Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Your assignment should be prepared individually. You should not copy another persons assignment. You should also not plagiarise another persons work as your own. PENILAIAN / EVALUATION Tugasan ini menyumbang sehingga 40% daripada jumlah markah kursus berkenaan dan akan dinilai berdasarkan kepada Rubrik yang dilampirkan. / This assignment accounts for 40% of the total marks for the course and shall be assessed based on the Rubrics attached . Anda akan diberikan maklum balas tentang tugasan ini sebelum Peperiksaan Akhir Semester bermula. / You would be given feedback on the assignment before the Final Semester Examination commences. PLAGIARISME: POTONGAN MARKAH / PLAGIARISM: MARKS DEDUCTION Amaran: Tugasan yang diserahkan, secara automatik, akan disemak untuk menentukan kadar pertindihan. Jika plagiarisme dikesan, markah akan dipotong seperti berikut: / Warning: The submitted assignment will automatically undergo a similarity check. If plagiarism is detected, marks would be deducted as follows: Tugasan dengan pertindihan kandungan antara 10 - 30%: potongan 20% daripada jumlah markah yang diperoleh. Tugasan dengan pertindihan kandungan antara 31 - 50%: potongan 40% daripada jumlah markah yang diperoleh. Tugasan dengan pertindihan kandungan lebih daripada 50%: Markah sifar akan diberikan. Assignments with 10 - 30 % overlap with others: 20% deduction from the total marks scored. Assignments with 31 - 50 % overlap with others: 40% deduction from the total marks scored. Assignments with more than 50% overlap with others: Zero mark would be given.
ASSIGNMENT QUESTION
PURPOSE The purpose of this assignment is to enhance learners skills to analyse auditors report of a listed company in Malaysia. REQUIREMENT Select a public listed company from Bursa Malaysia and analyse the internal auditors report and external auditors report of the company based on the financial statements for the year 2011. (Note: excluding banking sector)
Low Criteria Introduction of the selected company. 1.5 Weig ht 0 No introduction was provided. Companys name and address were not given. 1 Vague and brief description of the companys size, products and services offered. Companys name and address were not given. Vague and brief analysis of the contents was conducted. Vague and brief analysis of the contents was conducted. Provide shallow comparison between contents of internal auditors report and external auditors report by identifying one difference. Samples are not provided.
Fair 2 Adequately clear but brief description of the companys size, products and services offered. Companys name and address were given. Clear but brief analysis of the contents was conducted. Clear but brief analysis of the contents was conducted. Provide shallow comparison between contents of internal auditors report and external auditors report by identifying two differences. Some samples are irrelevant.
Above average 3 Clear and somewhat detailed description of the companys size, products and services offered. Companys name and address were given. Clear and somewhat detailed analysis of the contents was conducted. Clear and somewhat detailed analysis of the contents was conducted. Provide somewhat detailed comparison between contents of internal auditors report and external auditors report by identifying three differences. All samples are relevant.
Excellent 4 Clear and detailed description of the companys size, products and services offered. Companys name and address were given. Clear and detailed analysis of the contents was conducted. Clear and detailed analysis of the contents was conducted. Provide detailed comparison between contents of internal auditors report and external auditors report by identifying four differences. All samples are relevant.
Max Mar ks
Analysis of the contents of internal auditors report Analysis of the contents of external auditors report Comparison between the contents of internal auditors report and external auditors report.
2.5
No analysis of the contents was conducted. No analysis of the contents was conducted. No comparison was done.
10
2.5
10
2.5
10
Summary. 1
Some of the key points of the assignment were summarised but in an incoherent manner.
Most of the key points of the assignment were summarised in a coherent manner.
All of the key points of the assignment were summarised in a coherent manner.
Total
10
40