THM204 Attractions and Events Management
- Subject Code :
THM204
- University :
Torrence university of Australia Exam Question Bank is not sponsored or endorsed by this college or university.
- Country :
Australia
THM204 Attractions and Events Management
Assessment 3 Group Report
Trimester 1 - 2023
Weighting 35%
Due Date Week 10
Word Count 2,750 words, with 250 word +/- deviation allowed
Group Size 2 to 3 people
Format Report
Aim To compare and contrast two attractions or events of a similar nature
- Students have to select two attractions or events. These could be:
- Both in Australia or b) one in Australia and one in another part of the world.
2. Students do NOT need to visit the attraction they have chosen.
Both need to be the similar types of attractions or events e.g. cultural, heritage, theme park, visitor center, resort, sporting event etc.
- Students are required to assess the tourism operations management and operational strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the two chosen attractions or events using secondary data (i.e. obtained from research rather than a site visit).
- Students have to compare and contrast the operations management of the two attractions, events or facilities based on the SWOT analysis undertaken.
- Furthermore, conclusions must be made as to the main challenges facing the attractions or events and recommendations made for the future management of these.
(ULOs 1, 3, 4, 5, 6)
Suggested Report headings
- Introduction
- Context of report
- SWOT Analysis for each attractions or events
- Contrast and compare the visitor experience of two attractions including:
- Accessibility
- Interpretation
- Digitisation
- Innovation
- Challenges and recommendations
Reference citations and reference list
Assessment 3 - Group Report Rubric
Criteria |
High Distinction 80%- |
Distinction 70%- 79% |
Credit 60-69% |
Pass 50-59% |
Fail 0-49% |
Introduction: Background to attractions Context of report |
Introduction is logical, comprehensive and succinct. Background to attractions and context is given with a good level of details and appropriate references. |
Introduction is logical, detailed and succinct. Background to attractions and context is given with an adequate level of details and appropriate references |
Introduction is logical, with some detail. Background to attractions and context is given with some level of details and appropriate references |
Introduction is logical, but a little under-developed Background to attractions and context is lacking in some detail with mostly appropriate references |
There is insufficient work to demonstrate the required level of understanding. Introduction is lacking structure and coherence. |
SWOT Analysis Separate SWOT analysis for each attractions or events |
Comprehensive and detailed, shows excellent understanding of internal and external trends and forces |
Very good level of detail, shows excellent understanding of internal and external trends and forces |
Good level of detail, shows excellent understanding of internal and external trends and forces |
Shows some detail, and adequate understanding of internal and external trends and forces |
Lacks detail and understanding of internal and external trends and forces |
Contrast and compare the visitor experience of two attractions including: Accessibility Interpretation Digitisation - Innovation |
Excellent analysis and critical perspective Provides very detailed and relevant insights |
Very good analysis and critical perspective Provides detailed and relevant insights |
Good analysis and critical perspective Provides some detailed and relevant insights |
Adequate analysis and critical perspective Provides some relevant insights |
Lacks analysis and critical perspective Minimal insights |
Challenges and recommendations |
Comprehensive summary of major challenges for the attractions. Excellent recommendation on addressing challenges are made based on readings and critical thought. |
Detailed summary of major challenges for the attractions Some very good recommendations on addressing challenges are made based on readings and critical thought. |
Reasonably detailed summary of major challenges for the attractions Good recommendations on addressing challenges are made based on readings and critical thought. |
Adequate summary of major challenges for the attractions. Some basic recommendations on addressing challenges are made based on readings and critical thought |
Poor coverage of section on major challenges for the attractions. No recommendations made, no references or critical thought |
Report writing and referencing |
Highly structured and well written, highly developed. Appropriately referenced report. |
Well-structured and well written, well-developed. Appropriately referenced report. |
Structured, reasonably well- developed and well-written. Adequately referenced report. |
Adequately structured, and fairly well- developed and well-written. Adequately referenced report. |
Poor coverage and writing and insufficiently developed and structured report. Poorly referenced. |
Reference citations and reference list |
Wide range of contemporary references and sources cited appropriately |
Good range of contemporary references and sources cited appropriately |
Fair range of contemporary references and sources mostly cited appropriately |
Limited range of contemporary references, some errors of citation |
Inadequate or very limited references and poor citation |
