Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
More like this
Coursework Result Appeal
Appeal against NRSG259 marking and feedback re Assessment 1B and Assessment 2
6 Comments
Quote from my feedback for Event Proposal, despite the fact that these 3 factors (Costings, contingency plan, and role delegation) were for the NEXT assignment (Event Marketing Plan): "However, other details were lacking, in particular costing the event, contingency planning, and delegation of duties within the group."
There is nothing stating in the Event Proposal brief that indicates we have to mention our finances. This assignment is a PROPOSAL, the second assignment we have just completed is a MARKETING PLAN, which included COSTINGS. Almost everything my group had proposed in this first assignment has changed so why would we have gone to the effort to produce financial records / predictions for somewhere or something that wasn't guaranteed to go ahead. I think this may be some of the most ridiculously incompetent marking and feedback I've ever received while studying at LCoM.
We were not told to include a technical specification or financial information as they would be included in the marketing plan in the next assignment.
I didn't hear simon say that costings didn't need to be mentioned, but the brief doesn't say that costings need to me mentioned until assignment two. I also sent Simon a draft of my proposal to which he said that I was only missing one thing, and didn't mention going into more detail about costs or contingency planning.
Didn't hear Simon say that couldn't mention costings but its pretty clear from the briefs that fiances should be included in assignment 2. Also my feedback says that I should have gone into more detail in 'costing, delegation of duties, contingency planning' which are all mentioned (or at least implied) in the second assignment briefs but not the first assignment. I think there has also been a general miscommunication between Simon's idea of what is expected and what the briefs actually say, throughout the module. Despite this I am happy with my mark, It's just a bit frustrating to read this in the feedback.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Copy link or share directly
Status: Closed — this petition is no longer accepting signatures.
Final supporters
6 Comments
Information in brief is not clear. The criticisms given were relative to information that wasn't clearly asked for and was specifically not to be included in the first assignment- according to our tutor. Furthermore, with this information in both the proposal and marketing assignment it would make both hand ins very similar in content. Also, in order to include this extra criteria in assignment one the word count would need to be larger. 1500 words is not suitable for what is now being proposed.
Quote from my feedback for Event Proposal, despite the fact that these 3 factors (Costings, contingency plan, and role delegation) were for the NEXT assignment (Event Marketing Plan): "However, other details were lacking, in particular costing the event, contingency planning, and delegation of duties within the group."
There is nothing stating in the Event Proposal brief that indicates we have to mention our finances. This assignment is a PROPOSAL, the second assignment we have just completed is a MARKETING PLAN, which included COSTINGS. Almost everything my group had proposed in this first assignment has changed so why would we have gone to the effort to produce financial records / predictions for somewhere or something that wasn't guaranteed to go ahead. I think this may be some of the most ridiculously incompetent marking and feedback I've ever received while studying at LCoM.
We were not told to include a technical specification or financial information as they would be included in the marketing plan in the next assignment.
I didn't hear simon say that costings didn't need to be mentioned, but the brief doesn't say that costings need to me mentioned until assignment two. I also sent Simon a draft of my proposal to which he said that I was only missing one thing, and didn't mention going into more detail about costs or contingency planning.
Didn't hear Simon say that couldn't mention costings but its pretty clear from the briefs that fiances should be included in assignment 2. Also my feedback says that I should have gone into more detail in 'costing, delegation of duties, contingency planning' which are all mentioned (or at least implied) in the second assignment briefs but not the first assignment. I think there has also been a general miscommunication between Simon's idea of what is expected and what the briefs actually say, throughout the module. Despite this I am happy with my mark, It's just a bit frustrating to read this in the feedback.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Information in brief is not clear. The criticisms given were relative to information that wasn't clearly asked for and was specifically not to be included in the first assignment- according to our tutor. Furthermore, with this information in both the proposal and marketing assignment it would make both hand ins very similar in content. Also, in order to include this extra criteria in assignment one the word count would need to be larger. 1500 words is not suitable for what is now being proposed.