ASSESSMENT GUIDE

ICT703 Big Data

Semester 2, 2024
Assessment Overview
Assessment tasks Learning Outcome Mapping

Assessment ID Assessment Item When due Weighting ULO# CLO#

for BITS

1 Case Study Analysis Report Session 4 20% 1, 2, 1.2

(Individual) (1500 Words)

2 Report -Assessment of high- Session 8 30% 3 1

volume
data processing
(Individual) (2000 Words)
3* Report and Presentation- Session 12 50% 2, 4,5 1,2,3,4,5
Distributed big data
Report -
computing
frameworks 40%
(Group) (4000 Words) Presentation
10%

Note: * means it is hurdle assessment and 40 % marks are required to pass this assessment and 50 % in
overall assessments to pass the unit
Submission Instructions
All submissions are to be submitted through Turnitin. Drop-boxes linked to Turnitin will be set up in
Moodle. Assessments not submitted through these drop- boxes will not be considered. Submissions
must be made by the end of the session indicated on this Unit Assessment Guide.

The Turnitin similarity score will be used to determine any suspected plagiarism in your submitted
assessment. Turnitin will check conference websites, journal articles, online resources, your peer’s
submissions, and possible work by generative artificial intelligence (AI) for similarity. You can see your
Turnitin similarity score when you submit your assessments to the appropriate drop-box. If your
similarity score is of concern, you can change your assessment and resubmit. However, re-submission
is only allowed before the submission due date and time. You cannot make re-submissions after the
due date and time have elapsed.

Please Note: All work is due by the date and time listed in this Unit Assessment Guide. Late submissions
will be penalised at 20% of the assessment final grade per day, including weekends.

Referencing guides
You must reference all the sources of information you have used in your assessments. Please use the
IEEE referencing style when referencing in your assessments in this unit. Refer to the library’s
referencing guides for more information.

Academic misconduct
VIT enforces that the integrity of its students’ academic studies meets an acceptable level of
excellence. VIT will adhere to its VIT Policies, Procedures and Forms which explain the importance of
staff and student honesty in relation to academic work and outlines the kinds of behaviours that are
considered "academic misconduct" including but not limited to plagiarism.

Late submissions
In cases where there are no accepted mitigating circumstances as determined through VIT Policies,
Procedures and Forms, late submission of assessments will lead automatically to the imposition of a
penalty. Penalties will be applied as soon as the deadline is reached.

Short extensions and special consideration

Special Consideration is a request for:

• Extensions of the due date for an assessment, other than an examination (e.g. assignment
extension).
• Special Consideration (Special Consideration in relation to a completed assessment,
including an end-of-unit Examination).

Students wishing to request Special Consideration in relation to an assessment task must engage in
written emails to the unit lecturer to Request for Special Consideration as early as possible and prior
to the start time of the assessment due date, along with any accompanying documents, such as
medical certificates pertaining to your current situation.

For more information, visit VIT Policies, Procedures and Forms.

Inclusive and equitable assessment
Reasonable adjustment in assessment methods will be made to accommodate students with a
documented disability or impairment. Contact the unit teaching team for more information.

Contract Cheating

Contract Cheating is a serious form of academic misconduct and is not tolerated by VIT under any
circumstances.

Contract cheating usually involves the purchase of an assignment or piece of research from another
party. This may be facilitated by a fellow student, friend, or purchased on a website. Other forms of
contract cheating include paying another person to sit an exam in the student's place.

Contract cheating warning:

• By paying someone else to complete your academic work, you don’t learn as much as you
could have if you did the work yourself.
• You are not prepared for the demands of your future employment.
• You could be found guilty of academic misconduct.
• Many for profit contract cheating companies recycle assignments despite guarantees of
“original, plagiarism-free work” so similarity is easily detected by Turnitin.
• Penalties for academic misconduct include suspension and exclusion.
• Students in some disciplines are required to disclose any findings of guilt for academic
misconduct before being accepted into certain professions.
• You might disclose your personal and financial information in an unsafe way, leaving yourself
open to many risks including possible identity theft.
• You also leave yourself open to blackmail - if you pay someone to do an assignment for you,
they know you have engaged in fraudulent behaviour and can always blackmail you.

Grades
We determine your grades to the following Grading Scheme:
Grade Percentage

A 80% – 100%

B 70% – 79%

C 60% – 69%

D 50% – 59%

F 0% – 49%
Assessment details
Assessment 1: Case Study Analysis Report
Weight Length Due date ULO

20% 1500 words Session 4 ULO1 and ULO2

Objective(s)

This assessment item relates to the unit learning outcomes as in the unit descriptor. This assessment
is designed to improve student research and writing skills and to give students experience in
researching literature on a specific topic relevant to the Unit of Study subject matter. Students
will be expected to complete a literature review to discuss a contemporary Big Data, access, design or
Information design issue which an IS professional may experience. Students will critically analyze
current academic papers then present their work in a detailed literature review and analysis.

Assignment Description

This assessment will be completed individually. All students must have a different topic. Students can
choose to write about the same technology, but the approach and the thrust of each paper must be
different. To ensure this uniqueness, each student must decide on a topic and email their topic and
title to their tutor within the first 2 weeks. Your tutor will respond with an approval or with a
message that you will either need to choose a different topic or to change the thrust of your paper.
You tutor may decide to do this for you. Once it has been approved you should begin by working
towards the first deliverable.

This assessment is worth 20% of the unit’s grade. Students are advised to begin working on this
assessment as soon as you have your topic approved.
Deliverable Description
Below is a description of the deliverables and the requirements

Submission

The deadline for submitting the draft is in week 4, and it will be structured into the following
sections:
• Abstract
 • Introduction
• At least 5 sections which are relevant to the topic you have been allocated
• Conclusion
• Reference

The final submission of your paper is due in week 4

The final submission should be no less than 1500 words. Your literature review should be presenting
the state of current knowledge in the specific area of your topic, and as such, should have a narrative
that flows from one paragraph to another. You cannot achieve this with bullet points and small
disjoint sections.

You are expected to include a minimum of 10 references in your paper. It is important to ensure that
all references included with your paper must be cited within the paper and be appropriate to the
context of the citation.
Marking Rubric

Criteria Missing or Developing Accomplished Exemplary

Unacceptable
Introduction: The research Elements are Research The research
abstract, background and poorly formed, background and background
background, research ambiguous, or not objectives are articulates clear
and research objectives are logically connected stated clearly and and objectives are
objectives omitted or to the research are connected to succinct,
(4 marks) inappropriate. topic. the research interesting and
topic. significant.

Literature Little or no Incomplete and not Evidence of The systematic

review evidence of a systematic, but reviewing, literature review is
(8 marks) systematic adequate to possibly clearly presented,
approach, identify part of the incomplete but in sufficient detail,
incomplete literature, very using appropriate and appropriate
review; little or little evidence of approaches, for the research
no evidence of critical evaluations some evidence of topic.
having read of the papers cited. critical appraisal
completely or partial critical
papers cited. appraisal.

Conclusion Argument is Adequate cohesion Consistency Logic is clear and

(3 marks) confused and and conviction. logical and easy to follow with
disjointed. convincing. strong arguments.

Writing skills There are many There are several There are few Writing is totally
(3 marks) spelling errors spellings or spelling or free of grammar
and grammatical grammatical errors; grammatical and spelling errors;
mistakes; ideas some ideas are errors; most ideas clear, concise and
are hard to clearly presented; are clearly creative
follow; references references are presented and presentation of
are not used. sporadic or not references are ideas and properly
used. used. referenced.

Reference Lacks consistency Sometimes clear Generally good Clear styles with
(2 marks) with many errors. referencing style. referencing style. excellent source of
references.
Assignment Overview
Assessment tasks Learning
Outcome
Mapping
Assessment ID Assessment Item When due Weighting ULO# CLO#
for BITS

2 Report -Assessment of high-volume Session 8 30% 3 1

data processing
(Individual) (2000 Words)

Tableau & Splunk Project

The Assignment consists of a research report of 1500 words Due Week 8 30%.

Part 1: Business Data Analysis

Problems to be addressed in the report

The report should provide an analysis and evaluation of Global Superstore financial performance
over a five-year period from 2014 to 2018 on its global reach of 165 countries. Conduct a
comprehensive analysis of revenue, profit, discounts and customer behaviour. Analyse the Key
Performance Indicators (KPI) in monitoring, assessing and managing a firm’s performance in
terms of:

 Diverse product range generating higher sales revenue and translation into
superior profit
 The influence discounts and promotions have on sales and customer loyalty.
 Predicting sale trends in product sub-categories in different regions

Investigate which categories and products are the most popular and the most profitable.
Should the Global Superstore consider streamlining their products offering, investing more
heavily in products which are performing well and removing which are not?
Examine the relationship between purchasing patterns and the percentage of discount applied
to determine the impact the discounts and promotions have on sales.
Customer service is another key factor that businesses use to differentiate themselves from their
competitors. Determine the volume of repeat customers. Assess the level of customer service
that they provide and make recommendations on how they can improve their service and
customer retention.
Examine which countries and products have highest return rates. Determine if there are any
products that the Global Superstore should consider removing from their product range, as well
as aiding them in developing strategies to combat or reduce the rate of return in countries with
a high frequency of returns. Perform a return analysis across categories and subcategories.
Evaluate the average shipping cost, most popular mode of shipping and shipping latency to
establish if there is a connection between these variables and purchases made.
Predicting future revenue streams is an essential component when determining merchandising
decisions.

This report should build a predictive model to determine sales revenue from a given product in
each region. This should be limited to the top five sub-categories.

The research report must have the format:

 Cover sheet (make sure each team member’s name and student no are on the coversheet)
 Executive Summary
 Table of contents
 Company Information
 Problem Identification
 Data Collection
 Analysis and Discussion
 Recommendations
 References

Part 2: Network Data Analysis

In this part of the assessment, you must analyse the log details of the global super store in
Australia with Splunk.
a) Perform a basic search for errors and any type of failures in all data sources. Provide a
screenshot of the entire page once completed.
b) Perform a new search for password and any type of failures on port 22 in all data sources.
Provide a screenshot of the entire page once completed.
c) Do you see trends over time? If so, what were they?
d) Use the output of your search to refine the results by adding a new field to the search
e) Take a screenshot of your ‘Activity Jobs Menu’ detailing the current job saved with
expiration date.
f) Take a screenshot of your search history. Set a filter to narrow down your search results.
g) Show where are selected field, interesting fields and all fields located. How do you use
fields to perform a search.
h) How do you add time range when performing search.
Students need to demonstrate to the tutor that each team member has made a significant
contribution to the report. It is suggested the group use a collaborative environment such as
google drive to store documents and work on the assignment. You will also create a document
that lists each task and the name of the team member/s responsible for the task.
The task allocation must be approved by the tutor before commencing other work on the report.
The group is also required to discuss their progress with the tutor on a weekly basis.
Additional information regarding this Assessment:
• Report document standards
o Normal font is Calibri, size 11 point for the body of all documents with the text fully
justified.
o Headings should not exceed 14 points in size except on a title page where larger fonts
are appropriate for the title of a report.
o Documents should use 1.15 spacing within a paragraph and have an 8-point space
between paragraphs.
o Footers should be created on the report that includes a page number.
• Up to 15% of the Report contents may be quoted or paraphrased from
other sources provided you acknowledge and cite the original source of the material you use.
• Use IEEE referencing on all quoted or paraphrased material.
• The marking criteria are described in the next few pages.

Marking Guide:
 Admirable 70% - Acceptable 50% - Unsatisfactory <=
Criteria Exceptional >= 80% Creditable 60% - 69%
79% 59% 49%
Executive
Clear, comprehensive, Clear and detailed Basic summary and Incomplete or Missing or very
Summary &
and insightful summary summary and background with unclear summary unclear summary
Company
and background. background. some details. and background. and background.
Information (5)
Limited
Problem Clearly identifies all key Identifies most key Identifies some key identification of key Fails to identify
Identification, Data problems with problems with problems with basic problems with key problems with
Collection & comprehensive and adequate and data and minimal incomplete or missing or
References (5) well-documented data. documented data. documentation. limited data irrelevant data.
documentation.
Thorough and insightful
Basic analysis with
analysis of revenue, Incomplete or
Analysis, Adequate analysis limited insights and Fails to provide
profit, discounts, minimal analysis
Discussion & with good insights basic adequate analysis
customer behavior, and and partially
Recommendations and clear recommendations and clear
clear, feasible, and well- justified
(5 recommendations. with some recommendations.
justified recommendations.
justification.
recommendations.
Well-presented with Poorly presented Unprofessional
Basic presentation
Professionally minor errors, with multiple errors, presentation with
with some errors,
presented, error-free, follows most fails to follow many numerous errors,
Presentation, follows some
follows all formatting formatting formatting does not follow
Format & Trend formatting guidelines
guidelines with guidelines with guidelines with formatting
Analysis (5) with basic trend
thorough trend analysis adequate trend limited trend guidelines with no
analysis and some
and clear insights. analysis and good analysis and trend analysis or
insights.
insights. minimal insights. insights.
Comprehensive and Adequate searches Basic searches with Limited searches Fails to perform
well-executed searches with clear clear screenshots, with unclear searches with no
Splunk Searches, with clear screenshots, screenshots, good some results, and screenshots, or unclear
Activity Jobs Menu detailed results, and results, and good basic explanation of limited results, and screenshots, no
& Field advanced explanation of explanation of field field usage. Basic minimal clear results, and
Explanation (8) field usage. Clear usage. Clear screenshots of explanation of field no explanation of
screenshots of Activity screenshots of Activity Jobs Menu usage. Unclear field usage. No or
Jobs Menu with detailed Activity Jobs Menu with some info. screenshots of very unclear
 info. with adequate info. Activity Jobs Menu screenshots of
with limited info. Activity Jobs
Menu.
References are References are References are
References have References are
comprehensive and adequate and missing or
References(2) some formatting incomplete with
correctly formatted correctly formatted incorrectly
errors. formatting errors.
IEEE. IEEE. formatted.
Assignment Overview

Assessment tasks Learning Outcome Mapping

Assessment ID Assessment Item When due Weighting ULO# CLO#

for BITS

3* Report and Session 50% 2, 4,5 1,2,3,4,5

Presentation- 12 Report -
Distributed big data
computing 40%
frameworks Presentation
(Group) (4000 Words) 10%
Distributed Big Data Computing Frameworks Assessment
Total: 50% (Report: 40%, Presentation: 10%)

Report: 40%
Objective(s): Evaluate and compare various distributed big data computing frameworks, focusing on
their architecture, performance, scalability, ease of use, and application areas.

Structure:

1. Introduction (10%)
o Define distributed big data computing.
o Importance of distributed computing frameworks in handling big data.
o Overview of the report.
2. Framework Analysis (40%)
o Apache Hadoop
 Architecture (HDFS, MapReduce, YARN)
 Performance and scalability
 Pros and cons
 Use cases
o Apache Spark
 Architecture (RDD, DAG, Spark SQL, MLlib)
 Performance and scalability
 Pros and cons
 Use cases
o Apache Flink
 Architecture (DataStream API, Batch Processing, CEP)
 Performance and scalability
 Pros and cons
 Use cases
o Other Relevant Frameworks (e.g., Apache Storm, Apache Samza)
 Brief overview
  Comparison with the above frameworks
3. Comparative Analysis (30%)
o Comparative table highlighting key features, advantages, and disadvantages.
o Discussion on the best framework for different use cases (real-time processing, batch
processing, machine learning, etc.).
4. Case Study (10%)
o Detailed analysis of a real-world application using one of the discussed frameworks.
o Evaluation of the chosen framework’s performance and impact on the application.
5. Conclusion (10%)
o Summary of findings.
o Recommendations based on the comparative analysis.
6. References (not graded but mandatory)
o Cite all sources in a consistent format (APA/MLA/Harvard).

Marking Rubric:
Criterion Excellent (90-100%) Good (75-89%) Satisfactory (60- Needs
74%) Improvement
(<60%)
Content Comprehensive and Good analysis Basic analysis with Superficial or
Depth in-depth analysis with minor several gaps incorrect analysis
omissions
Clarity & Clear and well- Mostly clear and Somewhat clear Unclear and
Coherence organized organized but lacks poorly organized
coherence
Critical Insightful and critical Some critical Limited critical Lacks critical
Analysis evaluation insights evaluation evaluation
Case Study Detailed and highly Relevant but Basic relevance Irrelevant or
Quality relevant lacks detail and detail poorly detailed
References & Proper and extensive Proper but Inconsistent Incorrect or
Citation citation limited citation citation missing citations

Presentation: 10%

Objective: Present the key findings from the report in a clear, engaging, and concise manner.

Structure:

1. Introduction (10%)
o Brief overview of the topic and purpose of the presentation.
2. Key Findings (50%)
 o Highlight major points from the framework analysis.
o Use visuals (charts, tables, diagrams) to illustrate comparisons.
3. Case Study Summary (20%)
o Summarize the case study, focusing on the application and impact of the chosen
framework.
4. Conclusion (10%)
o Summarize the overall findings and recommendations.
5. Q&A Session (10%)
o Engage with the audience by answering questions and providing further clarification.

Marking Rubric:
Criterion Excellent (90- Good (75-89%) Satisfactory (60- Needs
100%) 74%) Improvement
(<60%)
Clarity & Clear and well- Mostly clear and Somewhat clear but Unclear and poorly
Organization organized organized lacks coherence organized
Engagement Highly engaging Engaging with Limited Unengaging
and interactive some interaction engagement
Visuals Quality Effective and Good visuals Basic visuals Poor or missing
high-quality with minor issues visuals
visuals
Conciseness Concise and to Mostly concise Somewhat concise Verbose and off-
the point but verbose topic
Q&A Handling Excellent Good handling of Basic handling of Poor or unable to
handling of questions questions handle questions
questions

Final Rubrics

Criterion Excellent (90- Good (75- Satisfactory Needs Not

100%) 89%) (60-74%) Improvement satisfactory
(<60%)
Content Comprehensive Good analysis Basic analysis Superficial or Incomplete or
Depth and in-depth with minor with several incorrect limited
analysis omissions gaps analysis attempt
Clarity & Clear and well- Mostly clear Somewhat Unclear and Incomplete or
Coherence organized and organized clear but lacks poorly limited
coherence organized attempt
Critical Insightful and Some critical Limited Lacks critical Incomplete or
Analysis critical insights critical evaluation limited
evaluation evaluation attempt
Case Study Detailed and Relevant but Basic Irrelevant or Incomplete or
Quality highly relevant lacks detail relevance and poorly limited
 detail detailed attempt
References & Proper and Proper but Inconsistent Incorrect or Incomplete or
Citation extensive limited citation missing limited
citation citation citations attempt
Presentation Presents Provides good Basic analysis Superficial or Incomplete or
Quality comprehensive, analysis with with several incorrect limited
in-depth minor gaps, analysis, attempt
analysis with omissions, somewhat unclear and
clear, well- mostly clear clear but lacks poorly
organized and organized coherence, organized
content and content, some limited critical content, lacks
insightful critical evaluation. critical
critical insights. Case Case study evaluation.
evaluation. study is has basic Case study is
Case study is relevant but relevance and irrelevant or
highly relevant lacks detail detail with poorly
and detailed with proper inconsistent detailed with
with proper but limited citation. incorrect or
and extensive citation. missing
citation citations.