| Category | Assignment | Subject | Education |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | Arden University | Module Title | COM5025 Ethics, Quality and Sustainability in Technological Environments |
| Word Count | 4000 Words |
|---|---|
| Assessment Title | Coursework |
As part of the formal assessment for the programme, you are required to submit a
Ethics, Quality, and Sustainability in Technological Environments assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
After completing the module, you should be able to:
1. Evaluate industry practices in a global context in relation to quality, sustainability, and ethics.
2. Appraise the role of ethics, quality, and environmental management for decision making within a technological context.
3. Apply appropriate theoretical concepts and practical techniques in proposing solutions to social, environmental, and ethical problems.
4. (Graduate Attribute) Responsible Global Citizenship: Understand global issues and their place in a globalised economy, ethical decision-making, and accountability. Adopt self-awareness, openness, and sensitivity to diversity in culture
All learning outcomes must be met to pass the module.
Consider the following scenario
The National Citizen Support Service (NCSS) is a large UK government department established to provide a wide range of essential services to UK citizens across the country. Some of these services include providing information and advice on government schemes, processing applications for benefits, facilitating access to public services, and managing citizen records. For many citizens, the NCSS is a crucial point of contact with the government.
Over the years, the NCSS has embarked on an ambitious digital transformation program aimed at improving efficiency, reducing costs, and enhancing citizen access to services. This program involves the increasing use of digital platforms (a website and a mobile application), automated processes, cloud-based infrastructure, and the exploration of emerging technologies like Artificial Intelligence (AI).
As part of the digital transformation, a key project is the development of an AI-powered chatbot dubbed “AdvizoBot". AdvizoBot was designed to cater to general citizen inquiries, provide basic information, and guide users through application processes. It is anticipated that AdvizoBot will significantly reduce the workload of the call centre staff and provide 24/7 access to support.
Another significant change, as part of the transformation, is the digitization and centralization of all citizen records. This will be done by incorporating a cloud-based National Citizen Database. This aims to streamline processes, improve data accuracy, and enable a more holistic view of citizen interactions with government services.
Furthermore, to leverage on specialist expertise and to reduce operational costs, the department has outsourced the IT infrastructure and cybersecurity management to a private company called "SecureITech", by the department.
Recent challenges and concerns:
Despite the anticipated benefits, several concerns have been raised since the start of the digital transformation project. As a neutral consultant with a background in ethics, you have been contracted to oversee all responses and proffer a resolution to the concerns raised, some of which include the following:
As a team of ethical and technology analysts, you are tasked with writing a report analysing the ethical, legal, social, and sustainability issues facing the National Citizen Support Service (NCSS) in its digital transformation journey.
You should explain the issues, what is being done well, and what improvements are needed, and make recommendations for the immediate and longer term. You should justify your findings with reference to relevant research and regulations and explain how you resolve any ethical dilemmas that the issues raise using ethical frameworks or lenses.
Points you may consider include:
You do not have to address each of these areas, but should select which you consider are the most relevant for the given scenario at this time and make appropriate recommendations, and some issues you address may cover more than one area. (4000 Words) (100Marks) (LOs: 1, 2, 3 and 4)
|
Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression which move beyond the descriptive or imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution. |
||
|
Grade |
Mark Bands |
Generic Assessment Criteria |
|
First (1) |
80%+ |
An outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. There is sophisticated use and management of learning resources, and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated. Writing is outstandingly well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and with some additional effort could considered for internal publication. |
|
|
70-79% |
An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills is demonstrated, and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills. |
|
Upper second (2:1) |
60-69% |
A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory, and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is evidence of growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are very good, expression is accurate overall, and the work is consistently referenced throughout. |
|
Lower second (2:2) |
50-59% |
A good understanding of the discipline which begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall, and the work is planned and structured with some though. Professional skills are good (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought, but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is referenced throughout. |
|
Third (3) |
40-49% |
Satisfactory level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought, and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and |
|
|
|
intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work. |
|
Marginal Fail |
30-39% |
A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and professional skills are weak and there are errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought and is largely imitative. |
|
Clear fail |
29% and Below |
A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is imitative. |
|
Criteria and weighting |
80% and above |
70% - 79% |
60% - 69% |
50% - 59% |
40% - 49% |
30-39% |
29% and below |
|
Content (80%) |
Discussion and |
Discussion and report |
Discussion and report |
Discussion and report |
Discussion and |
Discussion and |
Discussion and |
|
|
report show an |
show an excellent level |
show a very good level |
show a good level of |
report show a basic |
report show an |
report is mostly |
|
|
exceptional level of |
of understanding and |
of understanding and |
understanding and |
level of |
incomplete |
lacking in terms of |
|
|
understanding and |
insight, along with a |
insight, with a level of |
insight, with a level of |
understanding and |
understanding and |
demonstrating |
|
|
insight in relation to |
level of independent |
independent thought |
independent thought |
insight, with a level |
insufficient insight, |
understanding and |
|
|
the task, with a level |
thought and synthesis of |
and synthesis of |
and synthesis of |
of independent |
with a level of |
insight, with a |
|
|
of independent |
appropriate principles |
appropriate principles |
appropriate principles |
thought and |
independent |
mostly absent level |
|
|
thought and |
that demonstrate an |
that demonstrate a very |
that demonstrate a good |
synthesis of |
thought and |
of independent |
|
|
synthesis of |
excellent understanding |
good understanding of |
understanding of the |
appropriate |
synthesis of |
thought and |
|
|
appropriate |
of the requirements of |
the requirements of the |
requirements of the |
principles that |
appropriate |
synthesis of |
|
|
principles that |
the task. |
task. |
task, though there are |
needs significant |
principles that |
appropriate |
|
|
exceeds |
|
|
aspects that require |
further |
needs significant |
principles. |
|
|
expectations. |
|
|
further development. |
development in |
further |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
relation to the task. |
development in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
relation to the task |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and omits required |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
aspects |
|
|
Structure and presentation |
Exceptionally |
Exceptional presentation |
Very good presentation, |
Good presentation, |
Basic presentation |
Limited |
Mostly inaccessible |
|
(10%) |
presented with no |
with no spelling or |
though there are some |
although there are some |
with major issues in |
presentation with |
in terms of structure |
|
|
spelling or |
grammatical errors and |
minor spelling or |
issues with the content |
terms of errors |
significant issues in |
and presentation |
|
|
grammatical errors |
in a fluent, logical and |
grammatical errors or |
in terms of errors, |
clarity, depth |
terms of errors, |
that is well below |
|
|
and in a fluent, |
engaging style that |
minor issues with clarity, |
clarity, depth and/or |
and/or relevance it |
clarity, depth and/or |
the standard for a |
|
|
logical and engaging |
demonstrates an |
the report is mostly |
relevance, it |
demonstrates a |
relevance that brings |
pass. |
|
|
style that employs a |
excellent use of the |
written in a style that |
demonstrates the use of |
limited use of |
it below a pass |
|
|
|
highly sophisticated |
appropriate terminology |
demonstrates the use of |
appropriate terminology |
appropriate |
standard, it |
|
|
|
use of the |
related to ethics. |
appropriate terminology |
related to ethics. |
terminology related |
demonstrates an |
|
|
|
appropriate |
|
related to ethics. |
|
to ethics. |
insufficient use of |
|
|
|
terminology related |
|
|
|
|
appropriate |
|
|
|
to ethics. |
|
|
|
|
terminology related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to ethics |
|
|
Use of references (10%) |
Exemplary |
Excellent |
A very good |
A good understanding of |
A basic |
A limited |
A lack of |
|
|
referencing and use |
understanding of |
understanding of |
referencing and use of |
understanding of |
understanding of |
understanding of the |
|
|
of a knowledge base |
referencing and use of a |
referencing and use of |
an appropriate and |
the Harvard |
the Harvard |
Harvard referencing |
|
|
that is highly |
knowledge base that is |
an appropriate and |
relevant knowledge |
referencing systems |
referencing systems |
system and a lack of |
|
|
appropriate and |
appropriate and |
relevant knowledge |
base. |
and a limited use of |
and a limited use of |
evidence of the use |
|
|
relevant. |
relevant. |
base, though there are |
|
relevant and |
relevant and |
of relevant and |
|
|
|
|
some issues with use of |
|
appropriate sources. |
appropriate sources, |
appropriate |
|
|
|
|
references and the |
|
|
which fall below the |
references. |
|
|
|
|
Harvard system. |
|
|
threshold of a pass. |
|
Do You Need COM5025 Assignment of This Question
Order Non-Plagiarized AssignmentDon’t let your COM5025 Ethics, Quality and Sustainability in Technological Environments assignment stress you out! We are here for assignment help. Our expert writers are here to support you with affordable, AI-free, and plagiarism-free assignment help. Whether it’s Business Management or a complex project, we ensure well-researched, high-quality content. We offer free assignment samples and always deliver your work before the deadline. Reach out today and get the best support for your assignments—quick, easy, and reliable! We also provide Arden University Assignment Samples that the phd expert writers have written. Contact us now!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
