This is to work on a research project that’s divided into phases as shown below and in the attached requirements file. The project timing will be extended upon delivering each phase (further requirements and explanation will be provided later on each phase)

– Phases 1+2+3 (Needed to be delivered by maximum 3 days from now)

– Phase 4 (Needed to be delivered by maximum of 3 days after delivering phases 1+2+3)

– Phase 5 (Needed to be delivered by maximum of 4 days after delivering phase 4)

– Phase 6 (Needed to be delivered by maximum of 4 days after delivering phases 5)

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Specifications on Phase 1: full requirements can be found on the attached file. The topic needs to be either 1. “Phishing Detection” or 2. “Visual-Based Phishing Detection” choose the topic that you feel that you can complete the research and find the needed resources easily.

———————————————————————

Specifications on Phase 2:

-choose initial 45-50 references (such as academic journals & books & etc) for the research (preferred to be published on 2017 and later, and preferred to be cited on ISI “Web of Science” (I can help you in downloading references that are not available for free in the internet))

-create a folder and upload all the references

-create an excel sheet and cite all the chosen references, and next to each cited reference create a link to the reference in the same folder “SM”

———————————————————————

Specifications on Phase 3: this phase is conduct an evaluation on the chosen initial references list 45-50, and to choose 27-30 from that list based on the conducted evaluation (full requirements and guidance can be found on the attached file)

-in the same created excel sheet, you’ll need to create a new tab to conduct the evaluation for the initial chosen list. In this tab you’ll list all references names in the rows, and columns for the evaluation criteria and score. For scoring, use a scale 0 or 1 or 2 to make the evaluation easier where 0 is too bad & 2 very good and meet the requirements.

-now after conducting the evaluation, you’ll choose 27-30 from the list based on the conducted evaluation and score. This can be done by calculating the final evaluation score for each reference and accept only references that score 80% or more (for example if you use the scale 0-2 and you have 5 criteria to evaluate from, then if the reference get a score of 8 out of 10 will be accepted)

-After choosing the accepted and rejected references, you’ll go back to the first tab in the excel sheet (where you have all references and links to sources) and add links to the evaluation tab and the status of the reference weather accepted or rejected.

Assignment Content

1. 
   

   Complete the Hewlett-Packard Case Study Analysis.
   Submit your analysis.
   Prepare a 7- to 10-slide Microsoft^® PowerPoint^®, Prezi, or Microsoft^® Sway^® presentation describing your analysis of the Hewlett-Packard Case Study. Describe how you addressed the five (5) Case Study topics/questions.Please be prepared to present your analysis and recommendation in class on Week 6.

   Please Note:50% of your grade will be your written analysis (see breakdown below) 25% Microsoft^® Word document 25% Microsoft^® PowerPoint^®, Prezi, or Microsoft^® Sway^® presentation50% of your grade will be your Verbal Presentation in Class on Week 6

   Wk 6 – Apply: Hewlett-Packard Case Study Analysis [due Mon]Menu

   Rubric Details

   Maximum Score130 points

   • 
     

     Supertrends

     15% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Comprehensive and in-depth identification of supertrends included and skillfully tied in with the elements of the case. 19.5Very Good Work Identification of supertrends included and appropriately identified as change drivers. 16.6Average Work Identification of supertrends included but were underdeveloped. 14.6Unacceptable Work Identification of supertrends missing or inadequate. 9.8

   • 
     

     Forces of Organizational Change

     15% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Forces for organizational change were thoroughly identified and explanation was well developed and insightful. 19.5Very Good Work Forces for organizational change were appropriately identified and explanation was well developed. 16.6Average Work Forces for organizational change were identified, but explanation was minimal. 14.6Unacceptable Work Forces for organizational change were not properly identified or the explanation was illogical or missing. 9.8

   • 
     

     Use of Lewin’s and Kotter’s Models

     15% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Recommendations of models as potential change drivers were well developed and insightful. 19.5Very Good Work Recommendations of models as potential change drivers were appropriately addressed. 16.6Average Work Recommendations of models as potential change drivers were addressed, but explanation was minimal. 14.6Unacceptable Work Recommendations of models as potential change drivers were illogical or missing. 9.8

   • 
     

     Fostering Innovation

     15% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement In-depth assessment of HP’s adherence to fostering innovation was complete and well developed. 19.5Very Good Work Description and explanation of HP’s fostering innovation was sufficiently accomplished. 16.6Average Work Description and explanation of HP’s fostering innovation was minimally accomplished. 14.6Unacceptable Work Description and explanation of HP’s fostering innovation was not done or was done poorly. 9.8

   • 
     

     Advice for HP

     15% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Student’s advice for HP was insightful and valuable. 19.5Very Good Work Student’s advice for HP was appropriately and thoughtfully communicated. 16.6Average Work Student’s advice for HP included, but was underdeveloped. 14.6Unacceptable Work Student’s advice for HP non-existent or minimal. 9.8

   • 
     

     Tone

     9% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Tone and level of discussion exemplify high level of ability to communicate in academic writing. 11.7Very Good Work Tone and level of discussion is at an appropriate level. 9.9Average Work Tone and level of discussion is approaching expected level, but writing should be elevated. 8.8Unacceptable Work Tone and level of discussion is not appropriate to the content and assignment. 5.9

   • 
     

     Sentence Structure

     8% of total gradeOutstanding Achievement Answers are fully organized in a logical and coherent manner; transitions are smooth and flow seamlessly from one point to the next. 10.4Very Good Work Answers are generally organized in a logical and coherent manner; transitions for the most part are smooth. 8.8Average Work Answers are generally organized in a logical and coherent manner; transitions, however, are awkward. 7.8Unacceptable Work Answers are organized in a logical or coherent manner, but not both. 5.2

   • 
     

     Grammar

     8% of total grade

   Must Read: Please read instructions carefully

For your final writing assignment, do the following:

• Spend some time researching through Park’s library guidesLinks to an external site., information about your majorLinks to an external site., Park’sundergraduate catalogLinks to an external site., and any other relevant web sites to learn about the types of writing done by academics in your major and/or professionals in your intended career field. Find at least 4 sources that address how writers write in your discipline, major, or career.
• Then, write a short, informative essay, aimed at your fellow college students, that explains what kinds of writing is done in your major academic/career field.

Guidelines for Exploratory Assignment

Length/Due Date: approximately 400-600 words, due Sunday midnight Central Standard Time (CST).

Style/Format: This, as all essays in EN106, should be formatted in a standard scholarly format. (Most students follow MLA or APA guidelines, which are outlined in Easy Writer.) No matter what format you follow, be sure to do the following:

• Use 12 point, Times New Roman font, double-spaced.
• Use 1-inch margins top, bottom, and sides.
• Although no cover page is needed, you should include your name, my name, the course number/title, and date at the upper left-hand corner of the manuscript.

Research & Documentation: This assignment must include formal references to at least 4 sources. Use your skills of quotation, paraphrase, and summary to incorporate information from these sources, and be sure to provide in-text citations using a standard scholarly style, such as MLA or APA. And, of course, you must also provide appropriate documentation for any other sources you cite.

File format: Please submit your essay as a .doc, .docx, or .pdf file. These formats are available in most word processors, including Google Docs and Open Office, and will ensure that your instructor is able to comment on your work.

Works Cited/References: Your essay should include an appropriate bibliography, with an entry for each individual source you reference in the body of the essay.

Titles: Include a descriptive title at the beginning of your essay that tips your readers off to your thesis. Do not format your title with quotation marks, boldface, underlining or italics.

Cover pages: Please do not format your essay to include a cover page.

Deadline: Submit your final draft essay no later than Midnight CST on Sunday at the end of this unit.

Week 7: Taiwan Films vs. Hollywood

Film Screening: Au revoir Taipei 一頁台北 (dir. Arvin Chen, 2010)

Week 8: Voices from the Margins

Film Screening: Wawa No Cidai 太陽的孩子 (2015, dir. Losia Shumi)

Week 9: Global Disparities and Instabilities

Film Screening: The Great Buddha大佛普拉斯 (dir. Huang Hsin-yao, 2017)

· 1000-word commentary on weeks 7-9 course materials uploaded to TED by midnight

As for our third commentary, which is due Sunday midnight, please discuss the ways the three major films e-screened over Weeks 7-9 deal with Japanese/Chinese/American (Hollywood) influences, in terms of film genres (state or cold war propaganda, romance comedy, gangster film, noir and detective, and so on), narrative technique, identity formation and political agency, global/local dialectics, minority rights, or ecology and sustainability. Please draw on specific scenes to make your points. And the grading rule I will give you below.