MGF5020 Chap.1 Assessment Map: Four Tasks, Zero Exam, and the No-GenAI Rule
Assessment Map: Four Tasks, Zero Exam, and the No-GenAI Rule
MGF5020 uses four within-semester tasks worth 100% in total: AT1 group presentation 20%, AT2 reflective essay 30%, AT3 research report 40% and AT4 forum posts 10%. The Week 1 assessment table places condition 1 beside all four rows and defines it as a prohibition on using generative AI to generate materials or content in relation to the task. Treat that condition as applying across research notes, prose, slides, visual material, recommendations and forum text unless a later official instruction changes the scope.
The official documents do not form one perfectly consistent calendar. AT1 presentation timing appears as Week 3–10 except Week 6 in the unit-information summary, Week 3–11 except Week 6 on the task page, and Week 3–10/11 except Week 6 in the Week 1 lecture. The Moodle assignment link separately shows 5 October 2026 at 11:55 pm; label this as the visible submission-link cutoff rather than a fourth presentation-slot formulation. AT2's current S2 link shows 4 September 2026 at 11:55 pm, while a separate page retains a stale 17 April string. AT3's current S2 link shows 23 October 2026 at 11:55 pm, while another page retains stale May dates.
Requirements must stay attached to their task. AT2 requires at least 10 peer-reviewed academic sources and APA. AT3's rubric requires at least 12 scholarly sources and says Harvard style, while the unit-level information says APA. AT1's task page divides the unit value into Presentation Details 15% and literature/resources list 5%; its rubric separately divides judgement within the task into six criteria totalling 100%. The unit-level hurdle section only says to see the Handbook, so a unit-level hurdle is not stated here. The AT3 page separately says hurdle requirements are not applicable to that assessment.
What this chapter covers
- 01Four official task weights and formats
- 02Three AT1 presentation-slot formulations
- 03Current S2 links versus stale dates
- 04AT1's two non-additive denominators
- 05AT2 and AT3 source and referencing conflicts
- 06No-GenAI and hurdle-scope controls
Document-conflict control drill
- 2Record all three presentation-slot strings with their official document locations.
- 2Label 5 October as the assignment-link cutoff, not an allocated presentation date.
- 2Confirm the group's actual presentation slot and submission-by-slot instruction on Moodle.
- 2Keep a dated written record of the clarification and make it visible to all group members.
- 2Re-check the activity before submission and retain the uploaded file and receipt.
Key terms
- Task denominator
- The base to which a percentage applies, such as unit marks or weighting within one rubric.
- Submission-link cutoff
- The due timestamp displayed by a Moodle assignment activity, which may differ from an allocated presentation slot.
- Task-level hurdle
- A hurdle statement scoped to one assessment rather than the unit as a whole.
- Conflict preservation
- Keeping incompatible official wordings attributed and visible until an authorised instruction resolves them.
- Condition 1
- The Week 1 code applied to all four tasks that prohibits generative-AI-generated materials or content.
- Operational source
- The current Moodle activity or Handbook entry that governs the action the student must take.
Assessment Map: Four Tasks, Zero Exam, and the No-GenAI Rule FAQ
Do the four weights total 100%?
Yes. AT1 20% + AT2 30% + AT3 40% + AT4 10% = 100% within-semester assessment.
Is AT1 worth more than 20% because its rubric totals 100%?
No. The rubric distributes judgement within the same 20% task. The task page's 15% + 5% is a separate unit-level decomposition. Never add across the denominators.
Which AT1 week range is correct?
The available official materials disagree. Preserve all three wordings and confirm the allocated slot on Moodle rather than selecting one silently.
Should the April and May strings be used?
No. They are stale Semester 1 strings. The current-looking S2 links show 4 September for AT2 and 23 October for AT3, but live Moodle must still be checked.
Is there a unit hurdle?
The unit materials available here do not state one; they defer to the Monash Handbook. AT3 separately says no hurdle requirement applies to that task.
Can a source minimum be applied across tasks?
No. AT2 has a 10 peer-reviewed-source floor; AT3 has a 12 scholarly-source floor in its rubric. Keep them task-specific.
Does the 5 October link create a fourth AT1 presentation range?
No. It is a separate upload cutoff. The three presentation-slot strings are the Week 3–10, Week 3–11 and Week 3–10/11 formulations.
What does Condition 1 cover?
It applies to all four assessment tasks and prohibits generative AI from producing assessment material or content. Retain human authorship and seek authorised clarification for uncertain tool boundaries.
Which source wins when documents conflict?
Do not invent a hierarchy that the materials do not state. Preserve each instruction with its location, check the current operational activity and obtain an authorised clarification before acting.
How often should the control map be reviewed?
Review it when each activity opens, before an irreversible topic or group decision, at draft audit and immediately before upload. A dated re-check is especially important for the three AT1 slot strings, stale AT2 and AT3 dates, the referencing conflict and Handbook-dependent hurdle information.
Assessment move
Create one control row per task with current Moodle link, output, weight, timing, word or time limit, source minimum, referencing instruction, rubric and integrity condition. Add a provenance column and a re-check date. For AT1, preserve all three slot wordings and record the allocated week. For AT2 and AT3, label stale strings and do not transfer them into the S2 calendar. For the referencing conflict, quote APA and Harvard with their locations and request official clarification. Keep the unit-level Handbook check separate from AT3's task-level hurdle statement. Before every upload, open the actual file, verify the activity and save the receipt. Run a weekly control review in two passes. The first is documentary: open each current activity, compare dates and instructions with the control row and mark the exact place where a change appears. The second is production: identify the next irreversible decision, such as topic commitment, group slot, evidence boundary or upload, and schedule a checkpoint before it. Maintain separate columns for official text, working interpretation and confirmed instruction so an inference never becomes a quoted rule. Use colour or status labels for unresolved conflicts, not for the importance of tasks. When advice arrives, record who or which authorised page supplied it and the date. A screenshot alone can lose context, so retain the activity title and surrounding instruction. Recheck source minima and styles task by task at outline, draft and final stages. Audit the four weights only once; the recurring risk is denominator drift inside AT1, not arithmetic. Close each assessment row only after content, format, integrity, activity and receipt have all been checked.
Working through Assessment Map: Four Tasks, Zero Exam, and the No-GenAI Rule in MGF5020? Sia is AskSia’s AI Management tutor — ask any MGF5020 Assessment Map: Four Tasks, Zero Exam, and the No-GenAI Rule question and get a clear, step-by-step explanation grounded in how MGF5020 is taught and assessed. Read this chapter free, then take your hardest questions to Sia.
