SPO203_Assessment Brief 3_Report_Module 4.Docx Page 1 of 5
ASSESSMENT BRIEF 3 | |
Subject Code and Title | SPO203: Managing Sports Facilities |
Assessment | Assessment 3 – Part 2 of 2 Facility Visit, Interview and Analysis Report |
Individual/Group | Group |
Length | 1000 words per student – Research Report |
Learning Outcomes | This assessment addresses the following learning outcomes: a) Identify the functions of sports facilities b) Evaluate processes required to manage, plan and operate a sporting facility c) Recognise risks involved in managing sporting facilities |
Submission | By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 4 (Week 7) |
Weighting | 25% |
Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context:
This assessment is Part 2, following on from Assessment 2 and basing this on the
facility/venue selected in Assessment 2 and working in the same (small) groups. This
assessment asks you to conduct an interview with a facility manager (as outlined in
Assessment 2). It also requires you to analyse the information gained through the interview
and your own desktop research to aid in your development of a report that provides
background and context to the facility and its’ operations, as well as your interpretations,
overall assessment and recommendations.
This assessment provides insight into the business practice of outsourcing an (external)
review of a business and its operations for the purpose of reviewing practices, procedures,
site conditions, requirements and other operational aspects.
Through this assessment, students will gain a direct understanding of their chosen facility
type from a service and operations perspective. The process used in this assessment mimics
real‐life activities such as interviewing, working in teams, using project management, report
development and contributes to knowledge of continuous improvement by using analysis to
determine operational risks, activities or processes requiring improvement.
SPO203_Assessment Brief 3_Report_Module 4.Docx Page 2 of 5
Skills derived and honed in the Assessment process include:
Interview skills
Research
Analytical and Critical Thinking
Evaluation
Report writing
Instructions:
1. Conduct an interview with your chosen facility/venue’s Facility Manager or Business
Manager using the interview questions prepared in Assessment 2. Students must
ensure that their group’s interview questions are modified to incorporate changes
per lecturer’s feedback of Assessment 2;
2. Conduct supplementary (extra, additional) desktop research to support information
gained from the interview. This might include research to follow up on key points
arising out of the interview and could include, for example, reviewing the following:
o The facility owner’s Annual Report or other Business Plan;
o Researching further on specific facility/venue infrastructure specifications;
o Consulting OH&S legislation or guidelines, or
o Reviewing Sport (national or state) or sport facility requirements or
specifications.
3. Develop a report that comprises of:
a. Brief background research i.e. select and incorporate, briefly, core facility
information from Assessment 2 such as the facility address and name the uses
onsite;
b. Describe the facilities’ governance model, ownership structure and key
relationships – organisation charts may be utilised. Ensure to clarify whether the
facility is under a lease type of arrangement and if so briefly describe its’
structure and obligations for the facility ;
c. In an ‘informational’ style, incorporate key information gained from the
interview covering the facilities’ :
i. management practices
ii. list and describe (specifications) of key fixed infrastructure and key
equipment
iii. maintenance management
iv. operations management
v. venue design including identifying available spaces and use of
spaces (space management approach]. Use of images, graphics,
plans or other visuals is encouraged;
vi. details of pending improvements/capital works/refurbishments
SPO203_Assessment Brief 3_Report_Module 4.Docx Page 3 of 5
vii. the Facility Manager’s or Business Manager’s role and
responsibilities
viii. Any other relevant information
4. A section must be written in an analysis writing style. This must consider your views
of key points derived from the interview and research. This might include
observations of, for example, challenges in staffing or that the facility has aged
infrastructure and no immediate plans to upgrade. Additionally your observations
might consider any critical issues that might impact the facility financially or legally;
Round this section off by providing a conclusion that outlines your group’s overall
‘findings’ and recommendations (you must develop these yourselves). The
recommendations should include consideration of operational cost savings measures
and may include environmental approaches.
Format of document:
Provide a professional looking document that includes a Title page, Table of
Contents and use of page numbers. Use of images or other visuals such as Smart Art,
maps or plans are encouraged. Use of tables and Appendices is encouraged, note
that content in these formats are not included in the word count.
The paper should be in a report style format (with headings) and should have a
structure that includes an introduction, a body and conclusion (comprising of
findings and recommendations).
You may use footnotes if necessary to include extra information, which may
otherwise disrupt the flow of the paper. Footnotes are not included in the word
count.
Include a full reference list. The reference list should be in the appropriate College
referencing style (see the Academic Writing guide). Make sure you properly
acknowledge any material from another author/source you use including research
material (such as articles, government reports/websites, and interviews). See the
Academic Writing Guide for assistance.
SPO203_Assessment Brief 3 Page 4 of 5
Learning Rubrics
Assessment Attributes Marks for each criteria |
Fail (Unacceptable) 0‐49% |
Pass (Functional) 50‐64% |
Credit (Proficient) 65‐74% |
Distinction (Advanced) 75‐84% |
High Distinction (Exceptional) 85‐100% |
Critical evaluation of chosen facility and organisation (30%) |
Poor evaluation. Significant gaps in knowledge of the facility and lack of understanding of the facility and organisation’s operational capabilities. |
Simple discussion of areas of strength and weakness in the facility and organisation’s operational capabilities. Works reflects limited engagement with the facility and organisation’s context. Not all aspects of task completed in sufficient detail. |
Identifies and discusses areas of strength and weakness in the facilities’ and organisation’s operational capabilities. Discussion of some relevant observations of the facility and organisation’s operations in evaluation. |
Identifies and clearly explains areas of strength and weakness in the facility’s and organisation’s operational capabilities. Links to organisational context and relevant observations and views in evaluation |
Identifies and insightfully discusses areas of strength and weakness in the facilities and organisation’s operational capabilities. Strong links to organisational context and relevant observations and views in evaluation. |
Explain and discuss your main observations, findings and/or conclusions arising from your research and the interview (30%) |
Poor explanation, discussion, or supporting evidence for the main observations, findings and/or conclusions. Answer expressed poorly. |
Explains and discusses main observations, findings and/or conclusions, expressed clearly. Minimal use of supporting evidence incorporated into explanation and discussion. |
Explains and examines main observations, findings and/or conclusions, expressed clearly. Moderate use of supporting evidence incorporated into explanation and discussion. |
Explains and analyses main observations, findings and/or conclusions, expressed succinctly. Appropriate use of supporting evidence incorporated into explanation and discussion. |
Explains and critically evaluates main observations, findings and/or conclusions, expressed succinctly and overall demonstrates insight. Extensive use of rational evidence incorporated into explanation and discussion. |
SPO203_Assessment Brief 3 Page 5 of 5
Demonstrates practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management (30%) |
Poor understanding and incorrect application of practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management. |
Demonstration of some practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management. |
Demonstration of reasonably practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management. |
Demonstrates significant practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management, and in the correct context. |
Extensive understanding and use of practical ideas or approaches for real life facility management, and used in the correct context. |
Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence (10%) |
Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support student’s views. There are mistakes in using the APA style. |
Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support student’s views, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. |
Is well written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support student’s views. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. |
Is very well written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good 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. |
Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high quality, credible and 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. |