Financial Reporting Issues and Applications
Coursework Booklet
COURSEWORK QUESTION
Due Date – Monday 29th October 2018 at 1pm
Corporate Social Reporting
“Corporations have long looked to the accounting profession for its expertise in
strategy, measurement, reporting, and analysis. These same skills make accountants
uniquely positioned to help companies implement [Sustainability] standards – to
communicate useful information not only to investors, but also to internal decision
makers, helping them drive long-term value creation.
By bringing their skills to bear on sustainability, accountants can shape the future of the
accounting profession and the broader capital markets. Developing a future tense for
the language of business can allow the story of more focused companies, betterinformed investors, and more stable and resilient 21st-century markets to be told.”
Hales, J. 2018, ‘The Future of Accounting Is Now’, CPA Journal, 88, 7, pp. 6-9,
Required
Critically discuss whether adopting a set of mandatory sustainability reporting standards
would benefit stakeholders or whether a voluntary approach would be more
appropriate.
2 | P a g e
Presentational requirements:
1. Your paper should have an overall length of 2,000 words (plus or minus 10%). A
word count MUST be given. In line with University Guidelines, you will be penalised
for a paper excessively over or under the word count. All references and quotes
made within the body of your essay are included in the word count. The
bibliography and reference list given at the end of your essay is not included in
the word count.
2. The paper should be presented on A4 and typed in double line spacing in
Verdana 11pt font with text justified.
3. Coursework is anonymously marked so your name should not appear anywhere
on your work.
4. The final draft of your coursework should be run though the Turnitin software and
the report made available for the marker to access online.
3 | P a g e
Coursework Guidance
As stated above, you have been asked to prepare an essay – not a report. This means
that your submission will be less structured than a report but not less formal in its language
and referencing. As indicated, you will be penalised for a word count excessively over
or under 2,000 words. You are allowed 10% difference either way ie, the essay should not
be less than 1,800 words nor more than 2,200.
In all points you raise for discussion, I am looking for depth of analysis rather than
breadth. This means you should look at fewer issues but the ones you do examine, do it
in more detail. I have highlighted some areas and key points you may want to consider
within the question set:
Identify and Explain the Guidelines
You only have 2,000 words to answer the whole question which means you can’t
devote pages of your essay describing or summarising the AA1000 or the GRI
standards. Your emphasis should be on ‘Explain’ and ‘Discuss’ rather than ‘Identify’ or
‘Describe’. In order for your critical appraisal to make sense, you will have to set your
discussion within the context of CSR and sustainability standards/guidelines but you will
have to summarise their contents heavily to ensure you have enough space to discuss
all the issues you’d like and get a better mark.
Critical appraisal of key aspects
This is where your research will help you get a good grade. You need to choose one
or two areas to discuss in depth in order to answer the question. Here are a few ideas of
what you could consider – the kind of angles you might use in your approach.
• What role does CSR play in accounting, business and society?
• What is its historical context and why would guidelines or standards be desirable?
Who was involved in determining what they were?
• Differences between voluntary and mandatory regulation.
• What tasks are guidelines or standards designed to do and can they meet this
challenge?
• Consider perspective – What are the advantages/disadvantages of Sustainability
reports to the reporting entity itself or the report users?
• Consider cost/benefit of CSR in practice.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive list and is not a list of questions you need to ‘answer’.
These aspects are highlighted to give you some ideas to begin your literature search.
A critical analysis involves explaining your issue with description and examples and
then discussing opinions around that topic – like a debate of the main issues. Each
opinion needs to be referenced and explained in the context of the issue you’re
debating. Don’t just provide a quote and hope that it ‘speaks for itself’. You need to
discuss the opinion expressed properly.
Use direct quotes sparingly. Most of the arguments and ideas you read should be
put into your own words, properly referenced and formed into the arguments you’re
setting out. Too many quotes make it look as though you haven’t understood the
meaning of what you’ve read. Show me you can put an argument together.
4 | P a g e
Marking and weighting
Your coursework mark will be weighted as follows:
Presentation, language & structure 10
Wide research and proper referencing 20
Knowledge, Understanding & Explanation 40
Critical analysis & discussion 30
Further information on each section is detailed below:
Language and Structure
• Grammar and spelling
• Presence of typing errors
• Good layout
• Good structure
• Formal essay style
Wide research and proper referencing
• Use of quality journals as well and web sites and technical articles
• Correct and consistent referencing style (Harvard style required) in citations and
reference list
• Up to date references
• Wide range of references (not Wikipedia and similar web sites!)
• Use of academic journals, magazines, newspapers and textbooks
Knowledge, understanding and explanation
• Discussion of key debates
• Explanation and demonstration of understanding of issues
Critical Evaluation of the key debates
• Good use of quotes and references to enforce debates and arguments
• Ability to analyse various viewpoints within relevant debates and arguments
• Synthesis of critical discussion
Grading Grid and Feedback Sheet
Final Grade
Grade A (Excellent) Grade B (Very Good) Grade C (Good) Grade D (Pass) Grade E (Marginal Fail) Grade F (Clear Fail)
Language and
Structure
10%
Structure is logical and
appropriate.
Presentation is to a
highly professional
standard with excellent
clarity of expression.
Structure is logical and
appropriate.
Presentation is to a
professional standard
with very good clarity of
expression.
Structure is in the main
logical and appropriate.
Presentation is to a
professional standard
with reasonable clarity
of expression.
Structure and
presentation are
acceptable but may
have some weaknesses.
May have problems with
clarity of expression in
places.
Structure, presentation and
layout of work are weak and
there may be problems with
clarity of expression.
Poor structure, presentation
and layout of work with poor
clarity of expression.
Wide research and
proper referencing
20%
Evidence of excellent
research to produce a
comprehensive
reference list using the
Harvard format.
Citations were included
and correct.
Evidence of very good
research to produce a
comprehensive
reference list using the
Harvard format.
Citations were mostly all
included and correct.
Evidence of good
research to produce an
adequate reference list
using the Harvard
format. Citations were
usually included and
correct.
Evidence of some
research and an attempt
at the Harvard format.
Some issues with
inclusion of citations and
reference format.
More research was needed to
reach an acceptable level for
an honours year coursework.
Issues with application of the
Harvard system in the citations
and reference list.
More research was needed for
an honours level coursework.
Poor use of the Harvard
system.
Knowledge
understanding and
explanation
40%
Confidently
demonstrates excellent
knowledge and
understanding of CSR
and relevant issues and
debates. Excellent
explanations which were
clear and focused.
Demonstrates very good
knowledge and
understanding of CSR
and relevant issues and
debates. Very good
explanations which were
clear and focused.
Demonstrates good
knowledge and
understanding of CSR
and relevant issues and
debates. Good
explanations on the
whole, but there could
be more clarity or focus.
Demonstrates
knowledge and
understanding of a
limited range of issues
surrounding CSR.
Explanations need a bit
more clarity and/or
focus.
Little evidence of knowledge
and understanding of CSR
and relevant issues. Weak
explanations that need more
clarity.
Poor explanations which didn’t
demonstrate knowledge and
understanding of CSR.
Analysis/evaluation
30%
Critical thought,
evaluation and/or
analysis are rigorous,
coherent, appropriate
and in depth. Excellent
use of references to
develop a critical
discussion of the key
issues raised.
Clear evidence of critical
thought, evaluation
and/or analysis but
could be in more depth.
Very good use of
references to develop a
critical discussion of the
key issues raised.
Reasonable evidence of
critical thought,
evaluation and /or
analysis but could be in
much more depth.
Good use of references
to develop a critical
discussion of the key
issues raised.
Limited attempt at
critical thought,
evaluation and/or
analysis and very limited
depth. Needed to use
references a bit more to
develop a discussion of
the issues raised.
Little attempt at critical
thought, evaluation and/or
analysis. Superficial answer
which tended to ‘describe’ or
‘explain’. Didn’t utilise
references to generate a
discussion
No attempt at critical thought,
evaluation and/or analysis.
Superficial answer which
tended to ‘describe’ or
‘explain’.
Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"
Like this:
Like Loading...
