TLH342 ETourism

September 8, 2021 admin 0 Comments

Table of Contents

ETourism TLH342- Assignment Help

Assessment 2020

Canvas Deadline: Tuesday 19^th October 2021 by 2pm

Learning outcomes

Upon successful completion of this module, students will have demonstrated

Knowledge

eTourism, the relationship between IT and tourism and hospitality and future potential developments in these areas.
Evaluation of tourism web sites, travel recommendation systems and decision support systems of various kinds.

Skill

Communicate and critically reflect on those ideas in written form.

ASSESSMENT METHODS: Case Study Report: (100%) of module mark This assesses learning outcomes 1, 2, and 3

Assignment Question (Case Study Report)

Critically evaluate the developments of Social Media and mobile technology on Hospitality

Businesses. Use an SMTE as case study to analyse the business’ social media portfolio and develop a new detailed social media strategy for your chosen business. Note that the case must be a small or medium hospitality or tourism enterprise of your choice with an online and social media presence.

Guide to the Assignment

Choose a Small and Medium Tourism or hospitality business with a social media presence.
Evaluate their current social media strategy to discuss and support the arguments of your literature review.
Develop a social media strategy/recommendation for the organisation
The main parts of the assignment are the literature review and case study.
The case study should reflect on topics highlighted in the literature review and include a detailed evaluation of the current social media presence.
Ensure you use academic references within your literature review, and that you add a copy of your collected data in the appendix.

Suggested structure of case study:

Introduction
Literature review
Case Study Evaluation (Findings)
Discussion
New Social Media Strategy
Conclusion
References
Appendix

Assessment deadline:

Provisional marks and feedback are released within four working weeks of your submission.

Word count: 4500 words

It is important to adhere to the prescribed word count limit to avoid any penalties. Your word count excludes table of title page, table of content, any appendices and reference list/bibliography. The word count must be stated at the bottom of your title page. Please note falsifying the word count is classed as an academic misconduct.

ASSESSMENT METHODS: Case Study Report: (100%) of module mark This assesses learning outcomes 1, 2, and 3 Maximum of 4500 words

For further information see AQH-F14 Policy on Penalties for Exceeding the Prescribed Word Limit for an assignment https://goo.gl/ckLmDZ.

The module resources access mmr

1 Generic Assessment Criteria – Undergraduate

These should be interpreted according to the level at which you are working

	Categories
	Grade	Relevance	Knowledge	Analysis	Argument and Structure	Critical Evaluation	Presentation	Reference to Literature
		86 – 100%	The work examined is exemplary and provides clear evidence of a complete grasp of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also unequivocal evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be exemplary in all the categories cited above. It will demonstrate a particularly compelling evaluation, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
76-85%	The work examined is excellent and demonstrates comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and some evidence of originality.
70 – 75%	The work examined is of a high standard and there is evidence of comprehensive knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. There is clearly articulated evidence demonstrating that all the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that level are satisfied At this level it is expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or by demonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.
60 – 69%	Directly relevant to the requirements of the assessment	A substantial knowledge of relevant material, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and issues therein	Comprehensive analysis – clear and orderly presentation	Well supported, focussed argument which is clear and logically structured.	Contains distinctive or independent thinking; and begins to formulate an independent position in relation to theory and/or practice.	Well written, with standard spelling and grammar, in a readable style with acceptable format	Critical appraisal of uptodate and/or appropriate literature. Recognition of different perspectives. Very good use of a wide range of sophisticated source material.
50 – 59%	Some attempt to address the requirements of the assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages	Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant material, with intermittent evidence of an appreciation of its significance	Significant analytical treatment which has a clear purpose	Generally coherent and logically structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s)	May contain some distinctive or independent thinking; may begin to formulate an independent position in relation to theory and/or practice.	Competently written, with only minor lapses from standard grammar, with acceptable format	Uses a good variety of literature which includes ecent texts and/or appropriate iterature, including a substantive amount beyond ibrary texts. Competent use of source material.
40 – 49%	Some correlation with the requirements of the assessment but there are instances of irrelevance	Basic understanding of the subject but addressing a limited range of material	Some analytical treatment, but may be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks clear analytical purpose	Some attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency, with issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in simplistic terms	Sound work which expresses a coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical conformity to one or more standard views of the topic	A simple basic style but with significant deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for the reader	Evidence of use of appropriate literature which goes beyond that referred to by the tutor. Frequently only uses a single source to support a point.

35 – 39%

Relevance to the requirements of the assessment may be very intermittent, and may be reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms

A limited understanding of a narrow range of material

Largely descriptive or narrative, with little evidence of analysis

A basic argument is evident, but mainly supported by assertion and there may be a lack of clarity and coherence

Some evidence of a view starting to be formed but mainly derivative.

Numerous deficiencies in expression and presentation; the writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic or repetitious style

Barely adequate use of literature. Over reliance on material provided by the tutor.

		The evidence provided shows that the majority of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied – for compensation consideration.
30 – 34%	The work examined provides insufficient evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence provided shows that some of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in some of the indicators.

	15-29%	The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence shows that few of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in several of the indicators.
0-14%	The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Level of the qualification. The evidence fails to show that any of the learning outcomes and responsibilities appropriate to that Level are satisfied. The work will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.

AQH-F6-15 Guidelines on Generic Assessment Criteria, v4 October 2014