ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Title PDH301 Planning and Designing Hospitality Venues
Assessment Assessment 1: Feasibility Study Report
Individual/Group Individual
Length 1,500 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes a) Identify the stages and key issues in the planning and design process related to hospitality venues
b) Evaluate the internal and external factors that affect an enterprise’s market position
d) Identify and assess the key factors of a feasibility study for hospitality venues
Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 3 (week 6)
Weighting 30%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context:
This assessment is aimed at consolidating knowledge from Modules 1 and 2. It supports students in developing their skills in research and knowledge of hospitality venue planning. Students will apply research to validate a current hospitality venue’s feasibility and determine planning and design outcomes.
Instructions:
Students are required to visit and collect information on two (2) different types of hospitality venues, including restaurants, coffee shops, hotels, nightclubs, and shopping centre food courts. You will then develop a report to assess the feasibility of the two different venue types based on their physical planning and design aspects.
The report will include:
• A summary review of the venue types selected • Details of the selected venues, including:
o Business name o Location o Target market o Average customer spend
PDH301 Assessment 1 Brief_2018 Page 1 of 5 o Hours of operation vs. peak periods o Type of licences required o Competitive point of difference
o Management / employee skill set requirements
• Visual representation of the venues
• The impact of design planning on the business
It is recommended that you use the following structure:
• Cover page
• Executive Summary highlighting the main findings of the report (not included in word count)
• Table of contents (not included in word count)
• Introduction that covers the background, aim and scope of the report
• Statement supporting the implementation of feasibility studies for hospitality venue planning
• Venue 1:
o Short introduction to the selected venue, including a summary of its history and a critique of its position in market
o Body of work – discussion on the venue’s alignment with planning and design paradigms and their impact on the customer service experience
• Venue 2:
o Short introduction to the selected venue, including a summary of its history and a critique of its position in market
o Body of work – discussion on the venue’s alignment with planning and design paradigms and their impact on the customer service experience
• Conclusion, summarising the main findings within the report
• Reference list (containing a minimum of 5 academic and 5 non-academic sources, APA referencing style)
• Appendices
Please review the Grading Rubrics for a detailed breakdown on how your work will be assessed.
Submission Instructions:
Submit report via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu in PDH301 Planning Designing Hospitality Venues. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
PDH301 Assessment 1 Brief_2018 Page 2 of 5
Learning Rubric: Assessment 1 – Feasibility study report
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75 -84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Grading scheme Fail grade will be awarded if a student is unable to demonstrate satisfactory academic performance in the subject or has failed to complete the required assessment points in accordance with the subject’s required assessment points. Pass is awarded for work showing as satisfactory achievement of all learning outcomes and an adequate understanding of theory and application of skills. APA academic referencing system is consistently used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. Credit is awarded for work showing a more than satisfactory achievement of all learning outcomes and a more than adequate understanding of theory and application of skills. APA academic referencing system is consistently used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. Distinction is awarded for work of superior quality in achieving all learning outcomes and a superior integration of understanding of theory and application of skills. Evidence of in-depth research, reading, analysis and evaluation is demonstrated. APA academic referencing system is consistently used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. High Distinction is awarded for work of outstanding quality in achieving all learning outcomes together with outstanding integration and understanding of theory and application of skills. Evidence of in-depth research, reading, analysis, and original and creative thought is demonstrated. APA academic referencing system is consistently used and sources are appropriately acknowledged.
Content and
purpose
20% Does not meet minimum standard, demonstrating no awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Lacks a clear focus with large sections of unnecessary or irrelevant information included. Content is disjointed and is not aligned to determine the feasibility of hospitality venues. Meets minimum standard, demonstrating limited awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Ill-defined focus with some unnecessary or irrelevant information included. Majority of content is disjointed and is not all aligned to determine the feasibility of hospitality venues. Progressing beyond minimum standard, demonstrating consistent awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment..
Broad focus with occasional unnecessary or irrelevant information included. Most content is clearly aligned to determine the feasibility of hospitality venues. Mostly relevant academic sources used. Exceeds minimum standard, demonstrating an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Clear focus with minimal unnecessary or irrelevant information included. All content is clearly aligned to determine the feasibility of hospitality venues. All academic sources used, mainly relevant. Exceeds minimum standard and exhibits high levels of
application.
Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of determining the feasibility of hospitality venues. All academic sources used, showing depth of content and purpose.
Knowledge and
understanding
50% Limited understanding of the discipline of undertaking a feasibility analysis. Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application / recommendations based on analysis.
Does not evaluate the impact of planning and design on two hospitality venues.
Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Knowledge and understanding of the discipline of undertaking a feasibility analysis. Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research and course materials.
Analysis and evaluation do not reflect expert judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability.
Discusses the impact of planning and design on the feasibility of two hospitality venues.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the discipline of undertaking a feasibility analysis. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research and course materials.
Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to research analysis.
Evaluates the impact of planning and design on the feasibility of two hospitality venue types.
Demonstrates the capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Identify logical flaws in chosen venues’ planning and design. Questions viewpoints of experts. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of planning and design paradigms and justified recommendations linked to research analysis.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research, course materials and extended reading.
Evaluates the impact of planning and design on the feasibility of two hospitality venue types, giving consideration to operational practices and the customer service experience.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Viewpoint of experts is/are subject to questioning. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgment, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability.
Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated from the research, course materials and extended reading.
Strong application by way of planning and design paradigms, evaluating its impact on the feasibility of two hospitality venue types with a focus on operational practices and the customer service experience.
Recommendations are
clearly justified based on the research analysis. Applies knowledge to new situations / other cases.
Identifies gaps in knowledge. Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations / further learning.
Structure
10% Discussion points do not flow smoothly or logically, with no connection between ideas.
Paragraphs not used, or lacked structure. Minimal structure evident however applicable points are loosely connected.
Limited use of paragraphs. Good structure with some applicable points presented in a logical order.
Paragraph structure used throughout.
The report includes an executive summary. Good structure evident with most applicable points presented in a clear and logical order.
All paragraphs are well organised.
Executive summary highlights the main findings of the report. Excellent structure evident with all applicable points presented in a clear and logical order.
Paragraphs are well defined and organised to a high quality.
Executive summary synthesises the main findings of the report.
Research and
Referencing
10% No evidence of research.
No academic sources used.
Sources of information are not referenced using the APA style.
Limited evidence of research. Minimal academic sources used.
Many errors in APA referencing style.
Some evidence of research. Limited academic sources used.
Few errors in APA referencing style.
Clear evidence of research. Several quality academic sources used.
One or two errors in APA referencing style.
Evidence of in-depth research. Many high quality academic sources used.
No errors in APA referencing style.
Format and
Presentation
10% Many spelling mistakes and/or grammatical errors.
Irrelevant or no images / multimedia used. A number of spelling mistakes and/or grammatical errors.
Limited use of images or multimedia. A few spelling mistakes and/or grammatical errors. A couple of relevant images or multimedia used. Minimal spelling mistakes and/or grammatical errors.
Good use of engaging and relevant images or multimedia. No spelling mistakes or grammatical errors.
Excellent use of engaging and relevant images or multimedia.