1
Assessment 3 Information
Subject Code: MBA601
Subject Name: Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship
Assessment Title: 3 minute pitch in-class, and an additional self-reflection recording
Weighting: 20% – Individual
Total Marks: 20
Due Date: Week 12 (for the elevator pitch in-class) and Monday of Week 13 at
11:55pm AEST for the self-reflection recording
.
Assessment Description.
You are to prepare a 3-minute “elevator pitch” for your new venture. This assessment is to be
presented in class. A self-reflection recording is also to be submitted. You have creative freedom with
this presentation to “sell/promote” your new venture to your class mates who are potential investors
and business partners. Importantly, the “elevator pitch” presentation is limited to three minutes only.
This assessment will focus on LO 2 and 3 and will draw from Workshops 5 to 11.
Assessment Details: Elevator Pitch
This is an individual assessment and you are to generate for your new venture, product or service
idea a 3-minute pitch.
Your pitch should incorporate the idea from Assessment 1 and business plan from Assessment 2.
Your pitch will follow the format shown here https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/242523 and an
example of the “elevator pitch” presentation can be viewed on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6O98o2FRHw. There are several other excellent examples
on YouTube.
You are required to perform this in class.
Assessment Details: Self-Reflection Recording
By Monday of Week 13, you are to record a 5-minute self-reflection video and upload it using the
instructions that your Workshop Leader will provide you closer to the due date.
This self-reflection video, using whatever creative methods you like, must address the following
questions:
– How do you feel you have performed in this subject?
– Are you now more likely or less likely to pursue a career as an entrepreneur? Why?
– What did you discover or learn that surprised you about entrepreneurship?
– When reflecting on where you are now compared to where you were at the beginning of this
trimester, what changes have you observed in yourself?
2
Marking Rubric for the 3-minute pitch
Criteria HD (High Distinction)
85%-100%
DN (Distinction)
75%-84%
CR (Credit)
65%-74%
P (Pass)
50%-64%
NN (Fail)
0%-49%
Introduction – briefly outlines the
pitch clearly and succinctly
o Comprehensive statement
of aims and scope
o Sufficiently detailed
statement of aims and
scope
o Solid outline of aims and
scope
o Brief outline of aims or
scope
o Does not state aims or
scope
Research and analytical skills
embedded in the pitch.
Articulated clearly and succinctly.
o Critically analyses and
interprets business specific
information to an excellent
level of understanding.
o Analysis clearly identifies,
defines and applies relevant
theories and concepts.
o Extensive research is
evident; quality selection
and range of scholarly
sources employed.
o Analyses and interprets
business specific
information to a high level of
understanding.
o Analysis convincingly
identifies, defines and
applies relevant theories
and concepts.
o High degree of research
effort evident; quality
selection and range of
scholarly sources
employed.
o Analyses business specific
information to a good
working knowledge.
o Good working knowledge of
relevant theories and
concepts.
o Research is focused, drawn
from an appropriate range
of scholarly sources,
however could be more
extensive in nature.
o Analyses business specific
information to a limited
degree.
o Analysis identifies, defines
and applies limited relevant
theories and concepts.
o Research effort limited
however evident; both intext
referencing and
reference list employed.
o Analysis lacks depth, and
interpretation lacking or
irrelevant.
o Analysis does not identify,
define or apply relevant
theories and concepts.
o Research is either absent or
lacks focus due to
unsuitable choice of
sources.
Arguments, conclusion and
justification offered clearly and
succinctly in the pitch.
o Draws together the key
findings of the analysis
comprehensively and
convincingly.
o Excellent evaluations with
succinct & highly developed
recommendations.
o Draws together the key
findings of the analysis
comprehensively.
o Very good conclusions with
a number of credible
recommendations.
o Draws together the key
findings of the analysis in a
well-written manner.
o Good conclusions with
several reasonable
recommendations.
o Draws together the findings
of the analysis in an
acceptable manner.
o Acceptable conclusions with
limited recommendations.
o Does not draw together the
key findings of the analysis.
o No real conclusion
apparent.
Pitch Presentation Structure and
delivery on time and clear
evidence of the pitch objective.
o Presentation is of a high
professional standard,
highly informative, wellstructured
and convincing.
o Writing is consistently
cohesive and of excellent
academic and professional
standard.
o Grammar and spelling are
flawless (or close enough)
throughout the report.
o Seamless flow between
discussion points and
sections.
o Report is professionally
presented to required
formatting standards.
o In-text referencing and
reference list are correct.
o Presentation is of a high
standard, highly informative,
well-structured and
convincing.
o Writing is cohesive and of
high academic and
professional standard.
o Grammar and spelling are
of excellent quality
throughout the report.
o Logical and rational flow
between discussion points
and sections.
o Formatting is well presented
with only minor errors.
o In-text referencing and
reference list are mostly
correct.
o Presentation is of good
standard, logically
structured yet needed more
clarity around the
opportunity and the
investment return.
o Writing is easily readable
but not always cohesive.
o Grammar and spelling are
very good.
o Ideas/themes developed,
but connections not always
obvious.
o Flow and readability have
opportunity for
improvement.
o Format chosen is mostly
appropriate.
o In-text referencing and
reference list are very good
but there are some errors.
o Presentation is of average
standard with disjointed
structured and limited clarity
around the opportunity and
the investment return
o Writing is understandable
but infrequently cohesive.
o Grammar and spelling
contain some errors.
o Critical thinking shows
limitations.
o Format chosen is good
enough but requires
improvement.
o In-text referencing and
reference list are
acceptable but errors are
obvious throughout.
o Presentation is of poor
standard, not structured
with poor clarity around the
opportunity and the
investment return
o Writing mostly disjointed,
demonstrating little or no
structure.
o Spelling and/or grammar
impact on flow and
readability.
o No evidence of critical
thinking.
o Format chosen lacks
structure and cohesion.
o In-text referencing and/or
referencing list missing
and/or incorrect.
Comments:
Assessment Mark/Grade:
Assignment Help & writing Services in Australia
