Learning Goal: I’m working on a cyber security multi-part question and need supp

Learning Goal: I’m working on a cyber security multi-part question and need support to help me learn.Project 2: Cloud Vendor PresentationHide Assignment InformationInstructionsIn this project, you will develop a detailed comparative analysis of cloud vendors and their services. A comparative analysis provides an item-by-item comparison of two or more alternatives, processes, products, or systems. In this case, you will compare the pros/cons of the cloud service providers in terms of security, ease of use, service models, services/tools they provide, pricing, technical support, cloud service providers’ infrastructure, and architecture model.You will present your findings to the owner of the company in a narrated PowerPoint presentation with 10 to 20 slides. Use the Cloud Presentation Template.This resource can help you prepare and record your presentation: Presentation Resources.Presentation GuidelinesYour presentation should be comprised of the following:One to two slides on the company profile.
One to two slides on what the company is struggling with.
One to two slides on current infrastructure.
Three to six slides on the top three cloud services providers. Include their service models (i.e., SaaS, PaaS, IaaS), services/tools/solutions (i.e., compute, storage, database, developer tools, analytics tools, networking and content delivery, customer engagement), pricing, accessibility, technical support for companies, global infrastructure.
One to two slides on a recommended cloud service provider based on the comparative analysis and the cloud vendor’s abilities to meet the service needs of the company.
One slide on the conclusion.
All slides must be narrated by you, the student.
How Will My Work Be Evaluated?As a professional, you will likely make presentations to customers, client audiences, and management. By summarizing your results and recommendations in an effective presentation, you are demonstrating how you use your technical knowledge to convey your ideas to others in a professional setting. Your ability to express recommendations to decision makers with the right mix of technical detail in an accepted format is an important workplace and career skill.The following evaluation criteria aligned to the competencies will be used to grade your assignment:1.1.1: Articulate the main idea and purpose of a communication.
1.1.2: Support the main idea and purpose of a communication.
2.1.1: Identify the issue or problem under consideration.
2.2.2: Evaluate sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility.
2.3.1: State conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.
10.1.1: Identify the problem to be solved.
10.1.2: Gather project requirements to meet stakeholder needs.
10.1.3: Define the specifications of required technologies.
13.1.1: Create documentation appropriate to the stakeholder.
13.2.1: Evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.
When you are finished, click “add a file” to upload your work, then click the Submit button.Hide RubricsRubric Name: Project 2: Cloud Vendor PresentationPrint RubricThis table lists criteria and criteria group names in the first column. The first row lists level names and includes scores if the rubric uses a numeric scoring method. You can give feedback on each criterion by tabbing to the add feedback buttons in the table.CriteriaExceeds Performance RequirementsMeets Performance RequirementsApproaches Performance RequirementsDoes Not Meet Performance RequirementsCriterion Score1.1.1: Articulate the main idea and purpose of a communication.6 pointsArticulates fully and clearly the main idea and purpose of the communication.5.1 pointsArticulates the main idea and purpose of a communication.4.5 pointsAttempts to articulate the main idea and or purpose of the communication, but one or both is not clear.0 pointsDoes not attempt to articulate the main idea and purpose of communication.Score of 1.1.1: Articulate the main idea and purpose of a communication.,/ 6Criterion score has been overridden1.1.2: Support the main idea and purpose of a communication.6 pointsSupports fully and appropriately the main idea and purpose of communication.5.1 pointsSupports the main idea and purpose of communication.4.5 pointsAttempts to support the main idea and/or purpose of the communication, but the support is lacking in some areas.0 pointsDoes not support the main idea or purpose of communication.Score of 1.1.2: Support the main idea and purpose of a communication.,/ 6Criterion score has been overridden2.1.1: Identify the issue or problem under consideration.6 pointsIdentifies the issue or problem under consideration in a clear and thorough manner.5.1 pointsIdentifies the issue or problem under consideration.4.5 pointsAttempts to Identify the issue or problem under consideration, but there is a lack of clarity or thoroughness.0 pointsDoes not identify the issue or problem under consideration.Score of 2.1.1: Identify the issue or problem under consideration.,/ 6Criterion score has been overridden2.2.2: Evaluate sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility.6 pointsEvaluates sources of information thoroughly and appropriately on a topic for relevance and credibility.5.1 pointsEvaluates sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility.4.5 pointsAttempts to evaluate sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility, but there are gaps in the evaluation.0 pointsDoes not evaluate sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility.Score of 2.2.2: Evaluate sources of information on a topic for relevance and credibility.,/ 6Criterion score has been overridden2.3.1: State conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.6 pointsStates well-conceived conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.5.1 pointsStates conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.4.5 pointsAttempts to state conclusions or solutions, but they are not clear or precise.0 pointsDoes not state conclusions or solutions.Score of 2.3.1: State conclusions or solutions clearly and precisely.,/ 6Criterion score has been overridden10.1.1: Identify the problem to be solved.14 pointsPresents a relevant IT problem clearly and specifically.11.9 pointsPresents an IT problem that requires a solution.10.5 pointsIdentifies an IT problem but may lack clarity and/or specificity regarding the need to be addressed.0 pointsDoes not identify an IT problem to be solved.Score of 10.1.1: Identify the problem to be solved.,/ 14Criterion score has been overridden10.1.2: Gather project requirements to meet stakeholder needs.14 pointsIdentifies IT project requirements in a thorough and clear manner to meet all stated stakeholder needs.11.9 pointsIdentifies IT project requirements to meet stated stakeholder needs.10.5 pointsAttempts to identify project requirements to meet stakeholder needs, but there are gaps and/or lack of clarity.0 pointsDoes not identify IT project requirements to meet stated stakeholder needs.Score of 10.1.2: Gather project requirements to meet stakeholder needs.,/ 14Criterion score has been overridden10.1.3: Define the specifications of required technologies.14 pointsDefines thoroughly and clearly the specifications of required technologies.11.9 pointsDefines the specifications of required technologies.10.5 pointsAttempts to define the specifications of required technologies, but there are gaps and/or lack of clarity.0 pointsDoes not define the specifications of required technologies.Score of 10.1.3: Define the specifications of required technologies.,/ 14Criterion score has been overridden13.1.1: Create documentation appropriate to the stakeholder.14 pointsCreates thorough and accurate IT documentation that exceeds requirements.11.9 pointsCreates IT documentation that meets requirements.10.5 pointsCreates IT documentation that lacks detail and/or does not fully meet requirements.0 pointsDoes not create appropriate IT documentation.Score of 13.1.1: Create documentation appropriate to the stakeholder.,/ 14Criterion score has been overridden13.2.1: Evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.14 pointsEvaluate and provides detailed justification for vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.11.9 pointsEvaluates vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.10.5 pointsAttempts to evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements, but some recommendations lack detail or do not consider context.0 pointsDoes not evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.Score of 13.2.1: Evaluate vendor recommendations in the context of organization requirements.,/ 14Criterion score has been overriddenRubric Total ScoreTotalScore of Project 2: Cloud Vendor Presentation,/ 100Criterion score has been overriddenOverall ScoreOverall ScoreExceeds Performance Requirements90 points minimumMeets Performance Requirements80 points minimumApproaches Performance Requirements70 points minimumDoes Not Meet Performance Requirements0 points minimum
Requirements: Long

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *