TOUR2001 TOURIST & VISITOR BEHAVIOUR 代写

  • 100%原创包过,高质代写&免费提供Turnitin报告--24小时客服QQ&微信:120591129
  • TOUR2001 TOURIST & VISITOR BEHAVIOUR
    Facility Design Assessment Feedback (45%)
    Student 1  Student ID  Marker  Tutorial  Date  Grade
    Student 2 (if pairs)  Student ID 
    Criteria  7 Exemplary  6 Superior  5 Good  4 Adequate  3 Unsatisfactory (Fail)
    Understanding of
    the design concept/
    proposal
    You provide a detailed and
    comprehensive introduction to your
    design concept
    You provide a detailed introduction
    to your design concept
    You provide a reasonably
    detailed introduction to your
    design concept
    You introduce your design concept,
    but some details are lacking
    Your introduction to the design
    concept is brief and lacking in most
    details
    Your design proposal is very creative
    and has been strongly and
    comprehensively justified with
    relevant, focused literature
    Your design proposal shows some
    creativity and has been strongly
    justified using relevant literature
    Your design proposal has been
    soundly justified, and is
    supported with reference to
    relevant literature
    Your design proposal has been
    justified but better use of relevant
    literature would strengthen this
    justification
    Your justification of the design
    proposal is poor, with limited
    evidence of relevant literature to
    support your justification
    Analysis and
    discussion of
    design proposal
    components
    Supported with credible evidence,
    you have clearly identified and
    comprehensively profiled distinct and
    relevant market segments
    Supported by sound evidence, you
    have clearly identified and profiled
    distinct and relevant market
    segments
    Supported by appropriate
    evidence, you have identified
    and profiled some distinct and
    relevant market segments
    You have profiled some appropriate
    market segments but these profiles
    could be strengthened with more
    credible evidence
    Your market segments lack
    distinction; your profiles are often
    simplistic and/or not well supported
    by research
    You have cleverly drawn on
    motivational theory to develop a
    comprehensive and convincing
    profile of the motives for each
    segment
    You have carefully drawn on
    motivational theory to develop a
    significant profile of the motives for
    each segment
    You have drawn on motivational
    theory to develop a useful profile
    of the motives for each segment
    With some reference to motivational
    theory, you have developed an
    adequate profile of the motives for
    most market segments
    You have shown little evidence of
    understanding and applying
    motivational theory to describe
    market segments
    You have provided detailed, creative
    and well justified suggestions for the
    positioning and image of your
    facility
    You have provided interesting and
    valid suggestions for the positioning
    and image of your facility
    You have provided sound
    justification for most suggestions
    relating to the positioning and
    image of your facility
    Though not always justified, you
    have provided some suitable
    suggestions for the positioning
    and/or image of your facility
    Your positioning and image ideas
    are often weak and/or not informed
    by theory
    The layout of your facility has been
    comprehensively considered, with
    strong and relevant justification given
    for decisions regarding physical
    space, visitor management and
    orientation
    The layout of your facility has been
    carefully considered, with relevant
    justification given for decisions
    regarding physical space, visitor
    management and orientation
    The layout of your facility has
    been considered, with sound
    justification given for most
    decisions regarding physical
    space, visitor management and
    orientation
    Adequate attention has been paid to
    the layout of your facility, with
    justification given for some
    decisions regarding physical space,
    visitor management and/or
    orientation
    There are practical issues with the
    layout of your facility; decisions
    made regarding physical space,
    visitor management and/or
    orientation tend to be descriptive
    and/or unjustified
    Your approach to experience
    design and visitor satisfaction is
    comprehensive, insightful and
    carefully considered
    Your approach to experience design
    and visitor satisfaction is insightful
    and relevant
    Your approach to experience
    design and visitor satisfaction is
    appropriate
    Though not insightful, you have
    suggested some useful approaches
    to managing experiences and
    satisfaction
    You have proposed very simple
    and/or ineffective strategies for
    managing experiences and
    satisfaction
    Creation and
    application of
    support materials
    Your illustrations are detailed,
    creative and professional, and
    enhance the communication of key
    aspects of the proposal
    Your illustrations are highly effective
    in communicating the key aspects of
    the proposal
    Your illustrations are mostly
    effective in communicating the
    key elements of the facility
    While illustrations have been
    included, a better design and
    presentation would enhance their
    usefulness
    Your illustrations are too simplistic,
    inaccurate and/or have been poorly
    designed
    Your carefully created support
    materials add impact to your report,
    enhancing the reader’s
    understanding of your proposal
    Your well-created support materials
    enhance the reader’s understanding
    of your proposal
    Your choice of support materials
    assists the reader to understand
    your proposal
    The reader’s understanding of your
    proposal has been assisted by
    some of your support materials
    Poor choice of support materials
    has impacted on the reader’s
    understanding of your proposal
    Criteria  7 Exemplary  6 Superior  5 Good  4 Adequate  3 Unsatisfactory (Fail)
    Research and
    discussion
    You have produced a fully
    comprehensive and interesting
    design proposal
    You have produced a detailed and
    interesting design proposal
    You have produced a
    reasonably detailed design
    proposal
    While adequate, your design
    proposal could be enhanced with
    more detailed information
    Your design proposal lacks
    detailed information
    Creative and logical links have been
    skillfully drawn between the different
    components relative to the design
    proposal
    Logical links have been drawn
    between the different components
    relative to the design proposal
    Mostly logical links have been
    drawn between the different
    components relative to the
    design proposal
    Though not always logical, some
    links have been drawn between the
    different components relative to the
    design proposal
    There has been few attempts to
    draw links between the different
    components relative to the design
    proposal
    Your discussion is cleverly supported
    by extensive and credible evidence
    drawn from relevant sources, and a
    sophisticated synthesis of materials
    Your discussion is supported by
    credible evidence drawn from
    relevant sources, and a skillful
    synthesis of materials
    Your discussion is supported by
    useful evidence drawn from
    mostly relevant sources, and
    appropriate synthesis of
    materials
    Your discussion shows evidence of
    some appropriate research but
    materials require better synthesis
    Much of your discussion is
    unsupported by credible sources,
    and/or materials lack synthesis
    It is extremely likely that your design
    proposal will be favourably
    considered by members of industry
    It is likely that your design proposal
    will be favourably considered
    With some minor changes, it is
    likely that your design proposal
    will be favourably considered
    With mostly minor and occasional
    major change there is some chance
    your design proposal will be
    considered
    Unless major changes are
    undertaken, it is highly unlikely that
    your design proposal will be
    considered
    Report genre and
    mechanics
    Your title page is attractive and your report is professionally presented
    following the parameters and guidelines provided
    The format chosen for your title page and report are appropriate but
    stronger adherence to the parameters and guidelines provided would
    improve your report’s appeal and presentation
    The format chosen for your title
    page & much of your report is not
    of an acceptable business standard
    Strongly supported by your well-designed table of contents, there is an
    obvious and logical connection between your ideas/themes, enhancing the
    structure, synthesis and readability of your report
    Despite some minor errors/oversights in your table of contents,
    ideas/themes have been developed; however, connections are not
    always obvious/logical which sometimes impacts on the flow and
    readability of your report
    In many places, including your
    table of contents, sections and/or
    ideas/themes do not logically flow
    or link
    Appendices contain relevant information that complement and support your
    report
    Though not always technically correct in its use, some relevant
    information has been included in your appendices
    Appendices contain superfluous
    information and/or are incorrectly
    used
    Your writing is fluent, lively and interesting  Your writing is fluent but not always interesting  Your writing tends to be disjointed
    Correct grammar and spelling is used throughout, with the occasional minor
    error
    Mostly correct grammar and spelling is used throughout, with minor
    errors and the occasional major error
    Spelling and/or grammar is
    consistently incorrect
    In-text referencing and the resultant reference list are correct, with only the
    occasional minor error
    Mostly correct in-text referencing and reference list, with minor errors
    and the occasional major error
    In-text referencing and/or reference
    list is inadequate and/or often
    incorrect
    Figure and table titles are numbered and used correctly and are referred to in
    the text of the proposal
    Figure and table titles are not always numbered and used correctly
    and/or are not referred to in the text of the proposal
    Figure and table titles not included
    and/or not well worded and/or not
    referred to in text
    You have adhered to an acceptable word limit range
    The word limit just falls outside an acceptable range  You have not adhered to the word
    limit
    NB: Most of the above points for report genre/mechanics must be highlighted
    to support an overall grade of 6 or 7.
    NB: Most of the above points for report genre/mechanics must be
    highlighted to support an overall grade of 4 or 5.
    Grade 2 Does not meet the minimum requirements for Grade 3  Grade 1 Fail with serious deficiencies; major components are missing OR failure to submit