2008 Beijing Olympic Games

2008 Beijing Olympic Games

individually written 3,000 word report based on an Olympic Games Host City of your choice.
(choose :2008 Beijing Olympic Games)Beijing ,China

You are to provide an in-depth analysis of a historical Olympic Games event, which should include the following:

• An overview of the historical development of the event, including bidding, planning and funding the event
• A critical analysis of the role and contribution of the event within its society, with particular reference to:
o Management of the economic, environmental and social legacy of the event
o Management of sports participation and the cultural programme
o The use of the event as a catalyst for socio-economic and tourism development within the host city

You are required to write a report, maximum length 3,000 words (+/-10%).

All sources of information should be referenced using the Harvard style of referencing.

You are strongly advised to study the intended learning outcomes that this assignment is designed to assess, before you start work on your report.
Hand in Procedures and Re sit Information

Assessment Item 1 & 2 are submitted electronically via the ‘Submit your work’ button on the module NILE site.

Re sit deadlines are available within the module guide for LEI3007

Assessment Criteria

You will be assessed on how well you carry out the assignment and how you take the opportunity to demonstrate that you have learnt what we intend you to learn in this module. For this reason you should pay attention to the intended learning outcomes that each assignment is designed to assess. A summary of which learning outcomes are assessed by which assignment is provided in the following table. A detailed description of the individual learning outcomes is then provided.

Assessment Items
Units Weighting Learning Outcomes
PS1- 1 X Paired presentation 2 40% a,b,d,g,h,i
AS1- 1 X Individual Assignment – Case Study 3 60 % a,b,c,d,e,f,i,j
Learning outcomes
The overall aim for this module is;

1. To develop an in-depth understanding of the sociological development and management of the cultural legacy that is associated with the Olympic Games Movement

On successful completion of the module, you will be able to;

Knowledge and Understanding
a) Demonstrate an ability to synthesise theoretical approaches when exploring the historical development of the Olympic Games
b) Critically reflect on the global cultural impact of the Olympic Games Movement
c) Evaluate the importance of cultural diversity in developing access to participation, in the context of the Olympic Games
d) Critically evaluate the changing political, economic and socio-culural role of the Olympic Games, and the lasting legacy in Host destinations
Subject-specific Skills

e) Apply a range of tools and analytical approaches used when planning and managing the Olympic Games legacy to a high level.
f) Examine the socio-cultural legacy of the Olympic Games, and apply to specific host destinations
g) Critically reflect on the changing role of the Olympic Games, in terms of its use as a catalyst for socio-cultural, economic and political development
Key Skills
h) Critical assess and evaluate theoretical approaches to the management of cultural legacy in host destinations
i) Demonstrate effective communication and presentation skills
j) Plan, design and execute a sustained piece of independent
intellectual work.

Assessment and Feedback Procedures

Assessments will be handed back to students within the required timescales wherever possible (please refer to your student handbook).
Written feedback will be provided to students when assignments are handed back, with the opportunity for verbal feedback if appropriate.
If a student fails an assignment, a re-sit must be taken (re-sit dates are provided within the module guide).

Students who achieve an ‘A’ grade will perform well on all of the above. You will be using a lot of theory from the module to support your points and you will be showing evidence of the ability to analyse, evaluate and critique rather than merely describe. You will making good use of a range of sources at an appropriate level and these will be correctly and fully referenced using the Harvard style.

Students achieving a ‘B’ grade will make a sound attempt to address the learning outcomes although some will not be covered sufficiently. Some theory is used to support points made and referencing is attempted though there may be some gaps.
Students achieving a ‘C’ grade have provided some work that is relevant to the topic. You will have made reference to some relevant theories though you may not be demonstrating a full grasp of now the theory is applied in context. You may not have made use of suitable academic sources and your referencing may not be complete or accurate. Your work may lean towards being descriptive.

Students achieving a ‘D’ grade may not have fully addressed the particular topic or question set out in the assignment. Work may be mostly descriptive and few if any references will be provided. The work is not at a suitable academic level and there may be evidence that some of the theory from the module is not fully understood.

Students achieving an ‘F’ grade have not understood what they were required to do. They demonstrate little application of knowledge from the module. The work is not at the required academic level and no suitable references have been provided.

In addition to the above criteria your attention is drawn to the standard Common Academic Framework (CAF) Grade Criteria. A copy is appended to this document.

Common Academic Framework Grade Criteria

80 – 100 A+ An exceptional first Work which fulfils all the criteria of the A grade, but at an exceptional standard for the level concerned.
75 – 79 A A good first Work of distinguished quality which is based on extensive research and/or strong technical and creative competence. An authoritative grasp of concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the subject/discipline and to the assessment task will be demonstrated. There is clear evidence of originality and insight and an ability to sustain an argument and/or solve discipline related problems, based on critical analysis and/or evaluation. The ability to synthesise material effectively and the potential for skilled innovation in thinking and practice will be evident. Capability in relation to relevant key skills for the assessment task will also be strongly evidenced.
70 – 74 A- A first Work of very good quality which displays most, but not all of the A grade characteristics for the level concerned.
67 – 69 B+ A high upper second Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the B grade for the level concerned, but shows greater insight and/or originality.
63 – 66 B A good upper second Work of good quality which is based on a wide range of properly referenced sources and/or creative input, demonstrating a sound and above average level of understanding of concepts, methodology and content appropriate to the subject/discipline and to the assessment ask. There is clear evidence of critical judgement in selecting, ordering and analysing content to construct a sound argument based on responses which reveal occasional insight and/or originality. Ability to solve discipline-related problems will be effectively and consistently demonstrated, with relevant key skills capability well developed and evidenced.
60 – 62 B- An upper second Work of good quality which contains most, but not all of the B grade characteristics for the level concerned.
57 – 59 C+ A high lower second Work which clearly fulfils all the criteria of the C grade for the level concerned, but shows a greater degree of critical analysis and/or insight.

53 – 56 C A good lower second Work of sound quality which is based on satisfactorily referenced sources and/or creative input and which demonstrates a grasp of relevant material and key concepts, together with ability to structure and organise arguments or materials effectively. The work may be rather standard, but will be mostly accurate, clearly communicated and provide some evidence of ability to engage in critical analysis and/or evaluation. There will be no serious omissions or irrelevancies and there will be evidence of generally sound capability in key skills relevant to the task. In dealing with solutions to technical problems, appropriate methods will be chosen.

50 – 52 C- A lower second Work of sound quality which contains most, but not all of the C grade characteristics for the level concerned.
47 – 49 D+ A high third Work of a satisfactory standard demonstrating a reasonable level of understanding, but lacking sufficient analysis and independence to warrant a C grade at the level concerned.
43 – 46 D A good third Work of satisfactory quality which covers the basic subject matter adequately and is appropriately organised and presented, but which is primarily descriptive or derivative rather than analytical or creative. There may be some misunderstanding of key concepts and limitations in the ability to select relevant material or techniques, and/or in communication or other relevant skills, so that the work may be flawed by some errors, omissions or irrelevancies. There will be some evidence of appropriate research and ability to construct an argument, but it may be narrowly focused. In dealing with solutions to technical problems, established and appropriate methods will generally be chosen, but these may be applied uncritically.
40 – 42 D- A third Work of bare pass standard demonstrating some familiarity with relevant subject matter and application of relevant academic capabilities, but only just meeting threshold standards in, eg research, analysis, organisation, focus or other key general or subject specific skills essential to the assessment task, and/or with significant errors or omissions.
35 – 39 F+ A marginal fail Work which indicates some evidence of engagement with the subject material and learning process, but which is, eg, essentially misinterpreted, misdirected, misunderstood or poorly organised and sketchy or otherwise just failing to meet threshold standards at the level concerned.
20 – 34 F A fail Work that falls well short of the threshold standards at the level concerned. It may address the task to some extent, or include evidence of successful engagement with some of the subject material, but such satisfactory ingredients will be clearly outweighed by major deficiencies across remaining areas.
5 – 19 F- A comprehensive fail Work of poor quality which is based on only minimal understanding, application or effort. It will offer only very limited evidence of familiarity with subject material or skills appropriate to the discipline or task and/or demonstrates inadequate capability in key general skills essential to the assessment task at the level concerned.
0 – 4 G Nothing presented, or work containing nothing of merit.


  • Buy an assignment from
  • us today and save 22%!
  • Enter the discount code: CPH22