The COSO framework of internal controls is practiced within companies around the world. The objectives of the COSO framework are closely related to its five components. For this week’s activity, please discuss these five components of the COSO framework. Be sure to include each components’ impact on each of the COSO framework objectives. What do you feel an auditor would most be concerned with during an IT audit? Lastly, discuss suggestions for integrating COSO framework compliance into a company in which you are familiar. 

Your paper should meet the following requirements:

• Be approximately four to six pages in length, not including the required cover page and reference page.

• Follow APA7 guidelines. Your paper should include an introduction, a body with fully developed content, and a conclusion.

• Support your answers with the readings from the course and at least two scholarly journal articles to support your positions, claims, and observations, in addition to your textbook.

• Be clearly and well-written, concise, and logical, using excellent grammar and style techniques. You are being graded in part on the quality of your writing.

Think about a place where you have worked, or where someone you know works. Think both from an employee’s perspective and a leader’s perspective.

Now that you are knowledgeable about the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) Theory of leadership:

– What are the implications for you, or the person you know, as an employee of the organization? How is this new knowledge changing the way you see things? What are you looking for? What are you thinking about?

– What are the implications for you, or the person you know, as a leader in the organization? What do you do with your newly acquired LMX knowledge?

– What are the benefits of being in the “in group” for an employee? What are the benefits for the organization that is characterized by high-quality leader-member exchanges?

Embed course material concepts, principles, and theories (including supporting citations) along with at least two current, scholarly, peer-reviewed journal article.

– 450-500 Words.

– APA style.

– Textbook: Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.).

Hi,

The Assignment (Evidence-Based Project)

Part 4A: Critical Appraisal of Research

Conduct a critical appraisal of the four peer-reviewed articles you selected by completing the Evaluation Table within the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template. Choose a total of four peer- reviewed articles that you selected related to your clinical topic of interest in Module 2 and Module 3.

Note: You can choose any combination of articles from Modules 2 and 3 for your Critical Appraisal. For example, you may choose two unfiltered research articles from Module 2 and two filtered research articles (systematic reviews) from Module 3 or one article from Module 2 and three articles from Module 3. You can choose any combination of articles from the prior Module Assignments as long as both modules and types of studies are represented.

To Prepare:

• Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and the four systematic reviews (or other filtered high- level evidence) you selected in Module 3.
• Reflect on the four peer-reviewed articles you selected in Module 2 and analyzed in Module 3.
• Review and download the Critical Appraisal Tool Worksheet Template provided in the Resources.

Realtors rely on detailed property appraisals—conducted using appraisal tools—to assign market values to houses and other properties. These values are then presented to buyers and sellers to set prices and initiate offers.

Research appraisal is not that different. The critical appraisal process utilizes formal appraisal tools to assess the results of research to determine value to the context at hand. Evidence-based practitioners often present these findings to make the case for specific courses of action.

In this Assignment, you will use an appraisal tool to conduct a critical appraisal of published research. You will then present the results of your efforts.

Attached are some provided resource materials.

Thanks

Writing Portfolio

Our attention in Unit Seven shifts to preparation for the final portfolio, which is due at the end of this unit. Your portfolio should be submitted no later than 11:59pm CST on Sunday. The portfolio counts as 20% of your overall grade in the course.

Final Portfolio Guidelines

Required Components:

• A reflective essay (about 4 full pages, double-spaced)
• Your two best essays from this class, each with further revision (in most cases, these will be revisions of Essays #3 and #5)
• Artifacts of your writing process

Length: Your reflective essay must be between 800-1200 words. Your two best essays should be as long as they need to be fully achieve their rhetorical purposes.

Style/Format: The revised essays essays 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.

File format: Please submit your portfolio as a single file attachment in 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: Those essays that refer to outside sources must include a page of Works Cited, References, or whatever bibliography is required by the guidelines you choose.

Deadline: Submit the portfolio as a single file to Submit Assignment no later than Midnight CST on Sunday at the end of this unit.

Use of essays for future courses: Please understand that your portfolio may be used— anonymously—as a sample for future EN106 students and instructors unless you expressly request that it not be used. Your work will only be used for educational purposes.

Why This Assignment Is Important

This portfolio serves as the core assessment measure for EN106 at Park University. Let’s consider that term for a moment. At Park, a “core assessment” is a required assignment that is common across all sections of a course, both online and face-to-face. This assignment is meant to serve as a tool for instructors to evaluate student learning across sections, terms, campus centers, and modalities. In other words, the portfolio is your opportunity to show off what you have learned in this course, and an opportunity for Park faculty to learn more about how our teaching works. Ideally, we use the lessons from your core assessments to inform changes to curriculum. As you prepare the portfolio, think about using it to make an argument: to use a metaphor from the law, you should make a case for what you have learned this term in EN106.

Your portfolio should demonstrate what you know about academic research and writing. Your EN106 portfolio is a “best works portfolio”—that is, your portfolio should be a collection of your strongest, most polished academic writing. It will contain three primary pieces: a reflective essay, your two best essays from this class, and artifacts from your writing process.

For most students, the two essays will be the same two essays you improved through revision and expansion in Unit Four and Unit Six.

The next Canvas page will describe in more detail the expectations for your portfolio, and some of the possibilities for how you might organize it.

Assessment Standards

Your portfolio will be evaluated as a whole according to the following assessment standards. Please note that while these standards are similar to those used to grade your essays throughout the course, they are not identical. Please read through these assessment criteria and ensure that your portfolio demonstrates each outcome. In general terms, significant weakness in any one of these areas reduces the grade of your portfolio by a letter grade. However, serious weakness in one area can lead to the loss of two or three letter grades or to a failing grade. We can also discuss these grading criteria in the Instructor’s Office.

Competency	Exceeds Expectation (A)	Meets Expectation (~B-C)	Does Not Meet Expectation (~C-D)	No Evidence (F)
Process: Apply writing processes, collaborative strategies, and effective academic research practices to participate in academic discourse.	Student demonstrates clear evidence of using process and social/collaborative practices to draft, revise, edit, and proof-read.	Student shows some evidence of using process and collaboration to write.	Student does not demonstrate the use of process or collaboration.	No portfolio submitted.
Focus: Maintain a controlling idea/thesis for a variety of academic genres.	The focus, or thesis, of each student essay is not only clear but insightful, memorable, and fully supported.	Student’s writing consistently has a clear focus, though it may not always be unique or insightful.	Student essays are either unfocused or feature commonplace or generic theses.	No portfolio submitted.
Development: Apply strategies for developing academic arguments across the disciplines, including conducting research and incorporating culturally diverse perspectives.	Student essays demonstrate successful and deliberate development strategies, especially in the use of research and culturally diverse perspectives, such that each essay seems fully argued and complete.	Student essays demonstrate some use of development strategies but show room for further development in research, argument, or incorporating diverse perspectives.	Student essays are unsupported, needlessly repetitive, unclear, or otherwise underdeveloped.	No portfolio submitted.
Rhetorical Strategies: Consider the rhetorical situations faced by academic writers to respond appropriately in both writing and research.	Student consistently displays an awareness of audience, context, and genre, and responds creatively and appropriately.	Student shows some awareness of rhetorical situations and responds appropriately.	Student shows little awareness of rhetorical situations.	No portfolio submitted.
Conventions: Use common formats and conventions (e.g., research, structure, documentation, tone, mechanics) for various genres of academic discourse.	Student essays make meaningful use of standard formats and conventions in structure, tone, documentation, and mechanics. Although a few mechanical errors may be present, they do not impede understanding.	Student essays are relatively standard in terms of format, documentation, and mechanics. Errors may be present, but do not impede understanding.	Student essays use inappropriate tone or structure, contain mechanical errors that impede understanding, or show serious deficiencies in terms of documentation (e.g., no Works Cited or References page).	No portfolio submitted.

Rubric

EN 106: First Year Writing Seminar II: Academic Research & Writing (1)

EN 106: First Year Writing Seminar II: Academic Research & Writing (1)

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEN106.CLO.01view longer description threshold: 3.0 pts	3.0 ptsExceeds Expectations 2.0 ptsMeets Expectations 1.0 ptsDoes Not Meet Expectations	—
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEN106.CLO.02view longer description threshold: 3.0 pts	3.0 ptsExceeds Expectations 2.0 ptsMeets Expectations 1.0 ptsDoes Not Meet Expectations	—
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEN106.CLO.03view longer description threshold: 3.0 pts	3.0 ptsExceeds Expectations 2.0 ptsMeets Expectations 1.0 ptsDoes Not Meet Expectations	—
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEN106.CLO.04view longer description threshold: 3.0 pts	3.0 ptsExceeds Expectations 2.0 ptsMeets Expectations 1.0 ptsDoes Not Meet Expectations	—
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEN106.CLO.05view longer description threshold: 3.0 pts	3.0 ptsExceeds Expectations 2.0 ptsMeets Expectations 1.0 ptsDoes Not Meet Expectations	—