A SSESSMENT BRIEF 1
Subject Code and Title
MKT101A - Marketing Fundamentals
Assessment
Discussion Forum Post (Part B)
Individual/Group
Individual
Length
Original post 500 Words +/- 10%
Response to peer posting 100 +/- 10%
Learning Outcomes
b) Outline the elements of the marketing process.
Submission
Original Discussion posted by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Monday of Module 4 (Week 7)
Feedback/Responses to peers by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 4 (Week 7)
Weighting
15%
Total Marks
100 marks
Context:
This assessment facilitates exploratory learning through reviewing and responding to the work of others and approaches learning in diverse ways.
It empowers you to express yourself with positive reinforcement from interactions on the discussion forum.
It allows time for thoughtful reflection on topics covered in this subject.
Instructions:
Using the same organisation you discussed in assessment 1 Part A, consider 1 change in the organisation’s Marketing Environment (choose either a Macro or Micro factor/force)
Answer the following questions in approximately 500 words (in total)
Submit your answer in the Module 3 (Week 5) discussion forum (you will not be able to see other posts until you have submitted your own post)
Original discussion will be individually posted by Monday of Module 3 (Week 7).
Feedback/Response to peers will be required by Sunday of Module 3 (Week 7).
MKT101A_Assessment Brief1.2_Posts_Module3 Page 1 of 6
Questions - In your own words discuss the following:
a) Identify and discuss the explicit Marketing Environmental factor/force and its potential impact on the organisation. Include in your answer whether this a Micro or Macro factor – approx. 250 words
b) Provide comments on what you consider the best response to the change in the Marketing Environment (including reasons why) and whether it would provide to be successful in establishing a competitive advantage for the organization. – approx. 250 words
You are then required to provide at least a 100 word response to parts (a) and (b) of a peer student’s initial post.
MKT101A_Assessment Brief1.2_Posts_Module3 Page 2 of 6
Learning Rubrics
Assessment Attributes
Fail (Unacceptable) (0-49) Pass
(Functional)
(50-64) Credit
(Proficient)
(65-74) Distinction
(Advanced)
(75-84) High Distinction
(Exceptional)
(85-100)
Knowledge and understanding
20% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
20% Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of g high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the
the organisation for sourcing evidence organisation for sourcing evidence
Evaluation of information selected to support the
chosen organisation case
20% Limited understanding of key concepts required to support the case study.
Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact with little questioning. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Analysis and evaluation do not reflect critical judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Identify logical flaws. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Viewpoint of experts are subject to questioning.
Analysis and evaluation reflect
growing judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis.
Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability.
Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence
20% Poorly written with errors in spelling and grammar.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Consistently demonstrates t very good use of good Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
Demonstrates outstanding use of high- quality, credible and
There are mistakes in using the APA style.or no references at all. sentence and paragraph construction.
Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
There are some mistakes in using the APA style. Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA style. relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading
beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.
Constructive
feedback to peers
20% Fails to offer any feedback.
No support or encouragement to peers.
No awareness or sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. Offers feedback but rarely constructive or useful.
Feedback is not always clear or specific to guide peers.
Little support or encouragement to peers.
Demonstrates little awareness of and/or sensitivity to Offers feedback that is sometimes constructive or useful.
Feedback is provided with examples to guide peers.
Some support and encouragement to peers.
Demonstrates some level of
awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst Offers constructive feedback regularly.
Formulates the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them to peers.
Offers support and encouragement to peers. Always offers detailed constructive feedback that is specific and appropriate.
Outstanding articulation of the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them effectively to peers.
Provides expert
diversity amongst peers. peers. Demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. assistance, support, and encouragement to peers.
Consistently demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.
ASSESSMENT BRIEF 1
Subject Code and Title MKT101A - Marketing Fundamentals
Assessment Discussion Forum Post (Part A)
Individual/Group Individual
Length Original post 500 Words +/- 10%
Response to peer posting 100 +/- 10%
Learning Outcomes a) Reflect on the evolution of the marketing concept.
Submission Original Discussion posted by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Monday of Module 2 (Week 3)
Feedback/Responses to peers by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT
Sunday of Module 2 (Week 3)
Weighting 15%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context:
This assessment facilitates exploratory learning through reviewing and responding to the work of others and approaches learning in diverse ways.
It empowers you to express yourself with positive reinforcement from interactions on the discussion forum.
It allows time for thoughtful reflection on topics covered in this subject.
Instructions:
Choose a product, service, organisation or institution that you are interested in working for (this can even be based on a new business idea that you would like to one day pursue).
Based on your choice above, answer the following questions in approximately 500 words.
Submit your answers in the Module 2 (Week 3) discussion forum (you will not be able to see other forum posts until you have posted your submission).
Original discussion will be individually posted by Monday of Module 2 (week 3). Feedback/Response to peers will be required by Sunday of Module 2 (week 3).
MKT101A_Assessment Brief1.1_Posts_Module2 Page 1 of 6
Questions - In your own words discuss the following:
a) Define the concepts and process within Marketing, including what generally is accepted as the focus of all Marketing activities?
b) Why is Marketing important to your chosen product, service, company or institution?
c) Discuss briefly how these insights have changed your original perception of what Marketing was before starting this subject.
You are then required to provide at least a 100-word response to parts b) and c) of a peer student’s original post.
MKT101A_Assessment Brief1.1_Posts_Module2 Page 2 of 6
Learning Rubrics
Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) (0-49) Pass
(Functional)
(50-64) Credit
(Proficient)
(65-74) Distinction
(Advanced)
(75-84) High Distinction
(Exceptional)
(85-100)
Knowledge and
understanding
20%
Limited understanding of required
concepts and knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Correct citation of key resources and evidence
20% Demonstrates inconsistent or no use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within Demonstrates use of high-quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the
the organisation for sourcing evidence
organisation for sourcing evidence
Evaluation of information selected to support the
chosen organisation case
20% Resembles little or no summary of key ideas.
Limited understanding of key concepts required to support the case study.
Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis.
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact with little questioning.
Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.
Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Analysis and evaluation do not reflect critical judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability.
Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Identify logical flaws.
Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Viewpoint of experts are subject to questioning.
Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Information is taken from sources with a high level of
interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis.
Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability.
Use of academic and discipline conventions
and sources of evidence
20%
Poorly written with errors in spelling and grammar.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.
Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary).
Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre.
Consistently demonstrates very good use of good Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre.
Demonstrates outstanding use of highquality, credible and
There are mistakes in using the APA style or no references at all.
sentence and paragraph construction.
Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
There are some mistakes in using the APA style.
Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas.
There are no mistakes in using the APA style.
quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA style.
relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading
There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.
Constructive feedback to peers
20% Fails to offer any feedback.
No support or encouragement to peers.
No awareness or sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. Offers feedback but rarely constructive or useful.
Feedback is not always clear or specific to guide peers.
Little support or encouragement to peers.
Demonstrates little awareness of and/or sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. Offers feedback that is sometimes constructive or useful.
Feedback is provided with examples to guide peers.
Some support and encouragement to peers.
Demonstrates some level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. Offers constructive feedback regularly.
Formulates the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them to peers.
Offers support and encouragement to peers.
Demonstrates a high level of awareness of Always offers detailed constructive feedback that is specific and appropriate.
Outstanding articulation of the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them effectively to peers.
Provides outstanding assistance, support, and encouragement to peers.
and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers. Consistently demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.