Call us

Auditing: Case Study

Order this Paper

This assignment is to be completed in groups of three and comprises twenty per-cent of the
marks for this course. There are four questions each worth five marks each (approx. 2000 words
in total)
Assessment Criteria:
Student work will generally be assessed in terms of the following criteria:
1. Effectiveness of communication – i.e. readability, legibility, grammar, spelling,
neatness, completeness and presentation will be a minimum threshold requirement for
all written work submitted for assessment. Work that is illegible or incomprehensible
and does not meet the minimum requirement will be awarded a fail grade.
2. Demonstrated understanding – This will be evidenced by the student’s ability to be
dialectical in the discussion of contentious issues.
3. Evidence of research – This will be evidenced by the references made to the statutes,
auditing standards, books, journal articles and inclusion of a bibliography.
1. All written work must conform with the Federation University General Guide for the
Presentation of Academic Work.
2. For all written work students must ensure that they submit their own original work. Any act of plagiarism will be severely penalised.
Plagiarism is presenting someone else work as your own and is a serious offence with serious consequences. As set out in the University Regulation 6.1.1, students who are caught
plagiarising will, for a first offence, be given a zero mark for that task. A second offence will
result in a failing grade for the course(s) involved and any subsequent offence will be referred
to the Student Discipline Committee. Student must be aware of the University Regulation 6.1.1
Student Plagiarism.
Students must:
? fully reference the source(s) of all material, even if you have re-expressed the ideas,
facts or descriptions; ? acknowledge all direct quotations; and ? not submit work that has been researched and written by another person.


Question 1.
Enquiries into very many received tenets and commonly presumed truths, also known simply as Pseudodoxia Epidemica or Vulgar Errors, is a work by Thomas Browne challenging and refuting the ‘vulgar’ or common errors and superstitions of his age. Browne’s three determinants for obtaining truth were firstly, the authority of past authors, secondly, the act of reason and lastly, empirical experience.

E.J. Merton summarised the ambiguities of Browne’s scientific view-point thus “Here is Browne’s scientific point of view in a nutshell. One lobe of his brain wants to  study facts and test hypotheses on the basis of them, the other is fascinated by mystic symbols and analogies.” Discus in terms of accounting first and then in relation to auditing

Question 2.
Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to fix. What does this say about the auditor/management relationship?

Question 3.
This is Martin Shkreli Who is he and what does his story tell us about corporations, shareholders, accounting and
auditing – if anything.

Question 4.
“If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I’d spend six hours sharpening my ax.”
Abraham Lincoln What does this mean in the context of auditing and auditors

Order this Paper

Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments are closed.

Powered by WordPress | Designed by: Premium WordPress Themes | Thanks to Themes Gallery, Bromoney and Wordpress Themes