in your own words what machine learning is.
ii. Compare supervised and unsupervised learning and provide examples of each.
iii. Explain what automation means in this context and how Python can be used to automate tasks relevant to intelligent systems.
2. Application to Real World Industries:
Choose at least two distinct real-world sectors such as healthcare, transport, agriculture, retail, finance, education etc. For each sector, include:
3. Reflective summary on research:
4. Use of Credible Sources and Referencing:
| Task | Weighti ng | A
(80-100%) |
B
(65-79%) |
C
(50-64%) |
D
(40-49%) |
E
(0-39%) |
| 1. Research and Understan ding of Key Concepts
(LO1) |
30% | Accurate, clear explanation s in plain language. Correct explanation of supervised and unsupervise
d with relevant examples. Automation defined appropriatel y and Python’s role explained clearly. |
Mostly accurate with minor gaps. Examples appropriate but under‑develo ped. Small omissions or imprecision in automation or Python explanation. | Basic and
partly accurate coverage. Examples are generic or unclear. Difference s between learning types not well explained. |
Major
inaccuraci es or omissions across concepts. Examples misleading or poorly chosen. |
Very limited understandi
ng. Key definitions missing or incorrect. |
| 2. Applicatio n to Realworld
Industries (LO1) |
30% | Two or
more sectors discussed. For each, a specific, well-scoped problem; data type and likely source clearly stated with labelled or unlabelled status; ML task correctly identified and convincingl y justified for the context; benefits and limitations/ri sks are |
Two sectors discussed. All elements present with minor gaps in specificity or depth. ML task is
appropriate but justification is brief. Benefits and limitations or risks mostly relevant. Evidence provided for each sector, though one citation or dataset attribution may be light. |
Two
sectors mentioned but treatment is uneven: one or more elements thin or generic in each sector. ML task identified with limited or unclear justificatio n. Benefits and limitations or risks are surfacelevel. Evidence present |
Only one sector, or multiple required elements
missing in one or both sectors. ML task is mismatche d to the problem or largely unjustified. Benefits and limitations or risks are vague or off-point. Little or no sectorspecific evidence; datasets not cited. |
Application
s are absent or inaccurate. Problems, data and task are incorrect or missing. Claims are unsupporte d; no credible sources or dataset citations. |
| concrete andbalanced;
all significant claims supported with at least one source per sector and any datasets explicitly cited. |
but minimal or not clearly tied to claims. | ||||||
| 3. | Reflective summary on research (LO1) | 20% | Clear account of search, selection and synthesis decisions.
Shows how collaboratio n improved clarity and accuracy. Specific challenge explained with a clear link to better evidence or explanation. |
Covers
search and selection with minor gaps. Collaboration described generally. Challenge linked partially to improvement. |
Basic description of process. Limited detail on collaborati
on or learning. Weak link to improvem ent. |
Minimal reflection with little evidence of process
or improvem ent. Unclear link to LO1. |
No meaningful reflection or link to LO1. |
| 4. | Credible
Sources, Referencing and Critical Evaluation (LO1) |
15% | Three or more
credible sources. Correct in‑slide citations and complete APA 7 reference list. Explicit, thoughtful application of CARS or CRAAP to justify credibility, including datasets. |
At least three credible sources. APA mostly correct with minor issues. Credibility considered
but not consistently. |
Three sources with
several APA errors. Credibility discussion brief or generic. |
Fewer than three credible sources or
significant APA errors. Weak or missing credibility evaluation. |
Citations or reference
list missing, or sources not credible. |
| Presentation
Structure, Visual Aids and Time Management |
5% | Clear,
logical progression signposted from introduction to conclusion. Slides concise and uncluttered with consistent formatting. Visuals are relevant, correctly labelled and interpreted in speech, clearly strengtheni ng key points. Finishes within the allotted time without rushing. |
Generally logical structure with minor ordering or signposting issues. A few slides slightly text-heavy. Visuals mostly relevant and labelled, with minor gaps in explanation. Completes within the allotted time with minor pacing issues. | Structure is uneven in places. Several slides cluttered or inconsiste ntly formatted. Visuals sometimes generic or decorative and only partly explained. Small overrun or underrun of up to 1 minute. | Disorganis ed flow
that makes ideas hard to follow. Frequent text-heavy slides. Visuals distract or are poorly labelled, with little integration into the talk. Overrun or underrun of 1-2 minutes. |
No coherent structure. Slides are cluttered or missing key information. Visuals absent, misleading, or not explained. Significant overrun or underrun of more than
2 minutes. |
|
Get Solution ofCAI402 Foundation of Machine Learning Assessment before Deadline
Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized AssignmentAre you a student at the Yoobee College in the NZ and struggling with your CAI402 Foundation of Machine Learning assignment? Get expert Machine Learningassignment help and make your studies easier! Our free list of assignment examples and samples will guide you step-by-step, helping you understand difficult concepts. Our NZ assignment help provides clear explanations to improve your skills. Don't let challenging assignments hold you back—get the support you need and excel in your course with confidence! Start your journey to success today!
Hire Assignment Helper Today!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content