1 BUSS5220 Responsible Business Mindset Semester 1, 2022 Workshop Presentation Debate Summary task information This is a compulsory assignment, which includes all parts. You will be pre-assigned to an Assessment Group within your workshop. Please note you cannot form groups outside of your timetabled workshop nor change groups during the semester. Groups will be assigned in Week 2. Debates will commence in Week 3. Note there may be some changes to groups until census date. Debate topic: In the Workshop Presentation Debate your group will be allocated one topic from one of the four perspectives, this means your group will present a debate on this topic only once during the semester. Group contribution: Your group is required to complete all parts of the assignment task. Each group member is expected to be involved in the preparation, drafting and proof checking all aspects of the group assignment. Group members will be held jointly responsible for the entire presentation/submission and awarded the same merit mark for the group component of the mark, so it is essential you work together as a team and contribute equally. Also, please pay attention to academic honesty. In the event of a breach of academic honesty a penalty will apply to all members irrespective of which member(s) caused the breach. Debate format, submission and due date: The debate will be a ‘live’ pre-prepared presentation and will take place in the workshop of the topic week that your group has been assigned to. Your group will present your debate topic during this workshop. You will need to submit your power-point slides (PPTX format) and your Peer Evaluation form through the ‘Submit Assignment’ button located in the ‘Assignments’ tab in Canvas by 8pm (AEST/AEDT) on the day prior to your Workshop Presentation Debate. Detailed instructions below. No submissions will be accepted via email. Marking process: The Workshop Presentation Debate will be marked out of a total of 30 marks during the workshop. Marks will be released as one batch at the end of semester at the same time for all students. There are two components: 1) The individual component is worth 20 marks, is based on your individual debate delivery. 2) The group component is worth 10 marks and all group members will receive the same group mark based on LO1, LO2, LO4 and LO5. Questions about the assignment: All assignment queries must be posted to the specially assigned ‘Assignment’ forum on Canvas. This provides an opportunity for all students to have access to the same information. Group communication: We recommend communication between the group members about the assignment should take place in your assigned Assessment Group page in Canvas. Take a look at this student-focused video on Canvas Groups. 2 Detailed task information Your assigned group is required to prepare and present a Workshop Presentation Debate in the assigned topic week during your workshop. What is a debate A debate is a formal contest between two sides, arguing a discussion statement known as the “Debate Topic”. Shaw (2012) believes that debates stimulate critical thinking and can be a highly effective way to actively engage students in research. The debate in its typical format supports flexibility, reflection, interpersonal and teamwork skill development. The interactivity of this format allows for peer motivation, and also result in a significant understanding of the course content and the development of knowledge communities among students. Traditionally debates are performed live and debate sides are from different groups. However, we are deliberately getting you to pre-plan and prepare your debate and work together as a group on two different sides of a Debate Topic because Responsible Business issues often require an understanding of both sides of the argument to appreciate the complexities and challenges. This will enhance your critical thinking skills in developing convincing arguments and learning the art of negotiation. The aim is not to settle but present both sides of the argument as convincingly as possible. How will students be assigned to groups and debate topics Students will be pre-assigned to Assessment Groups and to a Debate Topic from topic 3-13 which designates the week your debate will take place. In our week 2 workshop we will spend time developing our debate skills as part of in-class debate skills activity and you will be notiiefd of your assigned Debate Topic. How will the debate be structured Your Assessment Group will split into two sides – a ‘For’ side and an ‘Against’ side. Ideally there will be an equal number of students on each side. Of course if there are 5 in a group – one side will be 3 students and one side will have 2 students. We have provided more guidance on this below. You will work together to present both sides of an argument for your designated Debate Topic, based on the lecture materials and resources provided. You can choose to draw on additional relevant references if you like. Emphasis should be on presenting compelling arguments for both sides. Don’t waste time on mini lecture recaps etc. Here is a summary of the roles and order of speakers: 3 How long will the debate be Your debate should be 20-21 minutes in total. For groups of 4 students: 4x ~5 minute mini presentations, commencing with the (1) ‘for/affirmative’ side opening arguments, (2) ‘against/negative’ side opening arguments, (3) ‘for/affirmative’ side rebuttal, new arguments and summary, and finally (4) ‘against/negative’ side rebuttal, new arguments and summary. For groups of 5 students: 5x ~4 minute mini presentations, commencing with the (1) ‘for/affirmative’ side opening arguments, (2) ‘against/negative’ side opening arguments, (3) ‘for/affirmative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, (4) ‘against/negative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, and finally (5) both ‘for/affirmative’ and ‘against/negative’ side summaries. For groups of 6 students: 6x ~3.5 minute mini presentations commencing with the (1) ‘for/affirmative’ side opening arguments, (2) ‘against/negative’ side opening arguments, (3) ‘for/affirmative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, (4) ‘against/negative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, (5) ‘for/affirmative’ side summary, and finally (6) ‘against/negative’ side summary. For groups of 7 students: 7x ~3 minute mini presentations commencing with the (1) ‘for/affirmative’ side opening arguments, (2) ‘against/negative’ side opening arguments, (3) ‘for/affirmative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, (4) ‘against/negative’ side rebuttal and new arguments, (5) final rebuttals and final new arguments for both sides (6) ‘for/affirmative’ side summary, and finally (7) ‘against/negative’ side summary. You will be cut off at 21 minutes and penalties will apply for exceeding the 21minutes time limit. We will have a class vote then Q&A and high level feedback after each Workshop Presentation Debate for ~10 mins. How will we construct our debate arguments The arguments are made in 2-4 rounds depending on the number of group members as described above. You must construct your arguments using the suggested references provided in the topic materials. You can also draw from additional readings and resources that you have discovered in your own research. Each student needs to contribute to the development of the content. Each group will also need to make reference to at least one relevant Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) and one related target. This could be done as part of the opening arguments for either or both sides. The key is to successfully integrate the SDG target in a relevant and impactful way for business at some point in your workshop presentation debate. Please ensure you complete the SDGs and Targets Skill Checker on Canvas to help you understand what an SDG target is. Can we use visual aids to present our debate Yes, visual aids such as power point are strongly encouraged. Presentations slide decks should be designed in a way so that there are 1-2 slides per speaker with a maximum of 11 slides for both sides (for/against) of the group including a title slide where you will include students names and speaking order. We suggest one group member is responsible for sharing the slides via the Zoom “Share Screen” function, if the debate is taking place online. These slides will be submitted into the Canvas assignment section by 8pm (AEDT/AEST) on the day before you present your debate. How will each group member be kept accountable for participating This is a group task that requires collaboration and equal contribution of all members in preparing the debate! To gauge team member contribution and participation, each group is required to submit a one page Peer Evaluation form. In one form for the entire group each group member will rate the other group members in terms of contribution to the task (i.e. peer evaluation). You do not need to rate your own performance. We 4 recommend you complete this task together as a group at one time (prior to your debate delivery) so everyone is clear and agrees the contribution of each of the group members. In the event there are issues with group members not contributing and participating fully in this task, and reasonable attempts have been made to address these issues but have been unsuccessful, then your Workshop Facilitator should be advised and the peer evaluation should then reflect this situation. It is therefore important that your peer evaluation explanations are factual, legible and professional. Note however, that a lack of documented action by the group to internally attempt and address group concerns and a failure to alert your Workshop Facilitator prior to the presentation of your debate will not be looked upon favourably and may result in all group members receiving a reduced assessment final mark for the group component of the mark. We expect it is the responsibility of all group members to contribute and participate equally in the preparation and presentation of the debate. Because all group members will be given the same mark for the group component of the mark, it is essential that you communicate clearly and early with each other. To help with group communication we recommend using your designated Canvas Assessment Group discussion page to document your ideas and discussions. It is important to communicate with your group members and designate tasks, roles and responsibilities early. If you find a group member is not cooperating you need to first, try to resolve this issue amongst the group and keep a formal record of these communications. If this approach does not work you may wish to alert your Workshop Facilitator before the presentation date, who will help triage the issue. To reiterate, try to resolve team issues as early as possible during the course of the assignment. This is an opportunity to practice working and communicating together in teams. Do not alert your Workshop Facilitator or the teaching team after you have presented your debate that there were team issues, as it will be too late to provide support to your team after the debate presentation. Also note debate marks will not be released unless both the Powerpoint slide deck and the group’s peer evaluation form are submitted. Failure to submit this form will result in the same late penalties as set out in Section 8 of the Business School Postgraduate Handbook, 2021. List of Assessment Groups, assigned topics and dates 5 Submission information You will need to submit your group’s powerpoint slides (PPTX file) and peer evaluation form (word doc) through the Canvas assignment portal located in the ‘Assignments’ tab in Canvas by 8pm (AEDT/ AEST) on the day prior to your Workshop Presentation Debate. No submissions will be accepted via email. You will need to submit two files: one for your powerpoint slides and one for your peer evaluation. Your assignment will be checked using TurnItIn. 1. Name your files as follows for your specific workshop/Activity: e.g. “XXXXXXXX_Tue_8am_Gigi” where XXXXXXXX is the SID of the first speaker in this debate, then Day/time of your tutorial and your workshop facilitator (WF), so in this case your workshop is Tue 8am and Gigi is WF. 2. Click on the Assignment button. 3. Click on the File upload tab. 4. Click on the Choose a file to upload button. 5. Locate the file in your computer and click on the Open button. 6. Check the box to acknowledge ‘I agree to the tool’s End-User Licence Agreement. This assignment submission is my own, original work’. 7. Click on the Submit Assignment button***. Repeat the above steps when you submit your Peer evaluation form in the different assignment portal which is clearly stated on Assignment page. ***Note only one PPTX and one peer evaluation form needs to submitted per group on 8pm (AEDT/AEST) the day before your actual debate. ***We recommend the group member responsible for any submissions takes a screenshot of the submission and sends to the other group members to avoid any submission issues. ***Note Turnitin in Canvas does not automatically email a digital receipt. Once you have successfully submitted your group’s assignment, take a screenshot of the submission details. We strongly recommend that you save this screenshot as proof of your group’s submission. Should submission problems arise, you should contact the University’s ICT Service Desk on 02 9351 2000 (option 2 for ICT) or email ict.support@sydney.edu.au 6 Marking rubric High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail 10 out of a possible total of 30 marks Conceptual understanding (LO1) The debate exhibits an exceptional, consistent and coherent narrative with two sides clearly and thoughtfully argued. The substantive content demonstrates an outstanding level of conceptual understanding. This is evident through the advanced application of domain specific vocabulary and theory. The debate exhibits an excellent narrative with two sides clearly argued. The substantive content demonstrates a high level of conceptual understanding. This is evident through the appropriate use of domain specific vocabulary and theory. The debate exhibits a good narrative with two sides argued to some degree of coherence. The substantive content, made evident through the use of some domain specific vocabulary and a limited use of theory to demonstrate a sound level of conceptual understanding. The debate exhibits a fair narrative, but two sides were not clearly argued. The substantive content demonstrates a satisfactory level of conceptual understanding. The use of domain specific vocabulary is limited and the is a lack of depth of analysis and little to no theory. The debate exhibits an inconsistent and incoherent narrative. The substantive content demonstrates a lack of conceptual understanding. Also defined as not meeting the level of pass. Critical reflection (LO2) The debate indicates exceptional development of your group’s own well-developed reflections, that are well-thought out and critical, framed in your group’s own words. The quality and depth of your critical thinking was clearly demonstrated by the high level of correspondence between your for and against arguments. There is a skilful use of the debate format to present critical and compelling arguments from both sides. This means that the critical reflections are integrated through both sides of the debate with all speakers. The debate indicates an excellent development of your group’s own critical reflections. The debate format is used effectively to present critical arguments from both sides with strong correspondence between the for and against arguments in a well-developed argument- counter argument format. Critical reflection are fairly well integrated though both sides and most speakers. The debate indicates a good attempt at the development of some of your group’s own critical reflections. The debate format is used to present arguments from both sides, however in some instances statements are not elaborated or followed up. In some instances there was a lack of strong correspondence between the for and against arguments. Critical reflect exists in some parts but is limited. The debate indicates satisfactory development of your group’s own reflections, however deals with ideas superficially rather than being critically engaged with the idea. The debate format is not utilised to present arguments, critical or otherwise from both sides. Little or superficial critical reflection. The debate indicates no development of your group’s own reflections, critical or otherwise. Also defined as not meeting the level of pass. 7 Collaboration, delivery and presentation (Group) (LO4) The debate reflects an exceptional collaboration. It is obvious that negotiation skills have been executed to develop well-planned arguments for both sides. The delivery and presentation is always clear and concise. This is made evident through the sophisticated use of appropriate conversation markers referred to points raised or to raised by other speakers. The debate reflects an excellent collaborative effort and negotiation skills reflected by a sound set of arguments for both sides. The delivery and presentation is mostly clear and concise and good use of conversation markers to structure the arguments and overall coherence of the debate. The debate reflects a good collaborative effort (e.g. it has been scripted). The delivery and presentation is sometimes clear and concise, although the use of conversation markers could have been better (with more clarity and cohesion). The debate reflects fair to little collaborative effort (e.g. poorly scripted, ideas are hard to follow). The delivery and presentation is often not clear and concise due to the lack of conversation markers referred to by other speakers. It is difficult to tell if the debate reflects a collaborative effort. The delivery and presentation is unclear and not concise. Also defined as not meeting the level of pass. Sustainable Development Goals (LO5) The debate presentation successfully integrates more than one SDG and target in a relevant and impactful way. The group has provided robust evidence on how business is meeting the SDG target. The debate presentation integrates at least one SDG and target in a relevant way. The group has provided some evidence on how business is meeting the SDG target. The debate presentation contains at least one SDG and target. Relevance is not clearly established and justified in an integrated way. The debate presentation contains at some SDG information but relevance is not established and justified. SDG targets are not mentioned. The debate presentation fails to mention any SDG information. Also defined as not meeting the level of pass. 20 out of a possible total of 30 marks Collaboration, delivery and presentation (Individual) (LO4) The individual presents an outstanding delivery that is highly engaging (i.e. always speaks with clarity, excellent volume, grammar, pace of delivery, well- positioned camera angle and effectively uses presentation tools). Where relevant, the individual always responds to questions in a relevant and accurate manner and draws exceptional conclusions. The individual presents an excellent delivery that is engaging (i.e. mostly speaks with clarity, excellent volume, grammar, pace of delivery, well-positioned camera angle and effectively uses presentation tools). Where relevant, the individual always responds to questions in a relevant manner and draws conclusions. The individual presents a good delivery (i.e. sometimes speaks with clarity, good volume, grammar, pace of delivery, and effectively uses presentation tools). Where relevant, the individual does not always respond adequately to questions and does not always draw adequate conclusions. The individual does not make an introduction and delivery is poor (i.e. rarely speaks with clarity, volume and grammar issues, inconsistent pace of delivery, poorly positioned camera angle and not effectively using presentation tools). Where relevant, the individual does not respond adequately to questions and nor draw adequate conclusions. The individual fails to make an introduction and delivery. Also defined as not meeting the level of pass. 8 IMPORTANT NOTE: use the separate Peer Evaluation form (word document) provided in Canvas – the below is an example only Peer Evaluation Unit of Study: BUSS5220 Responsible Business Mindset, Semester 1, 2022 Workshop day and time: TUES_____ / WED _____ / THU _____ Name of the Workshop Facilitator: ________________________________ Name SID Speaker 1 Speaker 2 Speaker 3 Speaker 4 Speaker 5 Speaker 6 Speaker 7(if any) – Please note that only ONE form of no more than TWO pages per group needs to be submitted. – As a group you need to give an agreed rating on a scale of 0 to 100 to each group member regarding contribution to the assignment, where 0 means no contribution and 50 means half a contribution and 100 means full contribution (which is what we expect!). – You are not required to rate your own contribution. Group member name Actual tasks/activities performed by each individual member (briefly) Contribution (out of 100) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 – Below, please provide explanations for ratings of 79 or less, and if appropriate, describe how you have attempted to encourage the group member to improve their performance. 9 – These comments are reviewed if students appeal their peer evaluation, so it is important that your explanations are factual, legible and professional. – This peer evaluation form is a formal component of your assessment for group work. – All group members are to electronically sign here as an agreement to what is stated. Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________ Full name: ________________________ SID: _______________ Signature ____________________
