MRD403 Management of Rooms Division
Unit Learning Outcomes
a. Undertake and critically reflect upon the rooms division supervisory functions
b. Assess a hotel business using management theories, concepts and business performance tools to measure, review and evaluate the essential issues in rooms division management
c. Evaluate the principles of cost control and the necessary resources for rooms division
d.
e.
Critically reflect upon safety and security measures practiced in rooms division of hotels, including risk assessment and external threats
Assess the importance and application of technology in rooms division, specifically the operation of the Opera Management System
Assessment Summary
Assessment Type Weighting Due Learning Outcomes
Reflective Portfolio
(5,000 words) 60% total Week 10 – Friday 15TH June 2018 – 5pm
a, b, c, d, e
Applied Learning
40% total
Between week 5 – 8
a, b, d, e
Assessment – Reflective Portfolio
The major assessment for this unit is a Reflective Portfolio. A portfolio is an organised collection of student work designed to represent students’ efforts and academic achievements over a period of time, in this case over a period of one term. The main purpose of this portfolio is for you to reflect upon what you have achieved and learnt throughout the term in this unit. Reflecting on your experiences will in turn give you the ability to articulate the skills developed during your time.
Throughout this term, we learnt about the different elements of Rooms Management in both theory and practical application. Students are required to complete a 5000-word Reflective Portfolio based upon each week / topic presented in this unit. A Reflective Portfolio allows students to explore their own learning process. Whereas traditional academic projects expect students to be objective and impersonal, a Reflective Portfolio asks students to highlight their own personal perspectives, opinions and feelings. It provides an honest summary of the work undertaken and the skill sets that were developed. The Reflective Portfolio is a means to review what you have learnt on a weekly basis, how concepts have related to your past experiences, how concepts could be applied to enhance your performance as a hotel leader, challenges and areas of confusion and other thoughts / opinions relating to your weekly learning experience. It is also recommended the unit learning outcomes are reflected upon for each entry.
The Portfolio can be presented as a weekly / topic journal, for example:
Introduction to Front Office
Executive Housekeeping
Effective Communication
Preparation and Review of Night Audit
Safety and Security
Labour Cost and Staffing
Facilities Management
Avoid presenting descriptive information or explaining the meaning of each learning outcome; and refer to the structural guidelines presented below:
Heading: chosen weekly subject
Topic sentence
What is your outcome and how can you summarise your learning in relation to this outcome?
For example: In response to Week 2 Introduction to Front Office, the author has learnt of a number of issues related to hotel service delivery, including but not limited to the value of employee motivation and satisfaction as internal customers.
A response to each weekly can be taken in various ways, depending on what you think has been valuable and the key idea you wish to draw upon.
Idea development
Reflect on your learning against the week subject with link/s to a broader theoretical perspective.
What you have learnt is demonstrated/supported in the literature. This is a positive link and needs to be the focus of your idea development.
Is there a theory or academic perspective that underpins what you have learnt? Think back to relevant topic material covered during the relevant lecture. Lecture slides are not an appropriate reference.
Additional development could relate to information from any of the following:
Lecture content and tutorial activities
Guest lectures
Self-directed research
This supplements academic research but does not replace it.
For example, Week 2 Introduction to Front Office could be linked to theories related to employee (internal customer) motivation and satisfaction. You may have learnt that internal customer satisfaction is crucial for external customer satisfaction, with this position supported by academic literature. Additionally, through theoretical perspectives related to employee motivation, you have learnt how to lead employees in a way that encourages excellent customer service. Effective communication is a good theoretical link, as are attributes of positive leadership. Further development could be linked to the guest lecture in Week 10.
Additional notes:
You can refer to yourself as ‘I’ or use ‘the author’ to maintain an academic tone. Either way, ensure your major ideas are supported by research and use proper paragraphing.
Applied Learning reflection is not preferred in this document, this portfolio is recommended to be primarily about the lecture topics.
Your previous work history relating to hotels is encouraged to be added to compliment your reflection of learning.
Do not quote the lecturer or presentation slides in this document, as this is not a reference.
1 introduction and 1 conclusion for the whole document is recommended, but not essential.
Submission Guidelines:
1.To be submitted in electronic form in Microsoft Word version to www.turnitin.com
2.Refer to the Assessment Structure Style Guide for the formatting.
3.Minimum of 12 references; can consist of minimum 7 academic/peer reviewed references and maximum 5 quality industry journals references
4.All referencing must be in accordance with APA 6th edition Referencing Style.
5.A school assessment cover-sheet to be submitted with your paper.
6.See marking rubric attached at the end of this document for your reference, but you do not need to attach this rubric to your submissions.
Essential Text and Materials:
•Individual texts uploaded each week on SISS
•Sturman, M.C., Corgel, J.B., Verma, R., 2011, Cornell School of Hotel Administration on Hospitality: Cutting Edge Thinking and Practice, Wiley.com
MRD403: Assessment Criteria for Portfolio
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Criterion 1
Quality of Research (30%) Research based only on a few or irrelevant secondary sources. Research based on few but relevant secondary sources mostly emphasising limited perspective. Research based on adequate number of relevant secondary and primary sources representing all perspectives in general terms. Research based on important secondary and primary sources representing all perspectives and identifying different perspectives. Research based on important secondary sources, emphasis on primary sources representing all perspectives, identifying different perspectives and contradictions.
Criterion 2
Level of analysis and application of concepts (25%) Analysis mostly absent; Lack of understanding of concepts from readings or just mentioning the terms without showing understanding. Use of terms relevant to analyse the subject matter, showing some comprehension but only a generalist understanding. Identifying different perspectives; discussing them and identifying the differences between them. Using concepts with a good understanding Discussing concepts and different perspectives integrating the relations between them and extracting implications from differences and similarities. Discussing different perspectives, integrating the relations between them and extracting implications from differences and similarities.
Criterion 3
Critical, reflective thinking and substantiation of argument (25%) Poor use of argument and absence of critical thinking and/or reflection. Minimal but convincing use of argument to substantiate the points under discussion. Some attempt at critical reflection. Actually being reflective, producing a good interpretation of issues under evaluation. Adequate substantiation of argument. Very reflective, producing a good interpretation of issues under evaluation, comparative analysis of alternative options. Relevant and convincing use of argument. Very reflective, excellent interpretation of issues under evaluation, comparing alternative options, original interpretations and reflections. Relevant convincing use of arguments to substantiate points, integrating different perspectives.
Criterion 4
Overall presentation and clarity of expression (sound sentence structure, grammar and spelling) (20%) Lacks theoretical support/evidence in discussion. Poorly supported with limited theories in discussion. Satisfactory supported with theories in discussion. Well supported with theories in discussion. Strongly supported with theories in discussion.
