DAT7001

Data Handling and Decision Making

Part 2: Report

Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on ilearn

(The submission portal on iLearn will close at 14:00 UK time on the date
of submission)

Page 1 of 7
[1665]
Assignment Brief

As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Data
Handling and Decision Making report. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full
details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and
submitting assignments.

Learning Outcomes (LO):

After completing the module, you should be able to:

1. Analyse methods of auditing data holdings and gap identification.

2. Critically analyse theoretical and core processes of data manipulation and mining.

3. Utilise and evaluate basic statistical concepts.

4. Appreciate ethical issues and their importance to data handling and decision making.

5. Develop a practical ability with data analysis and data mining methods to analyse and
interpret data sets.

6. Make recommendations based upon the findings from data analysis.

7. Graduate Attribute – Effective Communication

Communicate effectively both, verbally and in writing, using a range of media widely
used in relevant professional context.

Maximum word count: 4,000 words

Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a reduction in grade by
the same percentage that the word count is exceeded.

You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates
anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the
student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.

Page 2 of 7
[1665]
Assignment Task – Report

This assignment is worth 80% of the marks for this module.

Assignment Part 2: Data-Driven Decision Support

Data-driven decision support encompasses a range of the most essential processes of data
analytics, including data preparation and integration, modelling using statistical and/or
machine learning techniques, and data presentation. The aim of this activity is to empower
the organisational decision-making with statistically tested and systematically evaluated
decision options. These options can be ranked using inferential models, such as forecasting,
prediction and/or classification.

In Part 1 of this assignment, you have identified a case study – an organisation or project of
your choice, as well as various data sources and datasets available to it, and an important
organisational decision. In this part, you have an opportunity to demonstrate how this
specific decision formulated in Part 1 in the context of your chosen case study can be
supported with data analytics.

Task 2.1

Discuss data preparation process, including

• Explanation of data collection, filtering and integration procedures.

• Analysis of data representativeness.
• Statement on generalisability and limitations of the integrated dataset.
(800 words)
(20 marks)
(LO 2)

Task 2.2

Perform data modelling, which should specifically demonstrate:

• Selection and justification of the inferential and/or machine learning models, most
relevant to the objectives of your case study.
• Application of statistical tools such as Excel, SPSS and/or Weka, to your model and
reporting on the initial outcomes of your modelling.
• Explanation what the decision in question should be, based on these outcomes.

(2000 words)
(40 marks)
(LO 2, 3)

Page 3 of 7
[1665]
Task 2.3

Present further outcomes, in support of the decision obtained in Task 2.2. This discussion
should be visualised with a range of charts and tables showing the identified and analysed
relationships. It should also be accompanied with detailed interpretation of the demonstrated
results.

(700 words)
(20 marks)
(LO 5, 7)

Task 2.4

Propose recommendations on the implementation, acceptance and assessment of the

decision arrived at in Tasks 2.2 and 2.3, and discuss how this decision can contribute to
strategic management of the chosen organisation or project.
(500 words)
(20 marks)
(LO 6, 7)

End of questions

Page 4 of 7
[1665]
Formative Feedback

You have the opportunity to submit a complete draft of this assignment to receive formative
feedback.

The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop
your skills as an independent learner.

Your work must be submitted to your tutor at least two weeks prior to the assessment
submission date. This is to allow time for you to reflect on the feedback and draft your final
submission.

Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date.

Student Guidelines

Development of academic skills:

You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and
wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard
system. The My Study Skills Area contains the following useful resources:

Guide to Harvard Referencing

http://moodle.bl.rdi.co.uk/guides/HarvardRef/AU_Harvard_Quick_Ref_Guide.pdf

Guide to Harvard Citation

http://moodle.bl.rdi.co.uk/guides/HarvardRef/AU_Guide_to_Harvard_Citation.pdf

You must use the AU Harvard Referencing method in your assignment.

Additional notes:

Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.

The word count excludes the title page, tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference
list and appendices. Where assessment questions have been reprinted from the
assessment brief these will also be excluded from the word count. ALL other printed
words ARE included in the word count See ‘Word Count Policy’ on the homepage of this
module for more information.

Page 5 of 7
[1665]
Submission Guidance

Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.

Your assessment should be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file. For more
information please see the “Guide to Submitting an Assignment” document available on the
module page on iLearn.

You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources
used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of
academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook which is on the homepage of your
module and also in the Induction Area).

Page 6 of 7
[1665]
 Assessment Criteria: Level 7
Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students’ expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in
the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students
are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with
some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is potentially worthy of publication by Arden University. A clear appreciation
of ethical considerations (as appropriate) is also a prerequisite.
Grade Mark Generic Assessment Criteria
Bands
Distinction 70%+ Excellent analysis of key issues and concepts/. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument, making
consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of
intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive / professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality.
Excellent academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and demonstrates an awareness of
relevant ethical considerations. Work may be considered for publication by Arden university
Merit 60-69% Very good level of competence demonstrated. High level of theory application. Very good analysis of key issues and
concepts. Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Some
evidence of original thought and a general awareness of relevant ethical considerations
Pass 50-59% A satisfactory to good performance. Basic knowledge of key issues and concepts. Generally descriptive, with restricted
analysis of existing scholarly material and little argument development. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent. The
work lacks original thought. Some awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Satisfactory professional skills (where
appropriate).
Marginal Fail 40-49% Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy
in expression. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions. Errors in
expression and the work may lack structure overall
39% and A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical
below considerations. Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with
structure/ accuracy in expression. Professional skills not present. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills.
No evidence of use of scholarly conventions.

Page 7 of 7
[1665]