2021 Autumn Term 1 Cultural Heritage Management Assignment File ASSIGNMENT 1: WRITTEN REPORT Due Date: 3 December 2021 (Friday) Length: 2,500 words excluding title page, table of content and references (per group) and 250 words reflection (per student) Marks: 100 marks (equivalent to 25% of the final grade) Instruction Each tutorial class will be divided into seven teams. Each team is asked to compose a written report based on one self-chosen heritage site in Hong Kong. Prior approval of the site selection is required. Please confirm with your tutor. This assignment is used mainly to assess outcomes 1 to 3. Report Structure As business development consultant of the Hong Kong Tourism Board, your group are asked to produce a consultancy report based on a self-chosen heritage site. The following issues should be discussed: Title page: Course code and name, names and student IDs of the group, tutorial number, group number and word count (Please use the designated title page) Table of content Introduction: Background of the selected site and type of heritage supply Planning principle: The participatory, incremental and collaborative (PIC) model Importance of the site to Hong Kong Potential visitors: Profiles of potential visitor(s), their conceptual viewpoint of authenticity and degree of authenticity Interpretation: Analysis on the existing interpretive tools Recommendations to the site mangers based on prior analysis References Reflection: Personal reflection on the report content 2021 Autumn Term 2 The data of this assignment should come from primary or secondary sources. Your team may conduct site visit, visitor interview, literature review from academic journals, magazines, newspaper, books, government reports, and/or other reliable sources. All claims have to be well justified with sensible reasons. 10% of the marks awarded to the assignment will be deducted for each calendar day overdue, or for every 250 words above or below the word limit. Any content involving plagiarism will be reduced to zero mark. Report Format Your written report should be typed or produced on a PC Use standard A4 size white paper Must be type-set with Times New Roman 12pt font; single-spaced with one-inch margin on all sides of the report. Number the pages in the lower middle of the page Clear headings and/ or subheadings should be used in each section Tables and figures should be utilized throughout the report where appropriate The APA referencing style should be followed 2021 Autumn Term 3 Rubric of Assignment 1 – Written Report (Group-based Assessment) The written report will be evaluated based on the following criteria. Criteria Unsatisfactory Below Average Satisfactory Very Good Excellent Understanding and application of theory (30%) Substantially inaccurate understanding of cultural heritage management theories Misunderstanding of cultural heritage management theories Minimal application of theories Fair understanding of cultural heritage management theories Sound linkage between theory and application Fair understanding of cultural heritage management theories Apparent linkage between theory and application Thorough understanding of cultural heritage management theories Substantial linkage between theory and application Quality of analysis (30%) Much extraneous information Confusing vocabulary and syntax Evident of extraneous information Inaccurate usage of vocabulary and syntax Relevant information but lacking personal insights Ordinary vocabulary range with some vernacular terms Relevant information with personal insights Good vocabulary range and accuracy of usage Wide knowledge to the questions with personal insights Exceptional vocabulary range and accuracy of usage Research effort and citation (15%) No research effort Inappropriate referencing style, i.e. use of footnote, absence of in-text citation and/or reference list Minimal research effort Use unreliable sources of information Citations are incomplete, inaccurate and/or missing Appropriate research effort Use reliable sources of information Cited most sources of information accurately, despite some inappropriateness Apparent research effort Use credible sources of information Cited most sources of information accurately Substantial research effort Use credible and diverse sources of information Cited all sources of information accurately Originality (10%) Absence of originality, i.e. borrowing ideas from literature with no personal insights Minimal originality, i.e. irrelevant claims or examples Limited originality, i.e. use of examples discussed in lectures or tutorials Some originality, i.e. use of appropriate examples not covered in lectures or tutorials Substantial originality, i.e. innovative examples/ ideas not covered in lectures or tutorials Reflection* (15%) Do not offer examples to support evaluation and application Few/ descriptive examples to support evaluation and application Some examples to support evaluation and application despite some inappropriateness Appropriate examples to support evaluation and application Awareness of differing viewpoints Extensive and appropriate examples to support evaluation and application Creative syntheses of differing viewpoint * Individual assessment component
