2. 1.2 Core / Elective
Core subject in the BIT
1.3. Subject Weighting
Indicated below is the weighting of this subject and the total
course points.
Subject Credit Points Total Course Credit Points
4 BIT (96 Credit Points)
1.4 Student Workload
Indicated below is the expected student workload per week for
this subject
No. timetabled hours/week* No. personal study
hours/week**
Total workload hours/week***
4 hours/week
(2 hour Lecture + 2 hour Tutorial)
6 hours/week 10 hours/week
* Total time spent per week at lectures and tutorials
** Total time students are expected to spend per week in
studying, completing assignments, etc.
*** Combination of timetable hours and personal study.
1.5 Mode of Delivery On-campus
1.6 Pre-requisites ICT103 Systems Analysis and Design
4. 03171A
Resource requirements specific to this subject: MS Imagine,
Office 365
Academic Details
2.1 Overview of the Subject
This subject provides a broad understanding of Computer
Organisation and Architecture. It covers the
internal functioning of computer hardware systems and
operating systems and the way computer
operations are managed. This subject explains algorithms and
data structures used in controlling the
functioning of a computer through rules and methods that
describe the functionality, organisation and
implementation of computer systems. Security aspects of
operating systems are also covered.
2.2 Graduate Attributes for Undergraduate Courses
Graduates of Bachelor courses from King’s Own Institute (KOI)
will be able to demonstrate the attributes
of a successful Bachelor degree graduate as outlined in the
Australian Qualifications Framework (2nd
edition, January 2013). Graduates at this level will be able to
apply an advanced body of knowledge
across a range of contexts for the purposes of professional
practice or academic scholarship, and as a
pathway for further learning.
King’s Own Institute’s key generic graduate attributes for a
bachelor’s level degree are summarised below:
5. Across the course, these skills are developed progressively at
three levels:
o Level 1 Foundation – Students learn the basic skills, theories
and techniques of the subject and
apply them in basic, stand-alone contexts.
o Level 2 Intermediate – Students further develop skills,
theories and techniques of the subject and
apply them in more complex contexts, beginning to integrate the
application with other subjects.
o Level 3 Advanced – Students have a demonstrated ability to
plan, research and apply the skills,
theories and techniques of the subject in complex situations,
integrating the subject content with a
range of other subject disciplines within the context of the
course.
KOI Bachelor Degree
Graduate Attributes Detailed Description
Knowledge Current, comprehensive and coherent knowledge
Critical Thinking Critical thinking and creative skills to analyse
and synthesise information and evaluate new problems
Communication
Communication skills for effective reading, writing, listening
and presenting in varied modes and contexts and for the
transferring of knowledge and skills to others
7. 03171A
2.3 Subject Learning Outcomes
This is a Level 2 subject.
Listed below, are key knowledge and skills students are
expected to attain by successfully completing this
subject:
Subject Learning Outcomes Contribution to Course Graduate
Attributes
a) Describe the major components of computer systems and
explain how they control the operation of a computer
b) Explain the processes for synchronisation, scheduling and
handling deadlocks
c) Explain how operating systems manage memory, storage, file
systems and input/output processes
d) Evaluate security issues and safeguards to protect against
threats and recover from disasters.
2.4 Subject Content and Structure
Below are details of the subject content and how it is structured,
including specific topics covered in
lectures and tutorials. Reading refers to the text unless
otherwise indicated.
Weekly Planner:
8. Week
(beginning) Topic covered in each week’s
lecture Reading(s)
Expected work as
listed in Moodle
1
09 Mar Computer system overview Ch. 1
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on computer system.
Formative not graded.
2
16 Mar Operating system overview Ch. 2
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on system calls and
activities of an operating system.
Formative not graded.
3
23 Mar
Process description and control,
threads Chs. 3, 4
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial. Formative not graded.
4
30 Mar Uniprocessor scheduling Ch. 9
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on scheduling.
9. 5
06 Apr
Concurrency: mutual exclusion
and synchronisation Ch. 5
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on synchronization problem,
Formative not graded.
6
13 Apr
Concurrency: deadlock and
starvation Ch. 6
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on deadlocks.
Assignment 1 - Mid trimester
test. Summative worth 20%
19 Apr 2020
–
26 Apr 2020
Mid trimester break
Approved by KOI Academic Board for T1 2020
ICT201
ICT 201 COMPUTER ORGANISATION AND
11. I/O management and disk
scheduling Ch. 11
Assignment 2 due: Presentation.
Summative worth 10%
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial. Formative not graded.
11
25 May Operating system security Ch. 15
Assignment 2 due: Presentation.
Summative worth 10%
Discuss review questions in the
tutorial on cryptography and
encryption. Formative not graded.
12
01 Jun
Revision & preparation for final
exam
All subject
material Practice all questions
13
07 Jun Study Review Week
14
15 Jun Final Exam Week
Please see Exam Timetable for exam date, time
and location
12. 15
21 Jun
Student Vacation begins
Enrolments for T220 open
16
29 Jun
Results Released 30 Jun 2020
Certification of Grades 03 Jul 2020
T220 begins 06 July 2020
1
06 Jul
Week 1 of classes for T220
Friday 03 Jul 2020 – Review of Grade Day for T120 – see
Sections 2.6 and 3.6
below for more information.
2.5 Public Holiday Amendments
Please note: KOI is closed on all scheduled NSW Public
Holidays.
T120 has six (6) days of public holidays (Easter Holidays and
the Queen’s Birthday) that occurs during
classes this trimester. Classes scheduled for these public
holidays (Calendar Class Dates) will be
rescheduled as per the table below. All other public holidays
fall within the mid-trimester break period.
14. 2.6 Review of Grade, Deferred Exams & Supplementary
Exams/Assessments
Review of Grade:
There may be instances when you believe that your final grade
in a subject does not accurately reflect your
performance against the subject criteria. Section 8 of the
Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy
(www.koi.edu.au) describes the grounds on which you may
apply for a Review of Grade.
If this happens and you are unable to resolve it with the
Academic staff concerned then you can apply for
a formal Review of Grade within the timeframes indicated in the
following sections of this subject outline -
Supplementary Assessments, 3.6 Appeals Process as well as the
Assessment and Assessment Appeals
Policy. Please ensure you read the Review of Grade information
before submitting an application.
Review of Grade Day:
KOI will hold the Review of Grade Day for all subjects studied
in T120 on
Friday 03 July 2020
Only final exams will be discussed as all other assessments
should have been reviewed during the
trimester.
15. If you fail one or more subjects and you wish to consider
applying for a Review of Grade you MUST attend
the Review of Grade Day. You will have the chance to discuss
your final exam with your lecturer, and will
be advised if you have valid reasons for applying for a Review
of Grade (see Section 3.6 below and
Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy).
If you do not attend the Review of Grade Day you are
considered to have accepted your results for T120.
Deferred Exams:
If you wish to apply for a deferred exam, you should submit an
Application for Assignment Extension or
Deferred Exam Form before the prescribed deadline.
If you miss your mid-trimester or final exam there is no
guarantee you will be offered a deferred exam.
You must apply within the stated timeframe and satisfy the
conditions for approval to be offered a
deferred exam (see Section 8.1 of the Assessment and
Assessment Appeals Policy and the Application
for Assignment Extension or Deferred Exam Forms). In
assessing your request for a deferred exam, KOI
will take into account the information you provide, the severity
of the event or circumstance, your
performance on other items of assessment in the subject, class
attendance and your history of previous
applications for special consideration.
Deferred mid-trimester exams will be held before the end of
week 9. Deferred final exams will be held on
two days during week 1 or 2 in the next trimester. You will not
17. A supplementary assessment may be offered to students to
provide a final opportunity to demonstrate
successful achievement of the learning outcomes of a subject.
Supplementary assessments are only
offered at the discretion of the Board of Examiners. In
considering whether or not to offer a supplementary
assessment, KOI will take into account your performance on all
the major assessment items in the subject,
your attendance, participation and your history of any previous
special considerations.
Students are eligible for a supplementary assessment for their
final subject in a course where they fail the
subject but have successfully completed all other subjects in the
course. You must have completed all
major assessment tasks for the subject and obtained a passing
mark on at least one of the major
assessment tasks to be eligible for a supplementary assessment.
If you believe you meet the criteria for a supplementary
assessment for the final subject in your course, but
have not received an offer, complete the “Complaint, Grievance,
Appeal Form” and send your form to
[email protected] The deadline for applying for supplementary
assessment is the Friday of the first
week of classes in the next trimester.
If you are offered a supplementary assessment, you will be
advised by email to your KOI student email
address of the time and due date for the supplementary
assessment – supplementary exams will normally
be held at the same time as deferred final exams during week 1
or week 2 of the next trimester.
You must pass the supplementary assessment to pass the
subject. The maximum grade you can achieve
18. in a subject based on a supplementary assessment is a PASS
grade.
If you:
o are offered a supplementary assessment, but fail it;
o are offered a supplementary exam, but do not attend; or
o are offered a supplementary assessment but do not submit by
the due date;
you will receive a FAIL grade for the subject.
2.7 Teaching Methods/Strategies
Briefly described below are the teaching methods/strategies
used in this subject:
o On-campus lectures (2 hours/week) are conducted in seminar
style and address the subject content,
provide motivation and context and draw on the students’
experience and preparatory reading.
o Tutorials (2 hours/week) include class discussion of case
studies and research papers, practice sets
and problem-solving and syndicate work on group projects.
Tutorial participation is an essential
component of the subject and contributes to the development of
graduate attributes (see section 2.2
above). It is intended that specific tutorial material such as case
studies, recommended readings, review
questions etc. will be made available each week in Moodle.
o Online teaching resources include class materials, readings,
model answers to assignments and
exercises and discussion boards. All online materials for this
subject as provided by KOI will be found in
the Moodle page for this subject. Students should access
20. (1 hour)
Week 6 20% a, b
Assignment 2: Analysis of an
operating system scenario and
report (2,000 words)
Week 9 Report
Weeks10-11 Presentation
Report: 20%
Presentation:10%
Total: 30%
b, c
Assignment 3: Final examination
(2,5 hours plus 10 minutes
reading time) Final Exam Period 50% a, b, c, d, e
Requirements to Pass the Subject:
To gain a pass or better in this subject, students must gain a
minimum of 50% of the total available
subject marks.
Assessment is designed to encourage effective student learning
21. and enable students to develop and
demonstrate the skills and knowledge identified in the subject
learning outcomes. Assessment tasks
during the first half of the study period are usually intended to
maximise the developmental function of
assessment (formative assessment). These assessment tasks
include weekly tutorial exercises (as
indicated in the weekly planner) and low stakes graded
assessment (as shown in the graded
assessment table). The major assessment tasks where students
demonstrate their knowledge and
skills (summative assessment) generally occur later in the study
period. These are the major graded
assessment items shown in the graded assessment table.
Final grades are awarded by the Board of Examiners in
accordance with KOI's Assessment and
Assessment Appeals Policy. The definitions and guidelines for
the awarding of final grades within the BIT
degree are:
• HD High distinction (85-100%) an outstanding level of
achievement in relation to the assessment
process.
• DI Distinction (75-84%) a high level of achievement in
relation to the assessment process.
• CR Credit (65-74%) a better than satisfactory level of
achievement in relation to the assessment
process.
• P Pass (50-64%) a satisfactory level of achievement in relation
to the assessment process.
• F Fail (0-49%) an unsatisfactory level of achievement in
23. Journal References:
o International Journal of Security and Networks
o International Journal of Security and Its Applications
o ACM Transactions on Computer Systems
o Computer Systems Science and Engineering
o Computer Science: Research and Development
Conference/ Journal Articles:
Students are encouraged to read peer reviewed journal articles
and conference papers. Google
Scholar provides a simple way to broadly search for scholarly
literature. From one place, you can
search across many disciplines and sources: articles, theses,
books, abstracts and court opinions, from
academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories,
universities and other web sites.
3. Assessment Details
3.1 Details of Each Assessment Item
The assessments for this subject are described below. The
description includes the type of assessment,
its purpose, weighting, due date and submission requirements,
the topic of the assessment, details of the
task and detailed marking criteria, including a marking rubric
for essays, reports and presentations.
Supplementary assessment information and assistance can be
found in Moodle.
KOI expects students to submit their own original work in both
assignments and exams, or the original
24. work of their group in the case of group assignments.
Marking guides for assessments follow the assessment
descriptions. Students should compare final
drafts of their assessment against the marking guide before
submission.
Assessment 1
Assessment type: Mid-trimester test (1 hour) – individual
assignment
Purpose: This assessment contributes to learning outcomes a,
and b.
Value: 20% Due Date: Week 6 in usual tutorial timeslots
Task Details: The quiz will consist of a series of short answer
questions relating to subject content weeks
1 – 6 inclusive.
Approved by KOI Academic Board for T1 2020
ICT201
ICT 201 COMPUTER ORGANISATION AND
ARCHITECTURE T120 02/03/2020 14:46 PAGE 9 OF 14
26. Well written,
structure not
totally clear
Well written and
structured.
Very clearly
written and
structured
4
Directly answers
question
Does not directly
answer question
Directly answers
most of the
question
Directly
answers the
question
Directly answers
the question giving
additional insights
Directly answers
the question, gives
additional insights
and theoretical
perspectives.
27. 4
Provides a
supported
argument
No support for
the position
taken in the
answer.
Provides some
support for the
position taken.
Provides good
level of
support for
position taken.
Provides excellent
level of support for
position taken.
Provides
exceptional level
of support for
position taken.
4
Draws a
conclusion based
on argument
28. No conclusion
presented
Conclusion
based on some
argument
Conclusion
based on
sound
argument
Conclusion based
on an extensive
argument
Conclusion based
on an extensive
and compelling
argument
4
Demonstrates
knowledge of
subject matter
Very little
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
Adequate
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
29. Sound
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
High level of
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
High level of
knowledge of
subject matter and
synthesis with
theory
demonstrated
4
Assessment 2
Assessment type: Report (2,000 words) – individual assignment
Purpose: This assessment will allow students to demonstrate
that they can identify and understand
synchronisation and deadlocks. This assessment contributes to
learning outcomes b and c.
Value: 30% (Report 20%; Presentation 10%)
Due Date: Report Submission via Moodle (Week 9);
Presentation (Weeks 10 - 11)
Submission: Upload the completed report via Moodle.
31. 03171A
a) Draw a timeline (Gantt-Chart) for each of the following
scheduling algorithms
b) What is the Waiting Time and Turnaround Time of each
process for each of the scheduling
algorithms? (Details of the calculation is essential).
i) First-Come-First-Served (FCFS)
ii) Round Robin (RR) (use time quantum of 3)
iii) Highest Response Ratio Next (HRRN)
iv) Shortest Remaining Time (SRT)
v) Shortest Process Next (SPN)
2- Using either internet resources or books, understand the
concept of Memory Management and
Virtual Memory. Define those terms (Memory Management and
Virtual Memory) in your own words.
You must provide references and cite the sources that you
consulted for this task. (Harvard
referencing is the required method.)
3- Consider the directed resource graph shown below and
answer the following questions:
a. Is this system deadlocked?
b. Which, if any, processes are blocked?
c. What is the resulting graph after reduction?
33. Content Fail (0 – 49%)
Pass
(50 – 64%)
Credit
(65 – 74%)
Distinction
(75 – 84%)
High Distinction
(85 – 100%)
Depth of Content The explanation is
sufficiently
inaccurate,
incomplete, or
confusing that the
reader gains little
information from the
report. It appears
that little attempt
has been made to
help the reader
understand the
material.
Some difficulty in
reading, structure
lacking in some parts
Well written, structure
not totally clear
Well written and
34. structured.
An accurate and
complete explanation of
key concepts and
theories is made,
drawing on relevant
literature. Enough detail
is presented to allow
the reader to
understand the content
and make judgments
about it. In addition,
applications of theory
are included to
illuminate issues.
Readers gain insights.
6
Accuracy of
Content
Does not directly
answer question
Directly answers
most of the question
Directly answers the
question
Directly answers
the question giving
additional
insights
35. Information (names,
facts, etc.) included in
the report is
consistently
accurate.
6
Clarity of Purpose No support for the
project’s objectives
taken in the
answer.
Provides some
support for the
project’s objectives
taken.
The project’s
objectives are
presented. The
motivation for
pursuing the project
and its relevance are
addressed.
The discussion is
reasonably
clear but not
compelling.
Provides excellent
level of support for
project’s objectives
taken.
36. The project’s objectives
are clearly stated. The
motivation for pursuing
the project and its
relevance are clearly
and
persuasively
established by relating
the project to current
engineering
problems.
6
Depth of Analysis No analysis
presented
Analysis based on
some argument
Analysis based on
sound argument
Analysis based on
an extensive
argument
Results are carefully
and
objectively analysed.
Interpretations are
made using appropriate
equations, models, or
theories.
6
37. Use of Language:
Word Choice,
Grammar, and
Sentence
Structure
Very little
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
Adequate knowledge
of subject matter
demonstrated.
Sound knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
High level of
knowledge of
subject matter
demonstrated.
High level of knowledge
of subject matter and
synthesis with theory
demonstrated 6
Assessment 3
Assessment type: Final Exam: individual assessment – open
book exam. Duration: 2,5 hours plus 10
minutes reading time.
39. the ability to manage workloads and meet deadlines.
Consequently, any assessment items such as in-
class quizzes and assignments missed or submitted after the due
date/time will attract a penalty (see
below).
Students who miss mid-trimester tests and final exams without a
valid and accepted reason (see below)
may not be granted a deferred exam and will be awarded 0
marks for assessment item. These penalties
are designed to encourage students to develop good time
management practices, and create equity for
all students.
Any penalties applied will only be up to the maximum marks
available for the specific piece of
assessment attracting the penalty.
Late penalties, granting of extensions and deferred exams are
based on the following:
In Class Tests (excluding Mid-Trimester Tests)
o No extensions permitted or granted – a make-up test may only
be permitted under very special
circumstances where acceptable supporting evidence is
provided. The procedures and timing to
apply for a make-up test (only if available) are as shown in
Section 3.3 Applying for an Extension
(below).
o Missing a class test will result in 0 marks for that assessment
element unless the above applies.
Written Assessments
40. o 5% of the total available marks per calendar day unless an
extension is approved (see Section 3.3
below)
Presentations
o No extensions permitted or granted – no presentation = 0
marks. The rules for make-up presentations
are the same as for missing in-class tests (described above).
Mid-Trimester Tests and Final Exams
o If students are unable to attend mid-trimester tests or final
exams due to illness or some other event
(acceptable to KOI), they must:
− Advise KOI in writing (email: [email protected]) as soon as
possible, but no later than three
(3) working days after the exam date, that they will be / were
absent and the reasons. They will
be advised in writing (return email) as to whether the
circumstances are acceptable.
− Complete the appropriate Application for Extension or
Deferred Exam Form available from the
Student Information Centre in Moodle, on the KOI Website
(Policies and Forms) and the
Reception Desk (Market St and Kent St), as soon as possible
and email with attachments to
[email protected]
− Provide acceptable documentary evidence in the form of a
satisfactorily detailed medical
42. must apply by completing the appropriate Application for
Extension form available from the Student
Information Centre in Moodle, the KOI Website (Policies and
Forms) and the Reception Desk (Market St
and Kent St), as soon as possible but no later than three (3)
working days of the assessment due date.
The completed form must be emailed with supporting
documentation to [email protected]
Students and lecturers / tutors will be advised of the outcome of
the extension request as soon as
practicable.
Appropriate documentary evidence to support the request for an
extension must be supplied. Please
remember there is no guarantee of an extension being granted,
and poor organisation is not a
satisfactory reason to be granted an extension.
3.4 Referencing and Plagiarism
Please remember that all sources used in assessment tasks must
be suitably referenced.
Failure to acknowledge sources is plagiarism, and as such is a
very serious academic issue. Students
plagiarising run the risk of severe penalties ranging from a
reduction through to 0 marks for a first offence
for a single assessment task, to exclusion from KOI in the most
serious repeat cases. Exclusion has
serious visa implications. The easiest way to avoid plagiarising
is to reference all sources.
Harvard referencing is the required method – in-text referencing
using Author’s Surname (family name)
and year of publication. A Referencing Guide, “Harvard
Referencing”, and a Referencing Tutorial can be
43. found on the right hand menu strip in Moodle on all subject
pages.
An effective way to reference correctly is to use Microsoft
Word’s referencing function (please note that
other versions and programs are likely to be different). To use
the referencing function, click on the
References Tab in the menu ribbon – students should choose
Harvard.
Authorship is also an issue under plagiarism – KOI expects
students to submit their own original work in
both assessment and exams, or the original work of their group
in the case of a group project. All
students agree to a statement of authorship when submitting
assessments online via Moodle, stating that
the work submitted is their own original work.
The following are examples of academic misconduct and can
attract severe penalties:
o Handing in work created by someone else (without
acknowledgement), whether copied from another
student, written by someone else, or from any published or
electronic source, is fraud, and falls under
the general Plagiarism guidelines.
o Copying / cheating in tests and exams is academic
misconduct. Such incidents will be treated just as
seriously as other forms of plagiarism.
o Students who willingly allow another student to copy their
work in any assessment may be considered
to assisting in copying/cheating, and similar penalties may be
applied.
45. 03171A
Examples of reasonable adjustment in assessment may include:
o provision of an oral assessment, rather than a written
assessment
o provision of extra time
o use of adaptive technology.
The focus of the adjusted assessment should be on enabling the
participants to demonstrate that they
have achieved the subject purpose, rather than on the method
used.
3.6 Appeals Process
Full details of the KOI Assessment and Assessment Appeals
Policy may be obtained in hard copy from
the Library, and on the KOI website www.koi.edu.au under
Policies and Forms.
Assessments and Mid-Trimester Exams:
Where students are not satisfied with the results of an
assessment, including mid-trimester exams, they
have the right to appeal. The process is as follows:
o Discuss the assessment with their tutor or lecturer – students
should identify where they feel more
marks should have been awarded – students should provide
valid reasons based on the marking
guide provided for the assessment. Reasons such as “I worked
really hard” are not considered valid.
46. o If still not satisfied, students should complete an Application
for Review of Assessment Marks form,
detailing the reason for review. This form can be found on the
KOI website and is also available at
KOI Reception (Market St and Kent St).
o Application for Review of Assessment Marks forms must be
submitted as explained on the form
within ten (10) working days of the return of the marked
assessment, or within five (5) working days
after the return of the assessment if the assessment is returned
after the end of the trimester.
Review of Grade – whole of subject and final exams:
Where students are not satisfied with the results of the whole
subject or with their final exam results, they
have the right to request a Review of Grade – see the
Assessment and Assessment Appeals Policy for
more information.
An Application for Review of Grade/Assessment Form
(available from the KOI Website under Policies
and Forms and from KOI Reception, Market St and Kent St)
should be completed clearly explaining the
grounds for the application. The completed application should
be submitted as explained on the form,
with supporting evidence attached, to the Academic Manager.
Approved by KOI Academic Board for T1 2020
http://www.koi.edu.au/
47. Running head: EFFECTIVE READING STRATEGIES
1
PAGE
2
EFFECTIVE READING STRATEGIES
The Effect of Motivation on Students Performance
The action of motivation is crucial with students in order to
help them do better when it comes to reading. Motivation can
support the students to achieve and accomplish a high level of
performance. Huang (2012) illustrates that “In general sense,
motivation can be defined as the dynamically changing
cumulative arousal in a person that initiates, directs,
coordinates, amplifies, terminates, and evaluates the cognitive
and motor processes whereby initial wishes and desires are
selected, prioritized, operationalized and successfully or
unsuccessfully acted out” (pg. 1755). Educators can support
students through motivation and by using different kinds of
strategies. Barrot (2016) believes “The term ‘reading strategy’
has been part of teachers’ everyday vocabulary in reading
classrooms”. Barrot (2016) continues “Reading strategies are
‘‘deliberate, goal-directed attempts to control and modify the
reader’s efforts to decode text, understand words, and construct
meaning of text” (pg. 885). In light of what is known about
children and educational policy and practice, what are some
strategies teachers can do to motivate students to read?
In this paper, the writer will review articles that discuss
different strategies which have been used by different
researchers. Similarities and differences can be found in the
literature in how the authors use different kinds of strategies
and how data, evidence, and findings are obtained and provided
in the studies. The articles that the writer will review include:
48. Impacts of Comprehensive Reading Instruction on Diverse
Outcomes of Low-and High-Achieving Readers by Guthrie,
McRae, Coddington, Klauda, Wigfield and Barbosa (2009).
Does Johnny’s Reading Teacher Love to Read? How Teacher’s
Personal Reading Habits Affect Instructional Practices Written
by McKool and Gespass (2009). Action Research on Motivation
in English Reading by Huang (2012). ESL Learners’ Use of
Reading Strategies Across Different Text Types Written by
Barrot (2016). Context-Specific Motivations to Read for
Adolescent Struggling Readers: Does the Motivation for
Reading Questionnaire Tell the Full Story? Written by
Neugebauer (2014).
Number of participants
Most of the participants of the studies were chosen randomly.
Barrot (2016) chose the participants to be a combination of
male and female English second language (ESL) learners who
had at least 10 years of prior formal instruction in English and
had an intermediate level reading proficiency. Huang (2012)
also chose 156 participants female and male non- English major
undergraduates. Neugebauer (2014) outlines the research which
included one hundred and fifteen fifth graders who were
administered the Motivation for Reading Questionnaire (MRQ),
an in-school reading motivation daily log, a demographic
survey, and standardized reading assessments. However,
McKool and Gespass (2009) selected the participants to be
female teachers in order to investigate the relationship between
teachers’ personal reading habits and their instructional
practice. According to McKool and Gespass (2009), these
teacher participants were willing to distribute and collect the
surveys.
Background and demographics of participants
Huang’s participants (2012) had English reading classes both
intensive and extensive and have mostly reduced of the
influence of the previous education like junior and senior high
school and are accustomed to the college curriculum. They have
49. been studying English for at least 8 years and have formed a set
of relatively fixed learning patterns, especially in English
reading. Guthrie, et al. (2009) selected grade 5 students from
three schools in the Mid Atlantic region. According to McKool
and Gespass (2009) sixty-five elementary school teachers who
taught reading as one of several subjects taught during the
school day. The average age of the teachers was 38 years with
10 years of experience. All of the participants were female and
23% held master’s degrees.
Barrot (2016) describes that the participants had been taught a
plethora of reading strategies (e.g., recognizing discourse
structure, contextual guessing, brainstorming, concept mapping,
activating background knowledge, predicting and previewing,
note-taking, skimming, and recognizing fallacies) during their
basic education. The participants were also significantly
exposed to different text types which include narrative,
descriptive, process, expository, comparison– contrast, cause–
effect, problem-solving, and argumentative/persuasive texts.
The participants came from various socioeconomic classes and
linguistic backgrounds which are typical of a university-level
English class.
Neugebauer (2014) conducted his research in the fifth grades of
two elementary schools in the Northeast of the United States. A
fifth-grade sample is well-suited for an analysis of reading
motivation, because the late elementary school period marks a
shift in children’s reading development. Fifth graders are
immersed in more sophisticated curricular materials that are
difficult for struggling readers, and they are expected to use
academic language that may be unfamiliar. Of the 152 students
recruited for the study, a total of 119 (78%) participated.
Methods used in the studies
The researchers provided numerical data, tables, scales, and
comparisons within the research results, clearly indicating that
data from the studies were analyzed using both qualitative and
quantitative methods. According to McKool and Gespass (2009)
50. quantitative data sources were analyzed through descriptive
analysis methods, while grounded theory methods were used to
analyze the short written responses. These written responses
were examined by both authors and then categorized using the
technique of “constant-comparative analysis” in which pieces of
information were compared against other pieces of information
across all subjects. Through this methodology, the concepts of
relationships among the pieces of information were not only
generated but they were also provisionally tested. The
researchers perfectly described the demographics of the
participants that had been chosen.
Findings of the studies
Barrot (2016) claimed that ESL learners generally applied a
wide range of strategies consistently when reading different text
types. From a practical perspective, these findings lend support
for an integrated approach to teaching and learning reading
strategies. This means no matter what the text type is, teachers
may need to simultaneously teach and expose learners to
various reading strategies. Educators can do this by explicitly
incorporating strategy instruction into their instructional
materials and other teaching activities. Theoretically, the
findings allow us to have a deeper understanding that reading
strategy use is a result of interaction between the learners and
the text; that is, it is influenced by learners’ schema and reading
proficiency level as well as structural complexity of the text.
After a series of statistical analyses of the correlation between
the reading proficiency and the motivation, Huang (2012)
reached the following findings:
1. The majority of the English students have a strong motivation
towards English reading;
2. Female students show a stronger intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation than male students, which indicates that gender is a
very important variable in English learning;
51. 3. The correlation between general motivation and reading is
significant;
4. The correlation between students with higher score and lower
score is significant.
McKool and Gespass (2009) indicated that teachers who are
readers themselves are more likely to engage in instructional
practices that model their passion for reading. McKool and
Gespass (2009) also found by reading out loud to the students,
reader teachers engage in conversations with the students about
books and model specific reading strategies. Those educators
give students greater choice in reading materials. Moreover,
those teachers give students frequent time to read during the
school day more than teachers who report that they do not read
for pleasure regularly. In this study, researchers realized how it
is important to understand personal reading attitudes and beliefs
do influence instructional practices in the classroom.
Neugebauer (2014) found that the MRQ did not significantly
predict reading performance on a standardized reading
comprehension measure. The MRQ shows that students with
good reading abilities, in the absence of motivation to read in
school, resembled their less literate unmotivated peers.
However, poor readers who were highly motivated in school
performed, on average, did worse than their peers who were not
highly motivated to read in school with comparable reading
skills.
Limitations
According to Barrot’s study (2016), the current study has
several limitations. First, the study remains a self-report study.
It would be useful to use a qualitative and/or a mixed method
design in future studies to provide more generalizable results.
52. Second, the study examined reading strategies of a limited
sample of university students with intermediate reading
proficiency. It is, therefore, interesting to replicate the study by
increasing the number of participants of varying reading
proficiency level from different universities and background to
make the findings more conclusive and interpretation more
meaningful. Third, since the strategies included in the study
were delimited to those that are included in the syllabus,
students might have used other strategies that were not included
in the list. Finally, since this study was conducted in a private
university in the Philippines, the findings may not be applicable
to other learning contexts and should be interpreted with
caution.
Neugebauer (2014) research has several limitations. The
researcher used primarily self-reported data, which may
increase the absolute reported motivation for reading. A
possible solution to these reporter biases for future research on
this topic is to triangulate student self- reports with both parent
and teacher reports, as well as classroom observations. The
MRQ study focused on in-school reading motivation; however,
both are equally important and will be an analysis of the
contribution of outside-school reading motivations, which may
explain additional variation in reading performance.
Neugebauer (2014) states that the analytic focus of this study
was on motivations to read in school. Understanding the
interchange between task and context will be a crucial
subsequent area of study. Collecting data on reading tasks was
judged to be too taxing for participants and would have required
multiple daily administrations to record all reading activities
and their concurrent reading motivations.
McKool and Gespass (2009) realized the limitations of their
study by indicating the small size of the sample they had.
McKool and Gespass (2009) chose to use only fourth- through
sixth- grade teachers because the schools that they used were all
53. intermediate grade schools which included fourth and fifth
grades or fourth through sixth grades. A second limitation is
that the data that were collected were self-reported by the
teachers. McKool and Gespass (2009) reported due to the
previous limitations, these data and the findings should be
viewed as exploratory rather than research findings that could
be generalized.
Conclusion
Motivation is one of the most important aspects of affecting
student’s performance in reading. Teachers should motivate and
train integrative and intrinsic motivation. Educators should give
learners who are lacking in motivation initiative feedback for
their endeavor and stimulate their extrinsic motivation in order
to let them enjoy learning. Furthermore, it is useful if students
develop themselves by using reading strategies effectively.
These studies illustrate the importance of the use of strategies
for motivating students to read.
References
Barrot, J. (2016). ESL learners’ use of reading strategies across
different text types. The
Asia Pacific Education Researcher,25(5), 883-892.
Guthrie, J., Mcrae, A., Coddington, C., Lutz Klauda, S.,
Wigfield, A., & Barbosa, P. (2009).
Impacts of comprehensive reading instruction on diverse
outcomes of low- and high
achieving readers. Journal of Learning Disabilities,42(3), 195-
214.
Huang, Q. (2012). Action research on motivation in english
reading. Theory and Practice in
Language Studies,2(8), 1755-1761.
McKool, Sharon S., & Gespass, Suzanne. (2009). Does Johnny's
reading teacher love to read?
54. how teachers' personal reading habits affect instructional
practices. Literacy Research
and Instruction,48(3), 264-276.
Neugebauer, S. (2014). Context-specific motivations to read for
adolescent struggling
readers: does the motivation for reading questionnaire tell the
full story? Reading
Psychology,35(2), 160-194.
PAGE
2
EFFECTIVE READING STRATEGIES
Components of the Capstone Paper:
Capstone Paper Cover Page (Page 1)- Use APA 6th edition
format for Capstone paper
· Dedication- (Page 2)
· Acknowledgments- (Page 3)
· Table of Contents (Page 4)- Use template designed for
Capstone paper found in Blackboard’s Course Materials folder
· Abstract (Page 6)- A one-half page summary of the contents of
the Capstone paper To include the following:
· Topic
· Purpose
· Brief summary of sources
55. · Keywords (limit to 4-5 words)
· Conclusions
· Past tens
Chapter one introduction (minimum 3 pages)
Chapter One should include the following:
· The topic and scope of the research investigation
· An explanation of the importance of the topic to the field of
education
· At least three sources cited with a clear connection to the
research question
· Statement of interest to engage the reader (narrative hook)
· Definition of terms and the scope of the problem investigated-
organized in a logical sequence
· Statement of the research question connecting to the Program
Essential Question in the concluding paragraph
· Past tense
Chapter Two: Literature Review (minimum 15 pages)
A written narrative synthesizing and summarizing information
from the selected research studies to develop a response and
answer to the research question proposed in the Introduction.
This should not be a list of separate studies or annotated
bibliography, rather it is a detailed overview of the existing
research that attempts to answer the proposed research question.
The review will be a minimum of 15 scholarly, peer-reviewed
56. sources; that may include, journal articles, online resources, and
conference/summit papers. Must use APA format and citations.
Please identify the following information for each source:
· Type of study (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, case
study, or other)
· Number and age/grade level of the participants and other
demographic/socioeconomic status information that provides the
context for the study
· The methodology (interviews, surveys, observations, pre-post
test data, experimental/control groups, etcetera
· Key findings that are related to your research question
· Limitations mentioned in the study, and any other limitations
that you noted
· Chapter includes an introduction and conclusion with
transition into the following chapter
· Past tense
Chapter Three: Research Summary and Conclusions (minimum
3-4 pages)
A succinct and precise summary, and a synthesized conclusion
of the Introduction and Literature Review.
This section must include the following:
· A review of the proposed problem (research question) that was
investigated
· The importance of this topic
57. · A paraphrased summary of the findings from the research
studies that were examined in the Literature Review with a
synthesized conclusion of how the findings answer the research
question
· Past tense
This is a concise chapter that clearly identifies the findings of
the studies that were discussed in the Literature Review and
syntheses the research in relation to the research question. This
chapter also includes an introduction and conclusion with
transition into the following chapter.
Chapter Four: Discussion/Application/Future Studies (minimum
4 to 5 pages)
This chapter includes the following:
· A summary of the insights gained from the research that will
lead to improved instructional practice
· Specific application examples of how the research will inform
instructional or educational practices
· A minimum of three suggestions for possible future studies
· A strong conclusion, as it acts as the conclusion for the entire
paper
· Present and/or future tense
References: An alphabetical listing of resources cited in the
paper, with correct citations per APA – 6th Edition.
PAGE
2
58. EFFECTIVE READING STRATEGIES
Components of the Capstone Paper:
Capstone Paper Cover Page (Page 1)- Use APA 6th edition
format for Capstone paper
· Dedication- (Page 2)
· Acknowledgments- (Page 3)
· Table of Contents (Page 4)- Use template designed for
Capstone paper found in Blackboard’s Course Materials folder
· Abstract (Page 6)- A one-half page summary of the contents of
the Capstone paper To include the following:
· Topic
· Purpose
· Brief summary of sources
· Keywords (limit to 4-5 words)
· Conclusions
· Past tens
Chapter one introduction (minimum 3 pages)
Chapter One should include the following:
· The topic and scope of the research investigation
· An explanation of the importance of the topic to the field of
education
59. · At least three sources cited with a clear connection to the
research question
· Statement of interest to engage the reader (narrative hook)
· Definition of terms and the scope of the problem investigated-
organized in a logical sequence
· Statement of the research question connecting to the Program
Essential Question in the concluding paragraph
· Past tense
Chapter Two: Literature Review (minimum 15 pages)
A written narrative synthesizing and summarizing information
from the selected research studies to develop a response and
answer to the research question proposed in the Introduction.
This should not be a list of separate studies or annotated
bibliography, rather it is a detailed overview of the existing
research that attempts to answer the proposed research question.
The review will be a minimum of 15 scholarly, peer-reviewed
sources; that may include, journal articles, online resources, and
conference/summit papers. Must use APA format and citations.
Please identify the following information for each source:
· Type of study (quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, case
study, or other)
· Number and age/grade level of the participants and other
demographic/socioeconomic status information that provides the
context for the study
· The methodology (interviews, surveys, observations, pre-post
test data, experimental/control groups, etcetera
60. · Key findings that are related to your research question
· Limitations mentioned in the study, and any other limitations
that you noted
· Chapter includes an introduction and conclusion with
transition into the following chapter
· Past tense
Chapter Three: Research Summary and Conclusions (minimum
3-4 pages)
A succinct and precise summary, and a synthesized conclusion
of the Introduction and Literature Review.
This section must include the following:
· A review of the proposed problem (research question) that was
investigated
· The importance of this topic
· A paraphrased summary of the findings from the research
studies that were examined in the Literature Review with a
synthesized conclusion of how the findings answer the research
question
· Past tense
This is a concise chapter that clearly identifies the findings of
the studies that were discussed in the Literature Review and
syntheses the research in relation to the research question. This
chapter also includes an introduction and conclusion with
transition into the following chapter.
Chapter Four: Discussion/Application/Future Studies (minimum
61. 4 to 5 pages)
This chapter includes the following:
· A summary of the insights gained from the research that will
lead to improved instructional practice
· Specific application examples of how the research will inform
instructional or educational practices
· A minimum of three suggestions for possible future studies
· A strong conclusion, as it acts as the conclusion for the entire
paper
· Present and/or future tense
References: An alphabetical listing of resources cited in the
paper, with correct citations per APA – 6th Edition.
![KING’S OWN INSTITUTE*
Success in Higher Education
ICT 201 COMPUTER ORGANISATION AND
ARCHITECTURE T120 02/03/2020 14:46 PAGE 1 OF 14
*AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF BUSINESS AND
MANAGEMENT PTY LTD © ABN: 72 132 629 979 CRICOS
03171A
ICT 201 COMPUTER ORGANISATION AND
ARCHITECTURE T120
All information contained within this Subject Outline applies to
all students enrolled in the trimester as indicated.
1. General Information
1.1 Administrative Details
Associated HE Award(s) Duration Level Subject Coordinator
Bachelor of Information Technology (BIT) 1 trimester Level 2
Mr Ali Noori
[email protected]
P: 92833583
L: Level 1-2, 17 O’Connell St.
Consultation: via Moodle or by
appointment.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/kingsowninstitutesuccessinhighereducation-221031043907-4a17e5d7/85/KING-S-OWN-INSTITUTE-Success-in-Higher-Education-docx-1-320.jpg)
