Name: | Ben Parkinson | ||
Project Title: | Centralising Australian Government Cybersecurity | ||
Week No: | 4 | Date: | 9/08/2020 |
Planning | |||
Milestone: | Planned: | Actual: | Comment: |
A2: Document partially drafted | 09/08/2020 | 09/08/2020 | Document drafted Submitted to TurnItIn Originality report not done |
Issues | |||
Description: | Date: | Action/Results | Finished (Y/N) |
Have not completed originality report | 09/08/2020 | Complete on 10/08/2020 | N |
Week 4
Week 4 – First draft ready
I’ve made really good progress and have now completed the first draft. I haven’t updated the WBS with the swap of the WBS work with the other documentation work as I had issues with dependencies
Week 4 – Draft underway
In developing the proposal I decided to review some literature on how to undertake literature reviews. There’s so much more to it than what is normally given credit. I’m taking on the approach provided by Fred Pyrczak’s book, Evaluating research in academic journals: a practical guide to realistic evaluation which I feel works well with the outcome I’m attempting to achieve.
I’ve broken down my document pretty much in line with the template provided in the Subject Outline, which is:
- Title
- Rationale
- Problem Domain
- Purpose and Justification
- Supervisor Approval
- Research Challenges / Questions
- Conceptual or Theoretical Framework
- Methodology
- Analysis of sources of information
- Research Method
- Data collection method
- Ethical Issues
- Compliance Requirements
- Project Plan
- Duration
- Deliverables
- Work Breakdown Structure
- Gantt Chart
- Risk Analysis
- References