Capstone Final Report Assessment South Africa's Booming Wine Industry References – should use more recent references, i.e. not later than 2012 in order to ensure validity and currency; the use of...

Capstone Final Report Assessment

South Africa's Booming Wine Industry

References – should use more recent references, i.e. not later than 2012 in order to ensure validity and currency; the use of additional references are needed. • Analysis – could be expanded further to discuss the contributing factors for issues and problems rising
. • Illustration – use of tables are encouraged to provide synthesisation
of the discussion • Literature review – needs more depth in order to encapsulate the point/s of discussion/s evident to bring about a stronger argument to demonstrate a thorough analysis needed for this Capstone Project requirements. • Conclusion – this should be written before providing recommendations; discussions are considered
lacklustre
and could be improved further by reiterating the salient points mentioned in the literature review. • Recommendations – again, discussions are rather weak and lack depth in detail on how to address the shortcomings faced by the case context leaving the purpose of this project analysis’ objectives not achieved.

Capstone Final Report Assessment Form Student name Student no Submission Date Project title South Africa’s Booming Wine Industry Project no Supervisor Dr Chun Jiang/ Dr Eugene Lim Score Descriptors for grades (Note, in capstone projects – we should have expectations that students are delivering at a level greater than 2 out of 5) 5 Work of outstanding quality surpassing expectations needed to demonstrate an excellent Capstone Project. 4 Work is of superior quality, including a capacity to demonstrate a competency/indicator at a level well above what is expected from late stage UG coursework; demonstrates learning at a superior level. 3 Work is of good quality demonstration of a competency / indicator at a level higher than what is expected from late stage UG coursework and presents a clear rationale / critique / discussion for the appropriateness / validity of the technique or tool or methodology used / applied. 2 Work is satisfactory demonstration of a competency / indicator at a level equivalent to what is expected from a late stage UG coursework. 1 Work is less than satisfactory demonstration not sufficient to demonstrate competency / indicator at level expected from late stage UG coursework material, or perhaps satisfactory demonstration of only early stage foundation level engineering science material. 0 This Indicator is not applicable to or not demonstrated in the capstone. Elements Evaluation question Supervisor evaluation Content Does the candidate clearly identify a question to be answered or problem to be solved? 0 1 2 3 4 5 Does the candidate present the results of the project in a succinct and cogent form, with suitable illustration where appropriate?       Does the candidate demonstrate significant business judgement at a level that would be reasonably expected from a pre-business undergraduate?       Is the content sufficiently substantial and broad ranging to allow coverage of the chosen assessment indicators?       Knowledge and ability Does the candidate exhibit sufficient knowledge of the research topic and familiarity with the discipline it embraces for a final report at this level?       Does the candidate demonstrate a capacity for clear thinking?       Does the candidate demonstrate significant techniques of analysis and/or evaluation as outlined in the chosen assessment indicators?       Has the candidate demonstrated an understanding of project analysis techniques and applied them effectively in their capstone project.       V2017 T4 1.0 Has the candidate demonstrated an ability to manage their own time and processes effectively, prioritising competing demands to achieve the required goals and objectives       Presentation Does the work represent a well-planned approach to the subject matter?       Is the report structured appropriately?       Does the candidate appropriately orient the reader to the ground to be covered and the arguments made?       Is the presentation of the report, in matters of grammar, spelling, punctuation and general appearance, adequate?       Additional comments • References – should use more recent references, i.e. not later than 2012 in order to ensure validity and currency; the use of additional references are needed. • Analysis – could be expanded further to discuss the contributing factors for issues and problems rising. • Illustration – use of tables are encouraged to provide synthesisation of the discussion • Literature review – needs more depth in order to encapsulate the point/s of discussion/s evident to bring about a stronger argument to demonstrate a thorough analysis needed for this Capstone Project requirements. • Conclusion – this should be written before providing recommendations; discussions are considered lacklustre and could be improved further by reiterating the salient points mentioned in the literature review. • Recommendations – again, discussions are rather weak and lack depth in detail on how to address the shortcomings faced by the case context leaving the purpose of this project analysis’ objectives not achieved. I have reviewed the turnitin similarity report and am/are satisfied with the originality and academic integrity of this work. I recommend the student is awarded the following mark/grade for Capstone Project: 50% Supervisor Dr Eugene Lim Signature Date 14/11/17 V2017 T4 1.0