BRH606 Business Research for Hoteliers Assessment

ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title BRH606 Business Research for Hoteliers
Assessment Research proposal
Individual/Group Group (3 max.)
Length 3,000 words
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
a) Analyse the various approaches to business and social research and the difference between primary and secondary research
b) Critically review extant knowledge in a disciplinary area for the identification of researchable problems
c) Understand and justify the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis
d) Investigate a range of data collection methods and tools
e) Conceptually map the research process, developing a defensible framework for proposed research
f) Evaluate the ways management research may be written and disseminated
Submission Due by 11.55pm ACST/ACDT/AEST/AEDT Friday of Week 10
Weighting 70%
Total Marks 100 marks
Context
This assessment aims to equip students with the ability to formulate, plan and justify a relevant research project in response to a business-related problem. This research project has already been established and defended in Assessment 1, with subsequent feedback provided.
For this assessment, students are required to produce a 3,000-word research proposal that discusses the research context, investigates the research problem, reviews relevant literature, and recommends a suitable methodology to undertake the project.
A Research Proposal can be defined as:
“A plan that offers recommendations for conducting research … details the who, the what, the where, the when and the how of research and the information associated with it”.
BRH606 Assessment 2 Brief Research Proposal of
Task Instructions
SECTION 1: RESEARCH CONTEXT
The research context outlines the background of the study and the research problem established in Assessment 1 (Note: it is best to approach this section as though the reader is unaware of the preceding presentation).
SECTION 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Using the research problem established in Assessment 1, students are to conduct a thorough secondary research and produce a literature review. The purpose of this literature review is to place the research problem in the context of what is already known and aid in better understanding the issue at hand. This will also help identify any gap in knowledge (that is, “What Information we still need to get?”) which will inform the research objectives and proposed primary research.
A minimum of 12 academic resources is expected, with additional supporting industry/professional references where required. This will reflect depth, breadth and credibility of the literature review. Correct and complete citations should be provided according to the APA 6th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Blackboard.
Students should avoid copying large amounts of secondary data and information. Rather, students are encouraged to paraphrase and model the concepts to address the specified research objectives.
In this section, students must demonstrate familiarity with the existing body of knowledge and methods used in the relevant area of research. Additionally, students are required to synthesise and critique the literature which have been reviewed.
SECTION 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR A PRIMARY RESEARCH PROJECT
In this section, students are expected to present and justify the methodological decisions of the research project. This section requires the following key points to be addressed:
• The (revised) research objectives linked to the research problem and ‘knowledge gap’ identified in the previous section (literature review). BRH606 Assessment 2 Brief Page 3 of 6
• The research approach to be applied – Specify whether the proposed study will be designed as an exploratory, explanatory, descriptive or causal research. This section should also provide justification as to why the recommended approach suits the problem/information requirements and how using the recommended approach will yield superior information/results.
• Details of methodology to be applied – For example: qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods
• The proposed data collection method(s) – For example: focus groups, interviews, surveys, experiments and/or observation. Include a justification as to why this technique(s) would be most appropriate.
• The population of the study, including a discussion on the overall population size.
• The proposed sampling method – For example: simple random sampling, cluster sampling, quota systematic sampling, purposive sampling, convenience sampling, etc. Provide a justification as to why this method would be appropriate and aligned with the overall research approach.
• The proposed data analysis method – For example: thematic analysis, content analysis, grounded theory, descriptive statistics, or inferential statistics. Include a justification as to why this technique would be most appropriate. In this segment, understudies should exhibit experience with the current assemblage of information and strategies utilized in the applicable space of exploration. Furthermore, understudies are needed to orchestrate and investigate the writing which have been surveyed.

Segment 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY FOR A PRIMARY RESEARCH PROJECT

In this segment, understudies are required to introduce and legitimize the methodological choices of the examination project. This part requires the accompanying central issues to be tended to:

• The (reexamined) research destinations connected to the examination issue and ‘information hole’ recognized in the past segment (writing audit). BRH606 Assessment 2 Brief Page 3 of 6

• The examination way to deal with be applied – Specify whether the proposed study will be planned as an exploratory, informative, clear or causal examination. This part ought to likewise give avocation regarding why the suggested approach suits the issue/data necessities and how utilizing the suggested approach will yield unrivaled data/results.

• Details of technique to be applied – For instance: subjective, quantitative or blended strategies

• The proposed information assortment method(s) – For instance: center gatherings, interviews, reviews, tests and additionally perception. Incorporate a legitimization concerning why this technique(s) would be generally fitting.

• The number of inhabitants in the examination, remembering a conversation for the general populace size.

• The proposed inspecting strategy – For instance: straightforward irregular testing, bunch examining, portion precise testing, purposive testing, comfort inspecting, and so on Give a legitimization regarding why this technique would be proper and lined up with the general exploration approach.

• The proposed information investigation technique – For instance: topical examination, content investigation, grounded hypothesis, unmistakable insights, or inferential measurements. Incorporate an avocation concerning why this strategy would be generally proper.
• Implementation plan – Details on how the research design will be administered. This should include a timeline of the project, as well as details relating to the storage of data and dissemination of research outcomes.
APPENDIX: ETHICS APPLICATION CHECKLIST
An Ethics Application Checklist must be completed and attached as an appendix to your proposal. This checklist will specify the risks associated to your research as well as ethical considerations you will take in the process of conducting your study.
All research must be conducted in alliance with the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human
Research (2007, plus amendments). Be sure to refer to the specific components of the National Statement that are relevant to your study. Note that students will not be allowed to conduct research that involves the following:
• minors below the age of 18;
• people with physical, sensory, psychiatric, neurological, cognitive and/or intellectual disability;
• the deception of participants and/or evading the requirement of obtaining informed consent
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here in the Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills website.
Group Work and Peer Evaluation Instructions
At the beginning of a term/project: All students taking part in a group assessment should draw up and sign a group contract (see template). Learning Facilitators need not be involved at this stage apart from giving students general guidance.
During a project: Students should keep records of communication and drafts. Any serious concerns about individual group member’s contribution should be brought to the attention of the subject Learning Facilitator as soon as they occur or at least two weeks before the due date, whichever is earlier.
At the end of a project/assessment submission: When submitting their group assessments, students should scan and include their peer evaluation forms (one per student; see template) as part of their submission. This is required for ALL groups so that every student is given a chance to exercise their right to have a say and defend themselves if necessary.
Allegations must be substantiated by supporting evidence (e.g. records of communication and drafts) and submitted to the subject Learning Facilitator by the assessment due date. Otherwise, they would be disregarded by the marker.
If no peer evaluation forms are submitted by the assessment due date, all group members would receive 0% for the “individual contribution based on peer evaluation”.
Submission Instructions
1. Typed and formatted according to the structure guideline presented above.
2. To be submitted as a Microsoft Word file to Turnitin on Blackboard in Week 10, Friday, no later than 11.55pm.
3. The total word count, excluding references, must be at a maximum of 3000 words. Penalties will apply when word count restrictions are not met.
4. Only one copy of the presentation is to be submitted, with names of all group members listed on the cover sheet.
5. A minimum of 12 academic sources and additional supporting industry/professional references where required. Lecture notes are unacceptable as a form of research.
6. All referencing (in-text referencing and reference list) must be in accordance with the APA 7th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Blackboard.
7. A Torrens University Australia Group Assignment Cover Sheet is to be attached to your submission.
8. See marking rubric attached at the end of this document. You do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately referenced and academically written according the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Assessment Rubric
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
RESEARCH CONTEXT
Content, audience and purpose (broad and specific content)
10% Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Demonstrates limited awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment
Demonstrates consistent awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Demonstrates an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose of the assignment.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
15%
Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application/ recommendations based upon analysis.
Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of existing knowledge with application.
Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis.
Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of existing knowledge.
Strong application by way of pretested models and / or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
METHODOLOGY
Knowledge and understanding (technical and theoretical
knowledge)
30%
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 confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports methodological choices and information with evidence from the research/course materials.
Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Supports methodological choices and information with robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically Supports methodological choices and information with robust evidence from the
evidence from the research/course materials.
Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.
Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Effective Communication
10%
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is
logical, clear and well supported by evidence.
Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic through a good line of reasoning
Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic through an excellent line of
reasoning
Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics.
Quality of research- Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
15%
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 high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows some evidence of wide scope of research extending to a variety of sources Demonstrates use of highquality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows strong evidence of wide scope of research extending to a variety of sources.
PEER REVIEW
Individual contribution
based on peer evaluation
Participates in few or no group meetings. Provides no leadership. Does little or no work assigned by the group; work is generally sloppy and Participates in some group meetings. Provides some leadership. Does some of the work assigned by the group; work tends to be disorderly, Participates in most group meetings. Provides leadership when asked. Does most of the work assigned by the group; work is generally complete, Participates in all group meetings; does the work that is assigned by the group; work is complete, well- organized, Assumed leadership role and attended all group meetings; routinely offered useful ideas; fulfilled all responsibilities on time or early; outstanding
20%
incomplete, contains excessive errors, and is mostly late. incomplete, inaccurate, and is usually late. meets the requirements of the task, and is mostly done on time. error-free, and done on time or early. intellectual and material contribution; highly productive.
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Analyse the various approaches to business and social research, and the difference between primary and secondary research
SLO b) Critically review extant knowledge in a disciplinary area for the identification of researchable problems
SLO c) Understand and justify the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis
SLO d) Understand and justify the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis
SLO e) Conceptually map the research process, developing a defensible framework for proposed research
SLO f) Evaluate the ways management research may be written and disseminated

Tags:

Comments are closed.