MRKC7002 – Marketing Management
Assessment – Please read very carefully
Marketing Management Assessment - Presentation
|
Unit
|
Type of Assessment
|
Weighting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
Formative - Forum Discussion Topic
· ONE Main post 500 words
· TWO Secondary posts 250 words
(References are not included in the word count)
|
0%
|
|
7
Task 1
|
Recorded Presentation, two submissions:
· MP4 Camera On, Med / Low quality
· PPT of same slides
BOTH Submissions MUST be made to the RKC Web Portal. There will be two submission points for this.
|
50%
Both files must be submitted to be assessed
|
|
7
Task 2
|
Reflective Essay (900 - 1100 words)
English Language
|
45%
5%
|
Table 1: Overview of Assessment
For Unit 7
You are required to make a 10 Minute (maximum) recording using the Microsoft Powerpoint Record function, with CAMERA ON. You will be asked to submit the MP4 file created (with camera on) as well as the same Powerpoint File which was used for the presentation separately.
We recommend you practice before making the final recording. See this link for help:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/office/record-a-slide-show-with-narration-and-slide-timings-0b9502c6-5f6c-40ae-b1e7-e47d8741161c
We are expecting your presentation to contain:
-A maximum of 10 slides in the main body of the presentation
-An additional slide as an Appendix for your references in the Harvard Referencing Standard. Harvard standard should be used throughout the submission.
-We need references on the slides where used in small 8 point font in a text box at the bottom of the slide
-Slide NOTES must not be used in the submitted slides. Any text placed there will be IGNORED in the assessment process
-We expect a professional presentation, we recommend a simple high contrast template with little clutter
-Tables and Figures can be used within the slides
-Do not overload the slides with text. A slide is not an essay
-We would expect to see data references for each P as well as references for the use of concept.
Task 1 of 2
For an organisation of your choice please develop an analysis of the 7Ps Marketing Mix for that organisation. Please choose your organisation wisely. It should be one for which you can find data which may be referenced.
Following the analysis we would like you to make a SINGLE supported Recommendation for the marketing activities of that organisation, based on the insight you have developed from the earlier analysis. For clarity a supported recommendation is one for which you should be using best practice academic and / or quality practitioner sources to support fully.
We would expect one well supported and referenced slide for each P.
Your presentation MUST NOT exceed 10 minutes in length. Anything offered beyond 10 minutes will be ignored in the assessment process.
The Harvard Referencing Standard must be used for all submissions. See guide here: https://my.cumbria.ac.uk/media/MyCumbria/Documents/Library/QuickGuideReferencing.pdf
After the submission has been reviewed and graded you may be required to “attend” a live recorded discussion with the tutor to clarify details from the presentation.
Marking For The Presentation
|
Overall Aesthetics (This refers to the look of the slides, not the information presented.) Out of 10
|
|
Overall Visual Appeal
|
Background makes the presentation hard to read. Graphics are confusing and not related to words. Too much movement in the slides. Many slides hard to read.
|
Appropriate background. There are too few graphic elements. Appropriate background. Some slides hard to read.
|
Appropriate background. Appealing graphic elements are included appropriately. Slides are easy to read and movement and sounds are used effectively.
|
Score
|
|
|
|
Grammar, Punctuation and Spelling Out of 10
|
|
Readability of the Slides
|
Many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Bullet format is not consistent or clear. Too much information on many slides.
|
Some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Bullet format is not consistent on a few slides. Too much information on two or more slides.
|
No errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Bullets are consistent and clear. Information is clear and concise on each slide.
|
Score
|
|
|
|
Flow of Presentation and Analysis Out of 60
|
|
Presentation
Skills
|
Little care taken in presentation of the information to camera
|
Good attention to the presentation and messaging offered
|
Excellent presentations skills and focus offered on the materials presented
|
Score
|
|
Analysis Offered
|
Limited analysis of the data used
|
Adequate analysis using available data
|
Excellent analysis using the available data
|
Score
|
|
|
|
Supporting Research Out of 20
|
|
Referencing
|
Limited use of academic peer reviewed and quality practitioner sources
|
Good use of academic peer reviewed and quality practitioner sources
|
Excellent use of available resources including academic peer reviewed and quality practitioner sources
|
Score
|
|
|
|
(Maximum of 100 Points May be Awarded) Total Points
|
|
Task 2 of 2
You must produce a reflective paper of between 900 - 1100 words focusing on your experience throughout the module – in particular the challenges faced in exploring literature, selecting and working with the different marketing cases, identifying issues, developing insight, recording, and presenting your presentation.
The University provides a quick guide to reflective writing here:
https://my.cumbria.ac.uk/Student-Life/Learning/Skills-Cumbria/Reflective-Writing/
You are advised to make use of a reflective model of your choice (e.g. Gibbs (1988) reflective model, Rolfe et al.’s (2001), etc.) to structure and guide your reflection.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechnic. (https://my.cumbria.ac.uk/media/MyCumbria/Documents/ReflectiveCycleGibbs.pdf)
Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., & Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection for nursing and the helping professions: A user's guide. Palgrave Macmillan. (https://my.cumbria.ac.uk/media/MyCumbria/Documents/ReflectiveModelRolfe.pdf)
General Instructions – Please read carefully
You are required to complete the assignment outlined above and submit your reflective document, and your recorded presentation (mp4 camera on as well as powerpoint slides) through the RKC Online Campus.
Your grade will be based on these two final deliverables, to which you will also receive written feedback.
Your reflection paper must have a clear structure and must include:
· Cover page (an example is available to you in Induction/Unit 4)
· Table of contents (Table of tables/figures if necessary) – numbered sections, page numbers
· A list of references – at Master level you must use in-text citations to support your argument and any work cited must appear in the References list at the end of the work. These should be in the Harvard Standard, see link above.
Please ask any questions about the final assignment in the class discussion forums.
|
Criteria and Weighting
|
To obtain 70% or above:
|
To obtain 60% or above:
|
To obtain 55 – 59%:
|
To obtain 50% - 54%:
|
To obtain a Fail grade of between 49 - 40 %:
|
To obtain a substantial fail of between 39 - 0%:
|
|
Reflection piece
|
|
Depth of reflection – 45%
|
|
|
Demonstrates an excellent level of reflection, with deep, insightful analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection goes beyond surface-level descriptions, showing critical engagement with the material and drawing meaningful conclusions.
|
Shows a good level of reflection, with a thoughtful analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection is detailed but may not fully explore all aspects or draw as deep conclusions as higher levels.
|
Displays a reasonable level of reflection, with some analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection may be more descriptive than analytical, and conclusions may be somewhat superficial.
|
Demonstrates a basic level of reflection, with minimal analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection is mostly descriptive, with limited critical engagement or meaningful conclusions.
|
Displays limited reflection, with little analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection is overly descriptive, lacking depth and critical engagement.
|
Demonstrates little to no reflection, with no meaningful analysis of personal experiences and learning. The reflection is purely descriptive or missing.
|
|
Integration of Theory and Practice – 30%
|
|
|
Excellent integration of relevant theories and concepts into the reflection. Theoretical insights are skillfully applied to personal experiences, demonstrating a strong understanding of their practical implications.
|
Good integration of relevant theories and concepts, with some application to personal experiences. There may be minor gaps in understanding or application, but overall the theory is used effectively.
|
Reasonable integration of relevant theories and concepts, though the application to personal experiences may be inconsistent or superficial. Some understanding of theory is demonstrated.
|
Basic integration of theories and concepts, with limited application to personal experiences. There may be gaps in understanding or relevance to the reflective content.
|
Poor integration of theory, with little or no application to personal experiences. Understanding of relevant concepts is weak or missing.
|
No integration of theory, with no application to personal experiences. The reflection lacks any theoretical basis.
|
|
Clarity and Coherence (10%)
|
|
|
The reflective piece is excellently structured and coherent, with a clear and logical flow of ideas. Writing is clear, concise, and free of errors, making the reflection easy to follow.
|
The reflective piece is well-structured and generally coherent, with a logical flow of ideas. Writing is clear, though minor errors may be present, and the reflection is mostly easy to follow.
|
The reflective piece has a reasonable structure, though some ideas may be disjointed or lack clarity. Writing is mostly clear but may contain some errors that affect readability.
|
The reflective piece has a basic structure, but ideas may be poorly organized or unclear. Writing may be unclear in places, with errors that impact readability.
|
The reflective piece lacks a clear structure, making it difficult to follow. Writing is unclear, with frequent errors that significantly impact readability.
|
The reflective piece is disorganized and incoherent, with little to no logical flow. Writing is unclear and riddled with errors, making it very difficult to follow.
|
|
Critical Thinking and Self-Awareness (10%)
|
|
|
Shows excellent critical thinking and self-awareness, with a deep understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, and growth. Reflection demonstrates a willingness to challenge assumptions and consider alternative perspectives.
|
Demonstrates good critical thinking and self-awareness, with a thoughtful understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, and growth. Some consideration of alternative perspectives is evident.
|
Displays reasonable critical thinking and self-awareness, with some understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, and growth. There may be limited consideration of alternative perspectives.
|
Shows basic critical thinking and self-awareness, with minimal understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, and growth. Reflection may lack depth in considering alternative perspectives.
|
Displays limited critical thinking and self-awareness, with little understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, and growth. The reflection does not challenge assumptions or consider alternative perspectives.
|
Shows little to no critical thinking or self-awareness, with no understanding of personal strengths, weaknesses, or growth. The reflection is shallow and lacks any consideration of alternative perspectives.
|
|
Quality of expression in English – 5%
|
|
Quality of expression in English
|
Spelling, grammar, punctuation and vocabulary meet the minimum standard for this study level of accuracy and clarity. Written expression has very few errors in standard UK English spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Vocabulary choice shows an accurate understanding of the meaning of a wide range of specialist terms in the context of the subject. The specialist terms used may include those where the meaning is still being developed, or where the meaning is changing; or where the meaning is not agreed by all subject experts. There is also a broad and varied general vocabulary chosen so that nuances of meaning can be expressed concisely and to reflect the most current thinking in the subject area. Sentences are grammatically correct and express arguments and ideas through using both short, simple sentences and longer, compound sentences that allow the writer to bring facts or ideas together in a logical way. Expression is appropriate to the form. of the assessment (for example, the use of bullet points and captions instead of sentences).
meets the Tech Prof threshold criterion wholly (gain 5 points)
|
meets the Tech Prof threshold criterion partly (3 points)
|
does not meet the Tech Prof threshold criterion (0 points)
|