1st SIT COURSEWORK 1: Spring Semester 2020

Module Code: CC4057NA

Module Title: Introduction to Information Systems

Module Leader: Sukrit Shakya (Islington College)

Coursework Type: Individual

Coursework Weight: This coursework accounts for 30% of your total module
grades.

Submission Date: Week 4

When Coursework is Week 2

given out:

Submission Submit the following to Islington College RTE department

Instructions: before the due date:

• soft copy of the report

Warning: London Metropolitan University and Islington College

takes Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with
sternly.

© London Metropolitan University

1
 Plagiarism Notice

You are reminded that there exist regulations concerning plagiarism.

Extracts from University Regulations on Cheating, Plagiarism and

Collusion

Section 2.3: “The following broad types of offence can be identified and are
provided as indicative examples
(i) Cheating: including copying coursework.
(ii) Falsifying data in experimental results.
(iii) Personation, where a substitute takes an examination or test on behalf of
the candidate. Both candidate and substitute may be guilty of an offence
under these Regulations.
(iv) Bribery or attempted bribery of a person thought to have some influence
on the candidate’s assessment.
(v) Collusion to present joint work as the work solely of one individual.
(vi) Plagiarism, where the work or ideas of another are presented as the
candidate’s own.
(vii) Other conduct calculated to secure an advantage on assessment.
(viii) Assisting in any of the above.

Some notes on what this means for students:

(i) Copying another student's work is an offence, whether from a copy on

paper or from a computer file, and in whatever form the intellectual
property being copied takes, including text, mathematical notation and
computer programs.
(ii) Taking extracts from published sources without attribution is an offence.
To quote ideas, sometimes using extracts, is generally to be encouraged.
Quoting ideas is achieved by stating an author's argument and attributing
it, perhaps by quoting, immediately in the text, his or her name and year
of publication, e.g. " e = mc2 (Einstein 1905)". A reference section at the
end of your work should then list all such references in alphabetical order
of authors' surnames. (There are variations on this referencing system
which your tutors may prefer you to use.) If you wish to quote a paragraph
or so from published work then indent the quotation on both left and right
margins, using an italic font where practicable, and introduce the
quotation with an attribution.

Further information in relation to the existing London Metropolitan University

regulations concerning plagiarism can be obtained from
http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/academic-regulations

2
This assignment includes 5 questions which are as follows:

1. What is an Information System? Write down your understandings. Give

suitable examples where required.
2. What are databases? What is the role of a database in an organization? Write
down your understandings with suitable examples where required.
3. Select an organization of your choice and design a database for it. Explain
your database design:
a. What is the database about?
b. What each entity (table) represents?
c. What each attribute (column) represents? What kind data do they
store?
d. Which attributes (columns) are the primary keys and the reasons
for selecting them?
e. Which attributes (columns) are the foreign keys and how they form
the relationship between 2 tables?
4. Draw an entity-relationship diagram (ERD) for the database you have
designed in question 3.
5. Write a personal reflection (max. 800 words) of the learning process up to the
moment. You may wish to summarize your thoughts on the following points
• your preparation for the subject before you started the module
• your expectations from the module when you started it
• looking back, were you able to meet those expectations
• how are you coping with the requirements, are you managing it
• what are your current difficulties; if any, what do you think you need
to do to get the most out of this module
The overall report must be well structured and must include: a cover page,
table of contents, list of figures and tables, proper labeling of figures and
tables, footer, proper referencing/citation of information sources and a list of
the references (bibliography) at the end of the report.

3
Marking Scheme:

University Grading Scheme for Undergraduate Programs: 2019/20

Marking criteria Letter grade Mark recorded

C1 – Work Showing Evidence:
1. An exceptional level of understanding of information A+ 95
systems is seen, proper explanations have been given
with suitable examples.
2. An exceptional level of understanding of databases is
seen, proper explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is exceptional and has been well
explained. An exceptional level of understanding is seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and
relationships have been presented properly. An
exceptional level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is well written and is well-
structured, written in good English, free from spelling
and grammatical errors and is written in a professional
style and presented at a high standard. The overall
formatting of the report is excellent.

C2 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. An outstanding level of understanding of information A 85
systems is seen, proper explanations have been given
with suitable examples.
2. An outstanding level of understanding of databases is
seen, proper explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is outstanding and has been well
explained. An outstanding level of understanding is seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and
relationships have been presented properly. An
outstanding level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is well written and is well-
structured, written in good English, free from spelling
and grammatical errors and is written in a professional
style and presented at a very good quality standard. The
overall formatting of the report is very good.

C3 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. An excellent level of understanding of information A- 75
systems is seen, proper explanations have been given
with suitable examples.
2. An excellent level of understanding of databases is seen,
proper explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is excellent and has been well
explained. An excellent level of understanding is seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and

4
 relationships have been presented properly. An excellent
level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is well written and is well-
structured, free from spelling and grammatical errors
and is written in a professional style and presented at a
good quality standard. The overall formatting of the
report is good.

C4 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A good level of understanding of information systems is B+ 67
seen, good explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
2. A good level of understanding of databases is seen,
good explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is good and has been fairly well
explained. A good level of understanding is seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and
relationships have been presented properly. A good level
of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is reasonably well written and is
well-structured. But may contain only minor typos and
grammatical errors but on the whole is good. The
overall formatting of the report is good.

C5 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A fairly good level of understanding of information B 63
systems is seen, good explanations have been given with
suitable examples.
2. A fairly good level of understanding of databases is
seen, good explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is fairly good and has been fairly
well explained. A fairly good level of understanding is
seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and
relationships have been presented properly. A fairly
good level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is well written and is well-
structured. But may contain some spelling and
grammatical mistakes but on the whole is good. The
overall formatting of the report is good.

C6 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A reasonable level of understanding of information C+ 57
systems is seen, good explanations have been given with
suitable examples.
2. A reasonable level of understanding of databases is
seen, good explanations have been given with suitable
examples.
3. The database design is reasonable and has been fairly
well explained. A reasonable level of understanding is

5
 seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database well. All entities and
relationships have been presented well. A reasonable
level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is written with a satisfactory
standard. But may contain spelling and grammatical
mistakes. The overall formatting of the report is
satisfactory.

C7 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A satisfactory level of understanding of information C 53
systems is seen, reasonable explanations have been
given with suitable examples.
2. A satisfactory level of understanding of databases is
seen, reasonable explanations have been given with
suitable examples.
3. The database design is satisfactory and has been fairly
well explained. A satisfactory level of understanding is
seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database fairly well. All entities and
relationships have been presented. A satisfactory level
of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is written with a satisfactory
standard. But may contain spelling and grammatical
mistakes. The overall formatting of the report is
acceptable.

C8 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. An acceptable level of understanding of information D+ 47
systems is seen, satisfactory explanations have been
given with suitable examples.
2. An acceptable level of understanding of databases is
seen, satisfactory explanations have been given with
suitable examples.
3. The database design is acceptable. An acceptable level
of understanding is seen.
4. The ERD reflects the database at a satisfactory level. An
acceptable level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is written with a satisfactory
standard but lacks proper structure and may contain
spelling and grammatical mistakes. The overall
formatting of the report is acceptable.

C9 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A just acceptable level of understanding of information D 43
systems is seen, just satisfactory explanations have been
given with suitable examples.
2. A just acceptable level of understanding of databases is
seen, just satisfactory explanations have been given with
suitable examples.
3. The database design is just acceptable.
4. The ERD reflects the database at just a satisfactory level.

6
 A just acceptable level of understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection is written with a satisfactory
standard but lacks proper structure and may contain
spelling and grammatical mistakes. The overall
formatting of the report is acceptable.

C10 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A weak level of understanding of information systems is F1 37
seen, no proper explanations given.
2. A weak level of understanding of databases is seen, no
proper explanations given.
3. The database design is weak and unacceptable and
contains many flaws.
4. The ERD is weak and contains errors. A weak level of
understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection lacks proper structure and is
written poorly. The overall formatting of the report is
poor and at an unacceptable standard.

C11 – Work Showing Evidence:

1. A very poor level of understanding of information F2 23
systems is seen, no proper explanations given.
2. A very poor level of understanding of databases is seen,
no proper explanations given.
3. The database design is poor and unacceptable and
contains many flaws.
4. The ERD is poor and contains errors. A poor level of
understanding is seen.
5. The learning reflection/report is very poorly presented
with no level of structure and cohesion, which contains
spelling, and grammatical errors that make it
considerably lower than just an acceptable standard
expected at this level.

Fail (non-submission or submission of work which cannot be F3 0

given any credit (e.g., blank submission, incorrect assignment)