44-703865 Strategic Event Creation Assessment Brief Task 1, 2024-25 | SHU

Criteria & Weighting

0-5

Zero

Zero: 0-5

6- 19%

Fail

Very Low Fail: 6-19

20-49%

Fail insufficient

Borderline Fail: 40-49

Mid Fail: 30-39

Low Fail: 20-29

50 - 59%

Pass

High pass: 57-59

Mid pass: 54-56

Low pass: 50-53

60-69%

Merit

High Merit: 67-69

Mid Merit: 64-66

Low Merit: 60-63

70-92%

Distinction

High distinction: 85-92

Mid distinction: 78-84

Low distinction: 70-77

93-100%

Distinction

Exceptional distinction: 93-100

0

10

25

35

45

50

55

58

62

65

68

74

81

89

96

Fail: Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty in some misconduct cases.

Fail

Knowledge and understanding is highly insufficient as the student is unable to evidence any meaningful understanding of taught concepts or methods; very limited evidence of reading and research to advance work; inadequate technical and practical skills as the student is unable to use and apply such skills to address problems or make judgements; limited or lack of understanding of the boundaries of the discipline and does not question received wisdom; approach to learning lacks autonomy and approach to tasks is not sustained; inability to communicate coherently.

Fail:

Knowledge and understanding is insufficient as the student only evidences an understanding of small subset of the taught concepts and techniques; fails to make sufficient links between known concepts and facts to adequately solve relevant aspects of the brief/problem; little ability to independently select and evaluate reading/research with almost total reliance on set sources and unsubstantiated arguments/methods; communication/presentation may be competent in places but fails to demonstrate structure, clarity and/or focus; inability to adequately define problems and make reasoned judgements; the general approach to tasks lacks rigor and competence.

Pass

Satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the area of study balanced towards the descriptive rather than critical or analytical and mostly confined to concepts that are not at the forefront of the discipline; evidence of some independent reading and research to advance work and inform arguments and approaches; Arguments and explanations are limited in range and depth although some are adequately supported by the literature albeit descriptively rather than critically; competently uses at least one taught media and communication method to communicate appropriately in familiar settings; although the approach applied to some aspects of the tasks may lack academic rigour, there are some clear areas of competence within the prescribed range. Relies on set sources to advance work/direct arguments and communicated in a way which shows clarity but structure may not always be coherent.

Merit

Very good knowledge and understanding is evidenced as the student is typically able to independently relate taught facts/concepts together some of which are at the forefront of the discipline; evidence of some competent independent inquiry operating with core concepts, methods and techniques to solve familiar problems; Arguments and explanations are provided that are typically supported by the literature and in some cases may challenge some received wisdoms; competently uses all taught media and communication methods to communicate effectively in a familiar settings; an academically rigorous approach applied to some aspects of the tasks is evidenced; some beyond the prescribed range, may rely on set sources to advance work/direct arguments; demonstrates autonomy in approach to learning.

Distinction

Excellent knowledge and understanding evidenced by some clear independent insight and critical awareness of relevant concepts some of which are at the forefront of the discipline; evidence of appropriate independent inquiry operating with core concepts, methods and techniques to solve complex problems in mostly familiar contexts; Arguments and explanations are provided that is well-supported by the literature and in some cases uses a range of media demonstrating an ability to communicate effectively in a limited number of formats using own style that is suited to both technical and non-technical audiences; a sustained academic approach to most aspects of the tasks is evidenced; one or more aspects of the academic work is beyond the prescribed range and evidences a competent understanding of all of the relevant taught content.

First

Exceptional breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding evidenced by own independent insight and critical awareness of relevant literature and concepts at the forefront of the discipline; evidence of extensive and appropriate independent inquiry operating with advanced concepts, methods and techniques to solve problems in unfamiliar contexts; Cogent arguments and explanations are consistently provided using a range of media demonstrating an ability to communicate effectively in a variety of formats using a sophisticated level of the English language in an eloquent and professional manner to both technical and non-technical audiences; a sustained academic approach to all aspects of the tasks is evidenced; academic work extends boundaries of the disciplines and is beyond expectation of the level and may achieve publishable or commercial standard.

Discussion of the strategic context and business environment affecting the client organisation

(Sections 1 & 2)

Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty for misconduct in some cases

No or very little understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment

No or very limited discussion of the factors affecting the business.

Demonstrates limited understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment

Demonstrates limited discussion of the factors affecting the business.

Demonstrates satisfactory understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment.

Adequate discussion of factors affecting the business, with and attempt at interpretation of how and why the strategic context for events matters.

Demonstrates very good understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment.

Insightful interpretation of how and why the strategic context for events matters.

Demonstrates an excellent understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment.

Detailed with insightful interpretation of how and why the strategic context for events matters.

Demonstrates an exceptional and extensive understanding of the client’s strategic context and business environment.

Detailed and insightful interpretation of how and why the strategic context for events matters.

Discussion of the stakeholders and relevant micro / macro factors affecting the client organisation

(Sections 3 & 4)

Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty for misconduct in some cases

No or very limited understanding of the attendees / wider stakeholders/ and other relevant micro and macro factors affecting the business and their event investments, and how and why they affect the event success.

Limited understanding of the attendees / wider stakeholders/ and other relevant micro and macro factors affecting the business and their event investments, and how and why they affect the event success.

Adequate discussion of the client’s stakeholders, that highlights why stakeholders matter in events. This is supported by a brief evaluation of who the key stakeholders are, and how important they are to the organisation.

There is some explanation of factors affecting the business and their event investments, and how and why they affect the event success.

Good discussion of the client’s stakeholders, that highlights why stakeholders matter in events. This is supported by a good evaluation of who the key stakeholders are, and how important they are to the organisation.

An excellent discussion of the client’s stakeholders, that highlights why stakeholders matter in events. This is supported by a through and detailed evaluation of who the key stakeholders are, and how important they are to the organisation.

Demonstrates an exceptional and critical understanding of the client’s key stakeholders and other relevant micro and macro factors surrounding the event proposal. Detailed evaluation of factors affecting the business, with insightful interpretation of how and why they affect the event investments.

Academic research and use of academic sources

Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty for misconduct in some cases

No or poor-quality research conducted.

No or limited reference list provided.

Limited evidence that appropriate research has been conducted.

A very limited reference list provided or sources are not appropriate / wide ranging enough.  Most sources drawn from those given in teaching material.

Evidence that appropriate research has been conducted.

An adequate reference list provided. Most sources drawn from those given in teaching material.

Evidence that a very good level of research has been conducted.

A rounded reference list provided, which uses high quality sources, some of which the student has identified themselves.

Evidence that extensive and in-depth research has been conducted using the most updated sources.

High quality sources are used, that the student has identified themselves.

Exceptional evidence that extensive and in-depth research has been conducted using the most updated sources.

High quality sources are used, that the student has identified themselves.

Presentation, communication and referencing style

Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty for misconduct in some cases

Weak illogical structure. Poor use of language.

Many grammatical/spelling/ typographical errors.

Limited or poor quality referencing in the report and / or in the reference list

Adequate communication which has some issues that mean it is not of passable standards.

Use of language is problematic, but does not prevent the reader understanding the key points

Grammatical/spelling/ typographical errors.

Errors in the reference list and citation style.

Adequate communication which uses appropriate structure for the piece of work. Fair use of language.

Some grammatical/spelling/ typographical errors.

Referencing is mainly correct.

Evidence that a very good level of research has been conducted. A rounded reference list provided, which uses high quality sources, some of which the student has identified themselves.

Strong logical structure. Excellent communication which uses appropriate structure for the piece of work.

Very few or no grammatical/spelling/ typographical errors.

Referencing is accurate and a comprehensive

Exceptional structure.

Excellent communication which uses appropriate structure for the piece of work.

Very few or no grammatical/spelling/ typographical errors.

Referencing is accurate and a comprehensive