conduct a virtual site inspection though a website of a venue and evaluate a potential site for a meeting with 100 people at an international hotel or an event site the meetings will be held for two days create all the details for this meeting that

Option #2: Virtual Site Inspection

Conduct a virtual site inspection (though a website of a venue) and evaluate a potential site for a meeting with 100 people at an international hotel or an event site. The meetings will be held for two days. Create all the details for this meeting that would include:

  • A discussion on the nature of the meeting
  • The scope of what the meeting planner needs to complete
  • Details for breakout rooms
  • Determine all meals
  • Explain crowd management strategies
  • The fiscal requirements.

Your paper should be three to four pages in length (excluding cover page and at least three supporting references) and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA (Links to an external site.). Be sure to discuss and reference concepts taken from the assigned textbook reading and relevant research. You must include a minimum of three credible, academic or professional references. Review the grading rubric to see how you will be graded for this assignment.

Be sure to check out the Hospitality Tourism Management guide in the CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.). Here you can:

  • Locate a variety of information sources that deal with hospitality, tourism, and management.
  • Gather industry information specific to different aspects of hospitality or tourism.
  • Locate writing and citing help.

Grading rubric below:





Upload a file, or choose a file you’ve already uploaded.
remove empty attachment

remove empty attachment

Submitting…

Before you can submit assignments directly from Google Drive you need to authorize Canvas to access your Google Drive account: Authorize Google Drive Access

Rubric

true

309993

Can’t change a rubric once you’ve started using it.

Find a Rubric

Find Rubric

HTM320 Mod 5 CT

You’ve already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.

HTM320 Mod 5 CT

Criteria Ratings Pts

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRequirements _8862

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >12.0 pts

Meets Expectation

Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment.

_2824

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >9.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment.

_5480

Edit ratingDelete rating

9.0 to >6.0 pts

Below Expectation

Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment.

_8654

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >0 pts

Limited Evidence

Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.

_4829

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

/ 15.0 pts

Additional Comments

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent _2370

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

25.0 to >20.0 pts

Meets Expectation

Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of the materials, including an understanding of the site inspection process and components.

_3336

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >15.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

Some significant, but not major, errors or omissions in understanding the site inspection process and components.

_504

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >10.0 pts

Below Expectation

Major errors or omissions in understanding the site inspection process and components.

_3819

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >0 pts

Limited Evidence

Fails to demonstrate an understanding of the site inspection process and components.

_2708

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

/ 25.0 pts

Additional Comments

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnalysis _6722

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

25.0 to >20.0 pts

Meets Expectation

Provides strong or adequate thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and applications, including an understanding of the site inspection process, the nature of the meeting, the meeting planner’s scope of responsibilities, and the fiscal requirements.

_6598

Edit ratingDelete rating

20.0 to >15.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

Some significant, but not major, errors or omissions in thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and applications related to the site inspection process, the nature of the meeting, the meeting planner’s scope of responsibilities, and the fiscal requirements.

_7470

Edit ratingDelete rating

15.0 to >10.0 pts

Below Expectation

Major errors or omissions in thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and applications related to the site inspection process, the nature of the meeting, the meeting planner’s scope of responsibilities, and the fiscal requirements.

_688

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >0 pts

Limited Evidence

Fails to demonstrate thought, insight, and analysis of concepts and applications related to the site inspection process, the nature of the meeting, the meeting planner’s scope of responsibilities, and the fiscal requirements.

_1138

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

/ 25.0 pts

Additional Comments

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style. _6191

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.0 pts

Meets Expectation

Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format, as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors in grammar and spelling.

_885

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.0 to >6.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

Project is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format, as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling.

_1057

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >4.0 pts

Below Expectation

Project is poorly organized; does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in grammar and spelling.

_9690

Edit ratingDelete rating

4.0 to >0 pts

Limited Evidence

Project is not organized or well written and is not in proper paper format. Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.

_9052

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

/ 10.0 pts

Additional Comments

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDemonstrates proper use of APA style _6606

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.0 pts

Meets Expectation

Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with no more than one significant error.

_6137

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.0 to >6.0 pts

Approaches Expectation

Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with no more than two to three significant errors.

_6438

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >4.0 pts

Below Expectation

Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with four to five significant errors.

_3804

Edit ratingDelete rating

4.0 to >0 pts

Limited Evidence

Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with more than five significant errors.

_7529

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

/ 10.0 pts

Additional Comments

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion

<