Assessment 2: Critique and Comparison of Two Discussion Papers

This assessment is for these students only:Gold Coast; Melbourne – Hotel School; Online; Sydney – Hotel School.

Assessment       Learning outcomes         Grading indicator             Min Score            Weight Length/

duration               Due        Professional accreditation

Critique and Comparison of Two Discussion Papers          2, 3         Graded N/A        30%        1500 words         10 Aug 2018 5:00 PM                N/A

This assessment exposes you to the concept of a Discussion Paper – an important consultation tool used in tourism planning and policy development. Assuming the position of an independent tourism planning expert, you are required to source, critique and compare two publically available discussion papers on topics of your choice. The policy cycle provides the framework for your critical evaluation of each individual paper and the structural comparison between them. Your assessment piece will conclude with a reflective section on lessons you learnt through doing this critique and how it might assist you in writing your own Discussion Paper.

For the full details about this assessment, please go to the Assessment Tasks & Submission menu on your MySCU unit site.

Tourism Planning Environments (MKT01760)

1

Assessment 2: Critique & Comparison of Two Discussion Papers

Due: 10 August @ 5:00pm (NSW) (uploaded via Turnitin on MySCU site) Length: 1500 words Weight: 30%

Rationale:

This assessment exposes you to the concept of a discussion paper. A discussion paper is an important consultation tool used in tourism

planning and policy development and in workplaces. Familiarity with discussion papers is a key employment skill. A good discussion paper

addresses all elements of the policy cycle. While the tool itself is used as part of the consultation stage, it addresses the early parts of the

policy cycle by identifying the issue, providing context and analysis, and identifying potential policy solutions & instruments. It also

addresses the latter parts of the cycle by outlining some alternatives and providing suggestions regarding implementation and evaluation.

Thus Assessment 2 gets you to actively think about all parts of the policy cycle while preparing you for Assessment 3.

Task:

You are to assume the position of an independent tourism planning expert and are required to source, critique and compare two publically

available tourism discussion papers on topics of your choice. These may be found online via a search of the internet or specific government

sites. The policy planning cycle (p. 196 of your text) provides the framework for your critical evaluation of each individual paper and the

comparison between them.

Your assessment piece will conclude with a reflection section on lessons you learnt through doing this critique and how it might assist you

in writing your own Discussion Paper (Assessment 3).

In order to complete the task you are required to:

 Identify and introduce two relevant tourism related discussion papers and highlight the key issues they address (6 marks).

 Critique the structure of the discussion papers against the framework of the policy planning cycle (6 marks).

 Critique the content of the discussion papers with regards to sufficiency for relevant stakeholders (6 marks).

 Succinctly compare & contrast the two discussion papers with regards to structure, quality and effectiveness (i.e. your perception

of the paper’s effectiveness in communicating with the target audience) (6 marks).

 Reflect on what you have learnt from this critique and comparison; how this assessment has/has not improved your awareness,

professional skills and knowledge relating to tourism planning environments; and how it might benefit you in writing your own

Discussion Paper (Assessment 3) (i.e. you need to engage with the Task for Assessment 3 for this) (6 marks).

Tourism Planning Environments (MKT01760)

2

Marking rubric:

Criteria High

Distinction

Distinction Credit Pass Fail

Introducing relevance & issues

 Two relevant papers identified

and key issues they address are

highlighted.

6 marks

Outstanding introduction.

Papers are clearly

identified, succinctly &

effectively described & key

issues clearly defined.

Very good introduction.

Papers are clearly

identified & described

well & key issues are

clearly defined.

Competent introduction.

Papers are identified &

described quite well &

key issues are defined.

Adequate introduction.

Papers are identified &

somewhat described.

Key issues are hinted at

but could have been

developed further.

Inadequate introduction.

Papers are not identified &

described clearly. The issues

are not outlined well or in

enough depth.

Structure critique – policy cycle

 The structure of each paper is

examined with regards to the

policy cycle – what elements

are/aren’t adequately

addressed?

6 marks

Outstanding critique.

Structure of paper is

effectively examined

against all stages of the

policy planning cycle &

strengths & gaps are well

identified.

Very good critique.

Structure of paper is

examined against all

stages of the policy

planning cycle &

strengths & gaps are

identified.

Competent critique.

Structure of paper is

examined against most

stages of the policy

planning cycle & some

strengths & gaps are

identified.

Adequate critique.

Structure of paper is

examined against some

stages of the policy

planning cycle. Some

strengths & gaps are

identified though with

little rationale.

Inadequate critique.

Structure of paper is not

adequately related to the

policy planning cycle.

Strengths & gaps are barely

addressed and without

rationale.

Content critique – stakeholders

 The content of each paper is

examined with regards to its

key issue/topic – is the

information sufficient/lacking

for stakeholders to provide

informed input? How so?

6 marks

Outstanding critique.

Critically examines each

paper with depth &

identifies strengths and/or

weaknesses of each very

clearly & succinctly with

reference to key

stakeholders.

Very good critique.

Critically examines each

paper with depth &

identifies strengths

and/or weaknesses of

each clearly & with

reference to key

stakeholders.

Competent critique.

Critically examines each

paper & identifies some

strengths and/or

weaknesses of each.

Adequate critique.

Examines each paper &

notes some strengths

and/or weaknesses of

each but with little

rationale.

Inadequate critique.

Little if any critical

engagement with the

content of the papers and

minimal if any identification

of strengths and/or

weaknesses.

Tourism Planning Environments (MKT01760)

3

Compare the two discussion

papers:

 Two papers are compared and

contrasted with regards to

strengths and weaknesses in

structure, quality and perceived

effectiveness

6 marks

Outstanding comparison.

Comprehensively

compares & contrasts

strengths & weaknesses of

each paper very clearly

and succinctly.

Addresses their structure

and provides strong

reference to the policy

cycle.

Compares their quality and

perceived effectiveness in

communicating with the

target audience with

strong evidence.

Very good comparison.

Comprehensively

compares & contrasts

differences, strengths &

weaknesses with clarity

and brevity.

Addresses their structure

and provides very good

reference to the policy

cycle.

Compares their quality

and perceived

effectiveness in

communicating with the

target audience with

evidence.

Competent comparison.

Compares & contrasts

some differences,

strengths & weaknesses

but could be more

comprehensive &

succinct.

Addresses their structure

and provides good

reference to the policy

cycle.

Compares elements of

quality and touches on

effectiveness in

communicating with the

target audience.

Adequate comparison.

Some comparison &

contrasting of strengths

& weaknesses but could

be more comprehensive,

clear and succinct.

Addresses their structure

and provides some

reference to the policy

cycle.

Compares some

elements of quality and

touches on effectiveness

in communicating.

Inadequate comparison.

Fails to compare strengths

and weaknesses in either a

succinct or clear way.

Barely addresses structure

and provides little if any

reference to the policy cycle.

Barely addresses quality

communication with

stakeholders.

Reflect on learning:

 How assessment has/has not

improved your awareness,

professional skills and

knowledge relating to tourism

planning environments; what

are areas of strength or need

for further upskilling.

 How assessment might benefit

you in writing your own

discussion paper

6 marks

Outstanding reflection.

There is strong evidence

of deep thinking and

consideration

Very good reflection.

There is evidence of very

good reflective

processes, thinking and

consideration

Competent reflection.

There is good evidence

of a considered

reflection and some

good insights

Adequate reflection.

There is some evidence

of thought and

consideration but could

have been developed

further beyond a noting

of facts.

Inadequate reflection.

Little evidence of depth of

thought and consideration.

There is a recording of some

facts but does not show

thinking and reflective

practice.