GROUP ASSESSMENT BRIEF
Subject Code and Name BRH606: Business Research for Hoteliers
Assessment Assessment 2: Research Proposal
Individual/Group Group Proposal
Length 3,000 words
Learning Outcomes This assessment addresses the following unit learning
outcomes:
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 By 11:59 pm 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”.
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 Help write my thesis – APA 6th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Sharepoint.
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).
Page 2 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.
• 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.
• Suggested questions/topic areas to be investigated – For example, if the proposed data collection method is a structured interview, then sample questions to be asked should be provided. These questions should relate directly to the objectives of your research.
• An Ethics Application Form must be completed and attached as an appendix to the students’ proposal for approval. 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
• A discretional + or – 10% marks may be awarded or deducted to individual students based on the outcome of peer evaluation.
Submission Instructions:
1. Typed and formatted according to the Assessment Structure Style Guide published on Sharepoint.
2. The total word count, excluding references, must be within 10% (+ or -) of the assessment word count. Penalties will apply when word count restrictions are not met.
3. To be submitted electronically in Microsoft Word format to Turnitin (www.turnitin.com).
4. Minimum of 12 academic sources and additional supporting industry/professional references where required. Lecture notes are unacceptable as a form of research.
5. All referencing (in-text referencing and reference list) must be in accordance with the Help write my thesis – APA 6th edition Academic Writing Guide available on Sharepoint.
6. See marking rubric attached at the end of this document. You do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
Page 4 of 6
Assessment Criteria
Content, Audience and Purpose (broad and specific content)
RESEARCH CONTEXT 10%
Analysis and application with synthesis of new knowledge
LITERATURE REVIEW 20%
Knowledge and understanding (technical and theoretical knowledge)
METHODOLOGY 40%
Fail
(Unacceptable)
0-49%
Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment.
Limited synthesis and analysis.
Limited application/ recommendations based upon analysis.
Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge
Key components of the assignment are not addressed.
Pass Credit Distinction
(Functional) (Proficient) (Advanced)
50-64% 65-74% 75 -84%
Demonstrates limited Demonstrates consistent Demonstrates an advanced and
awareness of context and/or awareness of context integrated understanding of
purpose of the assignment and/or purpose of the context and/or purpose of the
assignment. assignment.
Demonstrated analysis and Well-developed analysis Thoroughly developed and
synthesis of existing and synthesis with creative analysis and synthesis
knowledge with application. application of with application of pretested
recommendations linked to models and / or independently
Shows the ability to interpret analysis/synthesis. developed models and justified
relevant information and recommendations linked to
literature. analysis/synthesis.
Knowledge or understanding Thorough knowledge or Highly developed understanding
of the field or discipline. understanding of the field of the field or discipline/s.
or discipline/s. Supports
Resembles a recall or summary methodological choices and Supports methodological choices
of key ideas. information with evidence and information with robust
from the research/course evidence from the
Often confuses assertion of materials. research/course materials and
personal opinion with extended reading.
information substantiated by Demonstrates a capacity to
evidence from the explain and apply relevant Well demonstrated capacity to
research/course materials. concepts. explain and apply relevant
concepts.
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose of the assignment.
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.
A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.
Systematically and critically Supports methodological choices and information with robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
Effective Communication
15%
Quality of research-Correct citation of key resources and evidence
15%
Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.
Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.
Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.
Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed.
Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.
Line of reasoning is easy to follow.
Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas.
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
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
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.
Demonstrates use of high-quality, 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.
