CLOTHING AND TEXTILES MANAGEMENT III

MANAGEMENT - EVALUATION 3
WRITTEN REPORT & ORAL PRESENTATION

OUTCOMES:
Use clear and effective language confidently in written format to report and demonstrate an
ability to research the marketing process using the topic listed below.

General comment
It is important for any organisation to understand the concept of marketing. It is important for
the company to evaluate the key issues and concepts of marketing, how to understand the
external factors affecting a business and consumer behaviour towards marketing a product.

Prepare a comprehensive report and powerpoint presentation on “Marketing in South Africa

(by using any brand)” covering the following criteria namely:

 The basic concept of marketing;

 The role of external environmental factors in marketing;
 The impact of consumer behaviour

(Use information relevance to the topic, interpretation of topic using examples, discussion
using knowledge of topic and not copy from source).

Instructions to the students and submission dates

1) Final report to be handed in on Friday, 17th August, 2018, by 11h00 positively

followed by power point presentation of 3 minutes each. The project is an
individual presentation and report submission format. All assignments not
 handed in on time will be viewed as late and the criteria for the department
will apply. The presentations should be a max of 10 slides covering all the
areas mentioned in your report.

2) Topic must be sufficiently covered;

3) Text must be pleasant to read, logically and systematically organised, based on

information obtained from various sources of information (websites, textbooks,
journals and trade publications.

4) Acceptable and neat presentation either hand written or typed.

a) Text Type: Times Roman, Arial or Tahoma.

b) Font size :12

c) Line spacing: 1.5 line spacing.

d) Alignment: Justified

e) Number of pages content: 5 - 7

f) Minimum of 7 sources (5 sources from primary sources e.g. textbooks

and 2 from internet sources).

DEPARTMENT CLOTHING & TEXTILE TECHNOLOGY

NAME OF STUDENT:

Assessment criteria of written report

MARK DESCRIPTION
ALLOCA
TION
10 PRESENTATION
9 - 10 Professional appearance: neat writing/typing and spacing, hardly any typing
errors. All required parts/pages correctly numbered.
7-8 Neat but not quite professional in appearance: typing/spacing/numbering
inaccuracies not obtrusive; minor errors/omissions in formatting.
5-6 Acceptable but not impressive appearance: some untidiness, a few
typing/spacing/numbering errors; errors/omissions in formatting.
3-4 Untidy: illegible handwriting or typing errors impede reading; many
errors/omissions in formatting.
0-2 Slovenly appearance: paper soiled; clearly scribbled in haste; serious
errors/omissions in formatting.
10 STYLE
9 - 10 Distinctive, sparkling, sophisticated, use of language entirely appropriate to context,
resourceful.
7-8 Pleasant to read, pleasingly fluent.
5-6 Fluent, support meaning, but particularly interesting.
3-4 Conveys message with difficulty, tone can be inappropriate/irritating, jerky, style,
slight limitations of style and mastery of idiom.
0-2 Clumsy or careless, register inappropriate meaning, clouded, stylistically poor,
hazy, woolly, and wordy.
10 STRUCTURE & ORGANISATION
9 - 10 Excellent: logically, systematically organised. Links clear and coherent. Key ideas
supported, developed. Well-integrated introduction and conclusion.
7-8 Very good: logically, systematically organised with minor faults. Links mostly
clear. Almost totally coherent, with only a couple of exceptions, all key ideas
supported and developed. Introduction and conclusion functional.
6 Fairly good: organisation logical, systematic with a few problem areas, but
meaning not seriously affected. Majority of key ideas supported and developed,
although not always fully, some incoherence. Introduction and conclusion
acceptable, but need to be clearly integrated.
 4-5 Acceptable: organisation and system need some attention, but one can still follow.
Some links appear, but not always everywhere they should, some worrying
incoherence. Key ideas somewhat supported, developed, and arranged.
Introduction and conclusion still acceptable, but not well integrated.
2-3 Not acceptable: organisation and system need much attention, difficulty to follow.
Links infrequent and not always meaning. Frequent incoherence. Key ideas usually
not supported, developed and arranged. Introduction and conclusion unacceptable
and/or missing.
0-1 Totally unacceptable: virtually no organisation, no apparent system. Impossible to
follow at times. Almost no links and meaning severely affected. Mostly incoherent.
Key ideas not supported, developed or arranged. Introduction and conclusion
unacceptable and/or missing.
10 LANGUAGE (Grammar, punctuation, spelling, vocabulary)
9 - 10 Excellent use of grammatical structure and vocabulary. Very few spelling and
punctuation errors.
7-8 Very good use of grammatical structures and vocabulary. Few spelling and
punctuation errors.
6 Good use of grammatical structures and vocabulary. Spelling and punctuation
could be improved.
4-5 Adequate use of grammatical structures and vocabulary. Average mastery of
spelling and punctuation.
2-3 Restricted use of grammatical structures and vocabulary. Weak spelling and
punctuation.
0-1 Poor grammar and vocabulary. Very weak spelling and punctuation.
50 CONTENT
41 - 50 Excellent, original, subject very well covered, insight shown in topic.
31 - 40 Good, interesting, subject well covered, omissions only minor.
21 - 30 Average, material/subject sufficiently covered.
11 - 20 Below average, too thin, insufficient material/information, unconvincing.
0 - 10 Unacceptable, contains little or no relevant information.
10 REFERENCING
9 - 10 Excellent: all entries in accordance with accepted method. More than sufficient
number of sources consulted.
7-8 Good: errors/inconsistencies, only minor. Sufficient number of sources consulted.
5-6 Above average: a few obtrusive errors/inconsistencies in bibliography/text
references. More sources could have been consulted.
3-4 Below average: more incorrect than correct entries. Text referencing/bibliography
missing. Inadequate sourcing.
0-2 Unacceptable: referencing required but not provided/adequate. Referencing
inconsistent/undated/incorrect. Totally inadequate sourcing.