image

The marks were release yesterday and I am sure that we have a range of happy and unhappy students. Why the differences in marks you ask?

Overall I was reasonable happy with the assignment – they range from an excellent HD to others that just needed more effort. The comments on the actual assignment are brief (there was a technical problem with one aspect of what had been intended). Those comments should be read with those below.

some points

read the question and marking guide – you need to answer and deliver what is specified. Not answer the question you think I should have asked.

if you elected to answer in report format – it should be a proper report. Here page numbers, title pages, table of contents, section numbers, headings etc all need to be done. It should not read like it was written by a group, writing seperate sections. It must have one voice. The reports need editing and proofreading.

Address all the key areas of the Marking Criteria. Not just some

An important instruction was that your Micro Adventure needed to have a commercial potential – you needed to provide a structure experience that was differentiated. This seems to be a sticking point – this quote was from last feedback notes  “You also needed to differentiate your concept from those available now – some of you just copied the ideas (we even had people going out for lunch or catching ferry from Parramatta to City – – – there is nothing unique about these examples as anyone can do that now).” for some groups the mistake was made again. In the first assignment you were required to visit existing experiences for this assignment you had to plan and prototype your own experience. For some group they simplely visited an existing experience.

There was little justification of why or how the commercial success was likely in the Aust marketplace.

You had to ‘plan’ the adventure using design thinking tools and the experience theory of P&G. You need to demonstrate this planning. Few groups explained how the experience targeted the specified persona group, there was some customer journey mapping and only one or two groups explained the transformational nature of the experience. The planning had to be logical and step-by-step approach (a requirement was that somebody else could use your planning to conduct the experience.) There needed to be a story line that unfolded. It needed to show a process with an envisaged end. It needed to be logical and methodical so that whilst reading, one could feel that something was happening.

The concept of adventure- this is feedback from last year “Adventures are ‘challenging’ with a ‘degree of difficulty’ – – – it should not be as easy as catching public transport and getting to your destination – – -a lot of you did not present an ‘adventure’, instead you just re-packaged something which one can do on a normal day.”  This again for some groups was an issue. In one or two cases there seemed to be no group input – just participation in a ‘fun’ day out. Other groups embraced the adventure concept.

the design thinking approach treated your experience as a ‘prototype’ – after the experience you needed to reflect on the ‘prototype’ and offer improvements. This feedback was offered last year “You also had to critique your micro adventure. For this section, you needed to discuss ‘what you did right’ and ‘what you would change for the future’ to bring about improvements – – – this was not apparent in many submissions.”  While some groups offered some feedback on the experience this task was still in general not well done. Particularly in the application of the experience theory to improve the offering.

The freedom offered in mode of presenting your material was to allow you to give ‘voice’ to the project narrative. You needed to make the project come alive. Great thought needs to be given to how you present information. Much better use should be made of visuals (Diagrams, mind-maps, concept plans, photos, video).

You need to Provide material that a third party could easily replicate taking part in your adventure – some groups provided enough detail but most did not.

Start earlier. (In some cases much, much earlier)

Manage the group process. particularly time management.

Do more research on all aspect of the set task.

Worry less about the mark and more about the learning ( you will then earn the marks)

be confident and creative – in all aspects of the assignment.

i know that for some it was just an assignment – the instruction was however to create a transformational experience that was fun. If you didn’t have fun…..

 

Advertisements