Fluent Essays

2000 words :The new revenue standard will significantly affect the revenue recognition practices of most companies. The new standard provides acomprehensive, industry-neutral revenue recognition model intended to increase financial statement comparability across companies andindustries. Revenue recognition is one of the areas of concern for accountants while preparing financial reports. IASB came up with IAS 18for revenue recognition but the standard was later replaced by IFRS 15 owing to deficiencies in IAS 18.You are required to write a report covering the following points:1. An analysis of revenue recognition issues.2. Background and main accounting principles of IAS 18 Revenue.3. Shortcomings in IAS 18 which led to its cancellation.4. An analysis of IFRS 15 as to how it overcame shortcomings of IAS 18.5. Your Conclusion should include a summary of major changes in revenue recognition principlesز fr_alternative_assignment_final__1_.docx Unformatted Attachment Preview Submission Deadline Marks and Feedback Before 6pm on: 15 working days after deadline (All Levels) Click or tap to enter a date. Click or tap to enter a date. 30th May 2020 Module title & code Financial Reporting AC 17-2 Assignment number and title Two Assessment type Individual Report Weighting of assessment 50\% Module learning outcomes 1. Develop understanding of relevant accounting principles and various rules/regulations applicable for preparation of financial statements as per international financial reporting standards (IFRSs). 2. Develop the ability to identify and apply IFRSs principles in a variety of scenarios thus leading to fair presentation of financial performance/position. What am I required to do in this assignment? The new revenue standard will significantly affect the revenue recognition practices of most companies. The new standard provides a comprehensive, industry-neutral revenue recognition model intended to increase financial statement comparability across companies and industries. Revenue recognition is one of the areas of concern for accountants while preparing financial reports. IASB came up with IAS 18 for revenue recognition but the standard was later replaced by IFRS 15 owing to deficiencies in IAS 18. You are required to write a report covering the following points: 1. An analysis of revenue recognition issues. 2. Background and main accounting principles of IAS 18 Revenue. 3. Shortcomings in IAS 18 which led to its cancellation. 4. An analysis of IFRS 15 as to how it overcame shortcomings of IAS 18. 5. Your Conclusion should include a summary of major changes in revenue recognition principles. Deliverables Submission Submission of the report will be done via Turnitin Link on MOVE. At the time of submission, you need to make sure that the assignment is your own and all the sources have been acknowledged. Is there a word limit (Number of Words ± 10\%)? The word limit is 2000 words with ± 10\% flexibility. What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations) In order to pass this assessment, you need to: ➢ Collect the relevant Information which should be clear and evident from the appropriate source for the required period. General understanding of the various issues related to revenue recognition. There should be some reference to related theoretical background which should be evident in the report. ➢ The assignment should have discussion of the ideas related to revenue recognition. ➢ The report should be properly structured and most of the task should be addressed. ➢ Conclusions should be supported with some reasoning and evidence. ➢ The report should show some compliance to HARVARD STYLE referencing. How do I produce high quality work that merits a higher grade? In order to produce high quality work(A Grade), you need to: ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ ➢ Recognise the severity of revenue recognition issue for various stakeholders. Show the evidence of exemplary understanding of relevant theory and latest research. Reference to appropriate theoretical background that provides support to your discussion. Critical reasoning is consistently evident across the discussions. The tasks have exemplary discussion and detailed narration of the results obtained. Show that the structure is exemplary. Execution of all task is excellent. Discussions are free of grammar or writing errors. A clear layout augments the presentation. Organize the overall report excellently. Provide conclusions that are supported with strong arguments which are outstanding; presents fantastic and balanced critical view; interpretation is very reasonable and objective. Accurate use of Harvard Referencing style. How does assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions? This assignment covers one of the major topic of the module which is about revenue recognition The work done by the students will allow them to practically analyse the impact of revenue recognition on users. 2 FR Level 5 Feb - June 20 How will my assignment be marked? Your assignment be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page. You can use them to evaluate your own work and estimate your grade before you submit. N o 1 Criterion Information search including the variety of sources used and Referencing Weighi ng (\%) 15 Majan University College Sub Standard / No Attempt (0 Marks) There is no evidence for information search/ Tasks are incomplete. The references do not clearly comply with the basic requirements of HARVARD STYLE format. Poor (20 Marks) Satisfactory (40 Marks) Sources not used to support substantive assertions or argument. Information search is not adequate. Very limited resources are used to discuss the tasks. Limited and uncritical use of a restricted range of sources. Information search is evident. There is an attempt to address some tasks. All the tasks lack proper focus in discussion. Although the information supports the task, some of them are not properly analyzed and lack Good (50 Marks) Relevant information search is evident, but not adequate. There is a good attempt to address the tasks. All the tasks are discussed but one or two tasks lack focus or clarity. The report Page 3 Very Good (60 Marks) Excellent (70 Marks) Outstanding (100 Marks) Very good usage of variety information from various sources. Contents are properly paraphrased. The usage of information can be better if it relates to the context. Excellent application of the relevant information from variety of sources. Excellent usage and quoting of the literature at relevant discussions. All the tasks are discussed astutely with proper focus. Exceptional use of a wide range of appropriate and current sources, focusing on research based reviews indicating personal research and critical awareness of their status and relevance. Accurate use All tasks are discussed properly. Use of a wide FR Level 5 The references do not clearly comply with the basic requirements of HARVARD STYLE format. The references are inadequate to support the literature used in the report. Sources used show limited relevance and currency. paraphrasing at some areas. The report shows some compliance to HARVARD STYLE referencing, but shows many errors. Very few references quoted which are inconsistent with the amount of literature used in the report. Feb - June 20 demonstrates a basic level of HARVARD STYLE referencing, but still contains major deficiencies. No sophistication is evident i.e. Websites do not follow Harvard Referencing style. Majority of the sources are relevant and current. Some sources of information are relevant while others are dated. Majan University College Page 4 The report demonstrates a solid understanding of the basic elements of HARVARD STYLE formatting. Intext citations if presented at relevant areas will lend more appropriatenes s to the report. Sources used to support the discussions are relevant and current. range of appropriate sources, indicating critical awareness of their status and relevance. The report demonstrates excellent HARVARD STYLE formatting skills. In-text citations are presented at relevant areas. Consistent use of relevant and current sources that enhance the discussions. of Harvard Referencing style. Student recognizes the concept of intellectual property, can defend him / herself if challenged, and can properly incorporate the ideas / published works of others into their own work building upon them. Skillful use of credible, relevant and current sources of information that augments FR Level 5 Feb - June 20 quality of discussion No evidence of understanding the issues or any concept. 2 Understanding of relevant concepts & Issues with reference to appropriate theoretical background, illustrations. Majan University College 25 Limited evidence of understanding the issues. Very poor conceptual understanding of the topics. General understanding of the various issues. Some reference to related theoretical background is evident. Good understanding of the various issues. Majority of the tasks show evidence of good understanding of related appropriate theoretical background. Page 5 Evidence of very good understanding of relevant theory and research in all tasks. Evidence of excellent understandin g of relevant theory and research. Reference to appropriate theoretical background provides support to the discussion. Some illustratio ns that support the theoretic al backgrou nd are evidence d in the discussio ns. Evidence of exemplary understandin g of relevant theory and research. Reference to appropriate theoretical background provides support to the discussion. Illustratio ns are provided that amplify the theoretic al backgrou nd. FR Level 5 Lack of analysis of information. No discussion is evident. No interpretations are found in the report. 3 Majan University College Task are not properly addressed. Limited evidence of critical evaluation of material. Application, Argument and Analysis. Detailed discussion on the tasks involved and critical awareness. The discussed tasks are completely out of focus. 30 Poor analysis of information. Although there is evidence for some discussion, they are discrete and lacking focus. It does not reflect critical application of the concepts to the case. Use of a range of appropriate sources. but without critical evaluation, or missing some significant items Evidence of a general critical stance. Evidence of limited critical evaluation in some areas, with some lost opportunities or misunderstandi ngs. Feb - June 20 There is good evidence for critical analysis and reasoning in some areas. Evidence of critical evaluation in some areas, although some material not evaluated. Use of a wide range of appropriat e sources with some critical awareness of their status and relevance Very good application of the information to the case. There is evidence for in-depth analysis of data. However, all tasks are not consistent in analysis and can be presented in a better manner. Evidence Page 6 of Excellent analysis of the informati on and precise applicatio n to the case. Critical reasoning is evident while discussio n of all the tasks. Evidence of thorough critical appreciati on and evaluatio n of relevant theory and research and a Critical reasoning is consisten tly evident across the discussio ns. The tasks have exemplar y discussio n and detailed narration . FR Level 5 Feb - June 20 good Presentation and structure 4 Clear introduction, logical structure, and overall organization of the report. Majan University College 10 The report is unorganized to the point of being virtually unreadable. Majority of the tasks are incomplete Lacks cohesion and orderly flow. The assignment has unacceptable failings in structuring and / or clarity of written expression Though discussion of the ideas is clear, a coherent flow of thought is not evident. The report is unorganized, but can be read. Poor flow of the report structure. The assignment has failings in Evidence for a coherent presentation is evident, but lacks uniformity throughout the essay. The report is somewhat organized. The flow is not coherent and Page 7 critical appreciati on and evaluation of relevant theory and research and a systematic attempt to relate it to the topic The report is well organized. There is orderliness in the structure. Coherence is also evident but there is still scope for improvement. A generally well-structured and expressed systemati c and creative attempt to relate it to the topic The report is well organized with a cohesive discussion. The structure of the report is excellent. An assignment whose clear The structure is exemplary. Execution is excellent. Discussions are free of grammar or writing errors. A clear layout augments the presentation. FR Level 5 structuring and / or clarity of written expression, which impair its capacity to communicate 5 6 Language Conclusions & Recommendat ion Majan University College 5 The report is difficult to read due to overwhelming errors or misspellings. There are too many sentence formation errors The report is difficult to read due to overwhelming errors or misspellings Frequent compositional errors or misspellings, but the report can be read does not take away significantly from the quality. 15 Conclusions are not supported with any reasons or evidence; no evidence of any Conclusions are supported with very weak reasoning and little evidence; Interpretations Conclusions are supported with limited reasoning and evidence; presents a Feb - June 20 needs improvement. While the assignment has some failings in structuring and / or clarity of written expression, these do not impair its capacity to communicate. Well executed. Few grammar or writing errors. Reads easily and generally well. Conclusions are supported with reasons and evidence; presents a fairly balanced Page 8 assignment, that communicate clearly. structure and expression significantly enhances its argument Well executed. Few grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Is fairly well organized Reads easily. Is well organized. Conclusions are supported with strong arguments and evidence; interpretation Conclusions are supported with excellent arguments and evidence; Execution is excellent. No grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Excellent overall organization of the report. Conclusions are supported with strong arguments which are FR Level 5 interpretation. Presents hardly any recommendatio ns, realistic, appropriate or otherwise. Majan University College are one sided and not objective. Presents recommendati ons but these not realistic or appropriate and with little, if any, support from the analysis and concepts discussed. somewhat onesided interpretation. Presents recommendatio ns which are somewhat realistic and appropriate but not very specific; there is some support from the analysis and concepts discussed Feb - June 20 view; interpretation are reasonable. Presents specific, recommendati ons supported by the analysis and concepts discussed. Page 9 is both reasonable and objective. Presents detailed, specific, realistic recommendati ons clearly supported by the analysis and concepts discussed. presents a clearly balanced and critical view; realistic and appropriate interpretation is both reasonable and objective. outstanding and evidence; presents fantastic and balanced critical view; interpretation is very reasonable and objective. FR Level 5 Feb - June 20 Old grading System (Before Feb 2015) GRADING SLAB GRADE GRADE POINT Range of Marks in \% A+ 16 86 to 100 A 15 76 to 85.9 A- 14 70 to 75.9 B+ 13 67 to 69.9 B 12 63 to 66.9 B- 11 60 to 62.9 C+ 10 57 to 59.9 C 9 53 to 56.9 C- 8 50 to 52.9 D+ 7 47 to 49.9 D 6 43 to 46.9 D- 5 40 to 42.9 E 4 35 TO 39.9 F 2 20 TO 34.9 F- 1 0 TO 19.9 G 0 NA Majan University College Page 10 New Grading System (Starting Feb. 2015) Grad e Letter A+ Mark Band \% 80-100 Grade Descriptor • • • Outstanding • • • A 75-79 A- 70-74 B+ 67-69 Excellent • • Commendable • • • 64-66 B- 60-63 C+ 57-59 C 54-56 C- 50-53 P A S S B • • • Good • • • • D+ • • 47-49 D 44-46 D- 40-43 An outstanding piece of work. Shows evidence of wider reading and originality Strongly analytical. All important points are covered. Arguments should be supported by examples and evidence, objectively presented and evaluated, Well-structured and well written, without noticeable grammatical or other errors. Correctly referenced Satisfactory • • • • 35-39 Marginal Fail F 25-34 Fail F- 01-24 Fail F A I L E Very good work. All main points will have been covered, though minor issues may have been omitted. The work will be analytical, balanced and soundly based. Examples and supporting evidence should have been included. The writing should be essentially correct, without major grammatical or other errors. Generally referenced correctly Generally good work. Most points will have been covered, but many finer points will generally have been missed. Shows limited reading. Arguments/analysis should be basically well structured and balanced with relevant examples, but with errors and gaps. The writing is clear, but has errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. Referencing will be present but may at times be inaccurate or insufficient. Satisfactory. Shows sufficient grasp of the subject to be acceptable. Tends to be descriptive. Examples and evidence is likely to be weak and limited. Shows limited reading. Referencing is likely to be absent or very poorly carried out. • • • Unsatisfactory/ Compensatable fail. Serious errors and omissions. Very little analysis • Work of a very poor standard with little relevant information and/or serious errors. Work containing little of merit • FR G Majan University College Level 5 0 Feb - June 20 • No work submitted Non-Submission Page 12 ... Purchase answer to see full attachment