ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title IAP607 Independent Critical Analysis Project
Assessment Group poster presentation and defence
Individual/Group Group (3 max.)
Length 10 minutes presentation + 5 minutes Q&A
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
a) Critically reflect upon and apply disciplinary methods and approaches in the design of the hotel analysis.
b) Critically review the literature as it applies to the hotel analysis.
c) Collect and synthesise data using appropriate consultancy tools.
d) Critically reflect upon and interpret information to reach meaningful conclusions and make recommendations.
e) Communicate the hotel analysis in appropriate academic language and structure.
Submission Due by 8:00am ACST/ACDT/AEST/ADST – Week 9 Day of presentation
Weighting 20%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context:
This assessment aims to equip students with the ability to formulate, execute and present a research project in response to a hotel business-related problem. This assessment will provide students the opportunity to interpret, report and share the findings of their research with their peers and members of faculty.
Task Instructions:
For this assessment, you will present your research project and findings in a 15-minute presentation. The presentation will comprise a 10-minute presentation followed by a 5-minute Q&A session which serves as a defence of your research project. To do this, you will be required to create a poster presentation that incorporates the following content:
Research context and Research objectives
Highlight the reason(s) why this topic was chosen for the project along with the importance and impact this research will have in solving a hotel industry, business-related problem or issue.
State the objectives and/or research questions of this specific research project.
Literature review
A summary of the literature and key concepts should be defined, described and evidenced. Identify the gap(s) that your research aimed to address (e.g., contradictions in existing studies, different schools of thought or areas that are under-researched).
Methodology
This section should detail how the research was designed and conducted by addressing the following areas:
• the research approach used (e.g., exploratory, explanatory, descriptive or causal research) and how this approach fits the research problem.
• research design and data collection method(s)
• research population, sampling method, sample size
• data analysis techniques
• criteria that justify the quality of the study and, thus, limitations of the study
Findings and discussions
The purpose of the discussion is to interpret and describe the significance of your findings and to explain any new understanding or fresh insights about the problem after you have taken the findings into consideration of previous literature.
Recommendations and areas for future research
Outline practical recommendations you would make to industry/business resulting from the outcomes of this research. Suggest areas for further research to better understand or clarify gaps arising from the study.
References
In text citations should be used in the poster. A reference list is not required on the poster. Citations on the poster should have a relevant reference in the list provided in the written report (Assessment
2).
During the presentation, you must comply with the following expectations:
• be well groomed
• be on time and ensure all necessary technology is functioning (speaker, mic and camera)
• be concise and not go over the time allotment assigned
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here in the Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills website.
Group Contract and Peer Evaluation Instructions
At the beginning of the term/project:
• All students taking part in a group assessment should draw up and sign a group contract using the template provided on Blackboard, in the Assessments section. This step should be completed at least two weeks prior to your assessment due date. Your Learning Facilitators may ask to review the contracts when deemed necessary (for example, when there is a lack of progress or conflict among group members).
During the project:
• You should keep records of communication and drafts. Any serious concerns about individual group member’s contribution should be brought to the attention of your Learning Facilitator as soon as they occur or at least two weeks before the due date, whichever is earlier.
At the end of the project/assessment submission:
• When submitting your group assessment, you are required to attach the group contract as an appendix of your submission. You are reminded not to ‘recycle’ (self-plagiarise) contracts from other assessments. Sections on deliverables, timeline and expectations, in particular, should be unique to each assessment or project. Self-plagiarism constitutes a breach of Academic Integrity and can lead to penalties to the assessment or subject.
• The group contract accounts for 10% of your assessment grade, as indicated in the marking rubric. The group contract will be assessed based on its effectiveness in stipulating targets, plans and expectations. It should be clear, realistic and appropriate for the nature of the project.
• A peer evaluation form is available on Blackboard in the Assessments section. This can be used when you feel there was unequal or unfair contribution from other group member(s) which you would like to raise with your Learning Facilitator. You must provide clear supporting evidence (e.g. records of communication and drafts) and email it to your Learning Facilitator together with a completed peer evaluation form by the assessment due date. Otherwise, the allegations will be dismissed.
• If you have been accused of not contributing equally or fairly to a group assessment, you will be contacted by your Learning Facilitator and given three working days to respond to the allegation and provide supporting evidence. If there is no response within three working days of contact, your Learning Facilitator will determine an appropriate mark based on the evidence available. This may differ from the mark awarded to your group members and would reflect your contribution in terms of quantity and quality of work.
Submission Instructions
1. To be submitted as a PDF file according to the submission deadline stated on Page 1.
2. A TUA Group Assignment Cover Sheet is to be attached to your submission.
3. Only one copy of the presentation is to be submitted, with names of all group members listed on the cover sheet.
4. All referencing (in-text referencing) must be in accordance with the APA 7th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Blackboard.
5. Torrens University Australia peer evaluation form MUST be completed and submitted to your lecturer, by the means designated by them, no later than the presentation day.
6. See marking rubric attached at the end of this document. You do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
Academic integrity declaration
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Rubric
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard)
0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
RESEARCH CONTENT
Background, aim, objectives, literature & gaps, findings,
discussions, conclusion
30% Insufficient content reflects a lack of understanding of the relevant subject area and/or task at hand. May have excluded industry or academic perspectives of the research topic.
Insufficient explanation of relevant concepts with limited (if any) examples offered.
Key parts of the project were not addressed, were too scant in detail and/or were not supported by evidence. Sufficient content reflects an understanding of the relevant subject area but may not include both industry and academic perspectives.
Attempted explanation of relevant concepts with some examples of contextual applications offered.
Some key parts of the project were not addressed, were too scant in detail and/or were not always supported by evidence. Substantial content that reflects a solid understanding of the relevant subject area from industry and academic perspectives.
Solid explanation of relevant concepts and supported by examples of contextual applications.
All key parts of the project addressed and supported by evidence, with some sections stronger than others. Detailed content that reflects a strong understanding of the relevant subject area from industry and academic perspectives.
Advanced understanding of concepts and their various applications has been shown.
All key parts of the project addressed and supported by evidence. Comprehensive content that reflects an integrated understanding of the relevant subject area from industry and academic perspectives.
Mastery of concepts and their applications in various situations.
Balanced level of detail offered in each section with all key aspects of the research project addressed and supported by evidence.
QUALITY - VISUAL
Uses and selects material and data in a way that is clear, meaningful and presented in a way that is engaging to the audience.
30% Inappropriate selection of material resulted in a message and information that was unclear.
Lack of images, icons and/or other graphics meant that concepts were not clearly communicated.
Data was presented in a way that was not appropriate or misleading.
Size, scale and/or colour of fonts, graphics and other icons were inconsistent. Choices in visual presentation Presentation of selected material resulted in a message and information that was not always clear.
Use of few if any images, icons and/or other graphics to communicate concepts.
Data was presented in a way that was wasn’t always meaningful or appropriate.
Size, scale and colour of fonts, graphics and other icons were not consistent and, at times, Clear presentation of selected material so the message and information were generally clear.
Use of some images, icons and/or other graphics to communicate concepts.
Data was presented in a way that was meaningful and but was unclear in parts.
Size, scale and colour of fonts, graphics and other icons were Creative presentation of material resulting in clarity of message and information.
Use of images, icons and/or other graphics to communicate key concepts.
Data was presented in a way that was meaningful and clear.
Size, scale and colour of fonts, graphics and other icons was Imaginative and creative presentation of material resulting in clarity of message and information.
Appropriate use of images, icons and/or other graphics to communicate key concepts.
Data was presented in a way that was meaningful, clear and impactful.
Size, scale and colour of fonts, graphics and other icons was consistent throughout and
made it difficult for the audience to read or engage.
Contains several typos or errors.
made it difficult for the audience to read.
Contains typos or errors not always consistent and made for easy audience reading.
May contain a typo or error consistent and made for audience engagement.
Free from typos or errors made for strong audience engagement.
Free from any typos or errors
QUALITY - SPOKEN
Articulates a clear, comprehensive and logical progression through the research process with the right balance of detail for the audience.
30% Poor timing meant that the team did not take advantage of their time. Lack of rehearsal reflected in poor or no cohesion.
Speakers’ speech was unclear, rushed and/or too softly spoken to be clearly understood. There was little connection with the audience.
Verbal presentation lacked confidence expected from a team strong topic knowledge.
Questions were answered by one member or went unanswered – suggesting gaps in knowledge. Timing was fair, additional rehearsal would have helped transition between speakers. The presenters did not always reflect cohesion.
Speakers’ speech was clear and evenly paced, one or more speakers may have spoken too softly or quickly to maintain connection with the audience.
Verbal presentation was confident in parts reflecting some good areas of knowledge.
Questions were answered by one member and reflected different levels of knowledge across the team. Well timed and rehearsed with fairly good transition from one speaker to the next. A solid team of presenters but did not always reflect cohesion.
Speakers’ speech was usually clear and evenly paced, one or more speakers may have spoken too softly or quickly to maintain connection with the audience.
Verbal presentation was confident in parts reflecting some good areas of knowledge.
Questions were answered by one member and reflected different levels of knowledge across the team. Well timed and rehearsed with smooth transition from one speaker to the next. A cohesive team of presenters
Speakers’ speech was clear and effective using an even pace and tone/intonation to keep audience engaged.
Verbal presentation was confident and spoken with knowledge.
Questions were answered with confidence and reflected knowledge across the team. Well timed with seamless transition from one speaker to the next. A very cohesive team of presenters.
Speakers’ speech was clear and effective using an even pace and tone/intonation to keep audience engaged.
Verbal presentation was confident and spoken with knowledge and conviction.
Questions were answered with confidence and reflected strong knowledge across the team.
GROUP CONTRACT
10%
The group contract has been poorly completed. Targets, plans and expectations have not been clearly defined and are not achievable.
The group contract has not been completed or submitted.
The group has partially completed the contract. Some targets, plans and performance expectations have not been identified and clearly defined. Some targets, plans and performance expectations are not achievable. Roles are not always clear.
The group has completed the contract. The group contract contains somewhat clear, precise and achievable targets and plans. It also stipulates performance expectations for each group member or role.
The group has thoroughly completed the contract. The group contract contains well thought out targets, plans and performance expectations. There are clear explanations in relation to performance expectations for each group member or role.
The group has completed the contract to an exceptional level. The group contract contains clear, precise and achievable targets and plans which are detailed and well justified. There are clear and well- structured explanations in relation to performance expectations for each group member or role.
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Critically reflect upon and apply disciplinary methods and approaches in the design of the hotel analysis
SLO b) Critically review the literature as it applies to the hotel analysis
SLO c) Collect and synthesise data using appropriate consultancy tools
SLO d) Critically reflect upon and interpret information to reach meaningful conclusions and make recommendations
SLO e) Communicate the hotel analysis in appropriate academic language and structure