ASSESSMENT: Golcar Brewery
|Module Title:||Digital and Social Media Marketing|
|Assessment Type||Individual Portfolio (60%)|
|Academic Year||2020/21 (Term 2)|
|Based on the strategy you developed in the individual essay assessment for Golcar Brewery, you should now focus on presenting your digital marketing campaign objectives and action plan for the email, website (including SEO), and social media marketing.
Golcar Brewery (http://www.golcarbrewery.co.uk/) was established by John Broadbent in 2001 to supply his village pub, The Rose & Crown, with its own beer. The Rose remains a regular outlet for John’s beers whilst the brewery has expanded and supplies beer to the free trade throughout West Yorkshire. Four regular beers are available along with specials.
Golcar Brewery is one of many SMEs operating within a vibrant food and drink sector in the Kirklees region. Other local craft ale SMEs include Empire Brewing (http://empirebrewing.com/beers/), Lords Brewing (https://www.lordsbrewing.com/brewery), and Magic Rock (https://www.magicrockbrewing.com/).
At present, Golcar Brewery has a limited digital footprint. They mainly rely on traditional print media (newspapers and magazine advertisements) and word-of-mouth communications. The managers recognise that a digital presence is essential to develop the customer base and expand their business. This business has invited you, as an external marketing consultant, to conduct a marketing audit of their current web presence, and to outline a digital and social media marketing strategy for the next 3 years.
|Task specific guidance:
Your individual portfolio provides details of the following:
· SMART objectives that are channel specific (i.e. email, website, social media marketing) (20%)
· Action plan (includes recommendations and justifications for prototypes for implementing the digital marketing campaign including: email, website design, SEO, and social media advertisements and/or posts) (50%)
· Evaluation (20%)
You will be required to develop a fully functioning website prototype which includes as a minimum 5 pages (you could use Wix, WordPress.com or Edublogs). You will need to include a wire frame (you could use Marvel) to provide a navigational outline showing the planning process for your website prototype.
Your individual portfolio will be preferred in the form of the website using any free program such as Wix, WordPress.com, or Edublogs. Your portfolio should include pages on:
· SMART objectives (approx. 600 words)
· Action plan (approx. 1500 words)
· Evaluation (approx. 600 words)
· Website prototype for case scenario company
|General study guidance:
· Cite all information used in your work which is clearly from a source. Try to ensure that all sources in your reference list are seen as citations in your work, and all names cited in the work appear in your reference list.
· Reference and cite your work in accordance with the APA 7th system – the University’s chosen referencing style. For specific advice, you can talk to your Business librarians or go to the library help desk, or you can access library guidance via the following link:
o APA 7th referencing: https://library.hud.ac.uk/pages/apareferencing/
· If you have any concerns about your writing, referencing, research or presentation skills, you are welcome to consult the Learning Innovation Development Centre team email@example.com. It is possible to arrange 1:1 consultation with a LIDC tutor once you have planned or written a section of your work, so that they can advise you on areas to develop.
· Do not exceed the word limit / time / other limit.
This section is for information only.
The assessment task outlined above has been designed to address specific validated learning outcomes for this module. It is useful to keep in mind that these are the things you need to show in this piece of work.
On completion of this module, students will need to demonstrate:
4. Critically research and assess opportunities for the application of digital and social media marketing practices within specific markets
5. Create and apply detailed, actionable e-marketing plans
6. Identify and manage information, web analytics, systems and process requirements for successful integrated, customer-focused e-marketing management
7. Apply quantitative techniques to analyse marketing data
Please note these learning outcomes are not additional questions.
|Submission Method:||Electronically via module site in Brightspace. Paper/hard copy submissions are not required. For technical support, please contact: firstname.lastname@example.org|
Appendix 1 Assessment criteria
These criteria are intended to help you understand how your work will be assessed. They describe different levels of performance of a given criteria.
Criteria are not weighted equally, and the marking process involves academic judgement and interpretation within the marking criteria.
The grades between Pass and Very Good should be considered as different levels of performance within the normal bounds of the module. The Exceptional and Outstanding categories allow for students who, in addition to fulfilling the Excellent requirements, perform at a superior level beyond the normal boundaries of the module and demonstrate intellectual creativity, originality and innovation.
|90-100||80-89||70-79||60-69||50-59||40-49||30-39||20-29||10 – 19||0 – 9|
|Fulfilment of relevant learning outcomes||Met||Met||Met||Met||Met||Met||Not met or partially met||Not met or partially met||Not met or minimal||Not met or minimal|
|Response to the question /task||Full command of assessment task; imaginative approach demonstrating flair and creativity||Clear command of assessment task; sophisticated approach||Very good response to task; elements of sophistication in response||Well-developed response to assessment task with evident development of ideas||Secure response to assessment task but not developed sufficiently developed to achieved higher grade||Adequate response that meets minimum threshold, but with limitations of development||Nearly a sufficient response but lacks key aspects.||Insufficient response||Little response||No response|
|Knowledge and understanding (F, I and H)
Knowledge requirements are different at F, I and H level. Please use the relevant level knowledge assessment criteria
|Conceptual and critical understanding of contemporary knowledge in the subject and its limitations (H)||Skilfully integrates conceptual knowledge from
other modules or disciplinary areas to provide original/ creative critical insights into the subject and its ambiguities in a considered individual voice
|Excellent conceptual knowledge and critical appreciation of the key tensions, controversies disagreements and disputes drawing on ideas from beyond the module bounds. Offers original, compelling, insightful or interesting additional perspectives.||Draws on an extended conceptual knowledge
Shows very strong ability to apply/ critique ideas and a well-developed consideration of the limitations of knowledge.
Performance at this level and above shows intellectual comfort with doubt, ambiguity, controversy, uncertainly and complexity -rather than seeking certainty and a single right answer.
|Demonstrates competent conceptual knowledge drawing on a broader knowledge base. A good attempt at integrating and critiquing. Some solid insights into the limitations of knowledge.
No major errors or misunderstanding.
|Demonstrates secure conceptual knowledge, conventional critical understanding of relevant knowledge. Some awareness of the limitations of knowledge.
Lacks depth of integrating ideas.
|Demonstrates adequate basic conceptual knowledge, some formulaic critical understanding and awareness of limitations of knowledge.
No integration of ideas.
Some errors and/or gaps in coverage and relevance
|Mentions some terminology relating to theories, concepts
Demonstrates insufficient grasp of a basic knowledge. Very limited critical understanding and awareness of the limitations of knowledge.
Many errors in understanding and omissions.
|Demonstrates little core knowledge. No critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.
Major misunderstandings and significant omissions.
|Demonstrates virtually no core knowledge or critical insight or awareness of the limitations of knowledge.
Many errors in understanding and extensive omissions.
Cognitive / Intellectual skills
A range of means of framing cognitive and intellectual skills are provided to reflect the variety of assessment tasks across the School. Module leaders should consider the following criteria and select the one(s) that best reflect the assessment tasks. Assessment task briefs should be designed with sufficient information to provide students with a clear understanding of the core intellectual skills expected within the bounds of the module– corresponding with the appropriate level of study
Module leaders should be clear about the nature of information / data to be analysed, as well as the ‘tools’ of analysis expected. Analytical tools can be based on logic (comparison, connection, categorisation, evaluation, justification) and/or numerical (e.g. statistics, financial) or other.
|Analysis of information / data using qualitative or quantitative analytical methods||Shows inspired / creative insights of both analytical method and results/ findings/ conclusions.||Adapts, combines, and possibly reconfigures recognized analytical methods in a way that leads to enhanced insight into a problem area.||Extended and accurate analysis of information / data.
Expected analytical methods used are wholly appropriately within normal boundaries.
Fully appropriate results/conclusions of analysis within the scope of the tool.
|Competent analysis with evident use of analytical methods.
Fully appropriate results / conclusions / findings.
No major errors or misunderstanding.
|Secure basic analysis with generally sound use of analytical methods.
Largely appropriate results with few significant errors
|Adequate basic analysis with largely appropriate use of analytical methods.
Partially appropriate results/ finding/conclusions with some errors
|Inadequate analysis with largely appropriate use of analytical methods. Partially appropriate results with some errors||Barely any relevant analytical methods of information / data. Major misunderstandings or omissions||Negligible analysis of information / data Many errors in understanding and omissions.||No relevant analysis of information / data|
|Application of knowledge / skills to practice / a solution(s) / proposal / conclusion||Creative & original application of knowledge /skills to produce new insights and offers a novel and comprehensive solution / proposal / conclusion which extends beyond the boundary of the brief.||Applies knowledge / skills to develop a comprehensive solution / proposal / conclusion which extends beyond the original boundary of the brief.
|Applies knowledge / skill in a sophisticated manner to develop a well conceptualised and solution / proposal / conclusion.
Alternative approaches might be considered.
Thoughtful and developed insights/ creativity.
|Applies knowledge/skill in a logical and developed manner to provide a considered solution / proposal / conclusion.
Some good insights /creativity
No logical errors.
|Applies knowledge/skill in a logical manner to provide a more developed solution / proposal / conclusion.
Some but limited insights/creativity.
Few logical errors
|Applies knowledge/skills in a basic manner to develop a simple but limited solution/ proposal/conclusion.
No insights / creativity
Logical errors evident.
|Use of some knowledge to provide a solution / proposal / conclusion, but limited solution/ proposal / conclusion||Some use of knowledge, but mostly insufficient.||Weak use of knowledge / skills evident. Very limited solution / proposal / conclusion.||No evidence of attempt to analyse or interpret information or provide a solution/proposal/ conclusion.|
|Argument, reasoning||Intellectually coherent and comprehensive argument that articulates authentic, considered stance in own voice||Compelling argument that shows intellectual agility and captures ambiguity. Wholly relevant.||Sharply focused and complex argument.
All points wholly relevant
Convincing and coherent reasoning.
|Clearly articulated argument with consideration of different perspectives.
Mostly relevant points.
Logically coherent reasoning.
|Satisfactory argument but limited in complexity.
Broadly relevant points.
Some limitations in terms of reasoning
|Adequate basic level of argument provided.
Some relevant points but also a number of irrelevant points
Errors in reasoning.
|Weak argument with substantial errors in reasoning.||Descriptive or largely incoherent||Largely incoherent||No argument is offered|
|Use of referenced* evidence and sources to support task
*Normally APA 7th or OSCOLA
|Systematic and rigorous use of evidence/ sources beyond the normal bounds of the module to robustly support purpose of the work. Evidence of independent reading and research.
Referencing fully competent and accurate
|Comprehensive use of high-quality evidence and sources beyond the normal bounds of the module and shows evidence of independent reading and research.
Referencing fully competent and accurate
|Task is very well supported by very extensive use of evidence / sources.
All points fully substantiated.
No unsubstantiated points.
Referencing fully competent and accurate
|Task is well supported by more developed use of sources/evidence
Most points are substantiated and no major unsubstantiated points
Referencing largely competent and accurate. Some minor errors in citations or references.
|Task is supported by several sources /evidence.
Some points are unsubstantiated.
Referencing largely competent and accurate but may include errors
|Task supported by basic evidence and sources but is over-reliant on very few sources.
Significant number of points are unsubstantiated.
Some effort to reference, but frequent errors and omissions
|One or two apparent references to concepts introduced in the assessment task
Very few points are substantiated using evidence / sources.
Significant errors and omissions in referencing
|Little or no evidence
Significant errors and omissions in citation and application of referencing
Very little attempt to cite or reference
|Structure and, style in supporting the development of ideas
(criteria relevant for essay-style work)
|Elegant flow and structure is integral to the argument. An exceptional demonstration of academic writing which effectively guides the reader.||Elegance of flow that skilfully through the work and excellently supports key message.
|Well-ordered logical flow of material in a fluid style which contributes well to the development of the key messages and guides the reader through the writer’s thinking.
|Clear logical and structured flow of material that guides the reader and supports the development of key messages.||Basic logical flow of material with elements of signposting for the reader which supports key messages to some extent, but which can lapse in places.||Some logical flow of material with some observable elements of signposting for the reader but elements of disorganisation
May contain repetition or irrelevant material which obscures the key messages.
|Some attempt at structure, but disorganized and ineffectual in reflecting argument or analysis.||No evident intent of structure. Disorganised, irrelevant or repetitive content.||None||Insufficient evidence|
|Language and style||Lucid, fluent, elegant, and compelling, using a distinctive and individual voice||Clear and fluent with a breadth of vocabulary. Discernible author voice.||Clear functional writing with a discernible author voice.||Clear and straightforward use language.
Largely error free
|Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and syntax.
|Basic use of vocabulary, grammar and syntax that conveys the meaning of the text.
|Many vocabulary, grammar and syntax errors that obscure meaning||Extensive flaws in vocabulary, grammar and syntax that prevent the text from being understandable.||Unacceptable||Insufficient evidence|
|Formatting of work (font, pagination, labelling)||Impeccable formatting entirely consonant with assessment brief expectations||Excellent formatting. Polished and consonant with the assessment brief expectations.||Formatting consonant with assessment brief expectations. No formatting issues.||Formatting very largely free from major presentational problems and consonant with assessment brief.||Formatting broadly consonant with assessment brief but some breaches of guidance.||Acceptable formatting, but some breaches of guidance. Some unprofessional aspects||Formatting not sufficiently consonant with assessment brief. Multiple formatting issues.||Formatting not consonant with assessment brief. Very poor with multiple formatting issues||No discernible attempt format work.||No formatting|