ACCOUNTING-From a review of the last two years i.e., 2009 and 2010 annual reports

1.
From a review of the last two years i.e., 2009 and
2010 annual reports of two Australian firms listed on the Australian
Stock Exchange (ASX), identify and critically discuss the company’s
disclosure of:

a.
AASB 116
Property, Plant and Equipment,

b.
AASB 101 Presentation of Financial Statements and

c.
AASB 1031 Materiality.

In your review you should discuss compliance or
non-compliance with the three standards and explain differences in disclosure
made by the two companies. Also in your
discussion, explain how these disclosures can help users in their decision
making. (Hint: make sure you define users). The report should be submitted to
university turnitin by midnight of 7^th February and a hardcopy to
the lecturer or the library by Friday 10 february.

Words- 2000

Two asx listed company- Wesfarmers limited and
Woolworth limited

Format – report

MARKING SCHEME RESEARCH
ESSAY

SEMESTER 3, 2011

Student Name

Student Number

Mark out of 50

Assessments	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Average	Marginal	Poor	Very Poor
1. Synopsis/abstract(5 marks)
2. Discussion ofAASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment Part A (10marks)
3. Discussion of AASB 101 Presentation of Financial Statements B (10marks)
4. Discussion ofAASB 1031 Materiality C (10marks)
5.Conclusion / recommendation (5marks)
6.Bibliography, referencing and citations (5marks)
7. English expression, coherence, grammar and spelling (5marks)

Assessment criteria to be applied on Assessments 1 to 7

Excellent: Work fulfilling
the above criteria to an outstanding degree, in particular demonstrating
excellence in sustained argument, critical thought and synthesis of material
from diverse sources.

Very Good: Work demonstrating extensive knowledge and
understanding of major content areas and issues; the ability to appropriately
synthesise material from a range of sources; a well developed capacity for
critical analysis of key issues and concepts; the ability to present a
defensible personal perspective on issues; evidence of wide reading in relevant
areas of the discipline; high quality presentation.

Good: Above average
work demonstrating good knowledge and understanding of major content areas and
issues; demonstration of some capacity for critical analysis; the ability to
present a perspective on issues; evidence of reading in relevant areas of the
discipline; high quality presentation.

Average: Work of ‘average’
standard which demonstrates a good comprehension both of basic concepts and of
more complex issues, based on class work and some further reading in the area;
some ability to analyse and compare key concepts and theoretical perspectives;
high quality presentation, particularly in regard to structure, expression and
referencing.

Marginal: Work which shows
a basic understanding of key elements of the subject matter at a descriptive
level, based mainly on attendance at lectures; satisfactory presentation with
few deficiencies in structure, expression or referencing.

Poor: Work which shows
little evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter and is
unsatisfactorily presented, particularly in regard to structure, expression and
referencing.

Very poor: Work which shows
no evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject matter.