Google Analytics Data Analysis-Report

 

Assessment task details and instructions

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Google Analytics Data Analysis-Report
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

 

You are required to prepare a report that demonstrates your analytical skills acquired during the module.

The main task is to conduct a purposive and meaningful analysis of recent google analytics data from Google Merchandise Store and present the results from the analysis and its interpretation in an effective manner utilising statistic.

 

At the beginning of the module, students will be provided access to the google analytics account. The student should:

1)      first look at the data available in the google reports

2)      identify meaningful and purposive study objectives specific to a time/period of analysis, which includes recent data to the delivery of the module, for Google Merchandise; you should specify what you want to extract from the data that can be useful for improvements (e.g. increase online sales in a particular area)

3)      analyse and interpret the data available in the reports.

 

 

 

 

 

Knowledge and Understanding

 

 

 

 

 

 

Practical, Professional or Subject Specific Skills

 

Assessed intended learning outcomes

On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:

1.      Demonstrate a critical awareness of the concepts, theories and debates surrounding digital marketing strategy

3.      Critically analyse and interpret web analytics to support an organisations digital marketing strategy

4.      Design and conduct a digital analytics project.

 

 

 

5.      Problem solving and critical analysis: analysing facts and circumstances to determine the cause of a problem and identifying and selecting appropriate solutions

6.      Research: the ability to analyse and evaluate a range of business data, sources of information and appropriate methodologies, which includes the need for strong digital literacy, and to use that research for evidence-based decision-making

7.      Commercial acumen: based on an awareness of the key drivers for business success, causes of failure and the importance of providing customer satisfaction and building customer loyalty

8.      Innovation, creativity and enterprise: the ability to act entrepreneurially to generate, develop and communicate ideas, manage and exploit intellectual property, gain support, and deliver successful outcomes Numeracy: the use of quantitative skills to manipulate data, evaluate, estimate and model business problems, functions and phenomena

9.      Numeracy: the use of quantitative skills to manipulate data, evaluate, estimate and model business problems, functions and phenomena

 

Transferable Skills and other Attributes

12.  Critically analyse and apply key ideas and concepts via comprehensive research relevant both to the subject area and to professional practice in the field

13.  Use terminology associated with the subject area accurately and in a way, which demonstrates sophisticated knowledge and understanding

14.  Develop and enhance both individually and collaboratively effective written and oral communication skills for both specialist and non-specialist audiences

Module Aims  

1.      Critically evaluate the drivers, significance, trends, issues and theories underpinning digital marketing and digital analytics

2.      Critically appraise topics and aspects related to digital marketing strategy and analytics.

3.      Critically appraise the implementation of digital marketing in organisation using the latest techniques in digital analytics.

 

Word count/ duration (if applicable)

 

The word count is 3,000 words (excluding figures, charts, appendices, list of references). Any work beyond the 3,000-word limit will not be considered for marking.

Appendices should be no longer than 3 A4 single sided. The editorial requirements are: font Calibri 11 or 12, one and a half line spacing.

 

Please note that appendices and tables are not an extension of your analysis and must not be used for this purpose. If their content is part of the discussion rather than in support of the discussion, they will be considered in the word count.

 

 

Feedback arrangements

 

You can expect to receive feedback via OnlineCampus in two weeks from submission deadline.

 

Support arrangements

 

You can obtain support for this assessment by attending the class discussions and asking questions in the dedicated forum thread.

 

 

Assessment Criteria

 

a.      Identification of clear and meaningful objectives and indication of which technique is used to achieve them (10 marks).

b.      Use of the analytical techniques and interpretation of the outcome (80 marks).

c.       Report presentation and referencing (10 marks).

 

See also attached assessment criteria.

In Year Retrieval Scheme Your assessment is not eligible for in year retrieval.
Reassessment

 

If you fail your assessment, and are eligible for reassessment, you will be advised of the resubmission date by the School Office.

For students with accepted personal mitigating circumstances, this will be your replacement assessment attempt.

Students should be aware that there is no late submission period at reassessment (this includes those students who have an accepted PMC request from a previous attempt).

 

If you need to be reassessed, the reassessment will be the same as the original assessment.

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Descriptors % Mark Criteria
Outstanding 90-100% Provides an exceptional report that has the potential to contribute to the existing theory related to consumer analytics. There is evidence to show that the team has conducted an exhaustive review and of analytical techniques in order to develop a brilliant model for analysis that is both purposive as well as enhances the existing knowledge in consumer analytics. Clever and logical transformation of the data is undertaken to wherever necessary –with clear explanations given, to induce greater meaning to the context. There is also evidence for a wide-ranging review of literature and outstanding awareness of the latest techniques and theoretical frameworks related to consumer analytics. Outstanding clarity and structure of the report and referencing.
Excellent 80-89% Highly creative and effective use of the data in the analysis with excellent choice of statistical techniques followed by excellent and novel analysis of the data. The representation of the results provides excellent evidence for outstanding understanding of the application of these techniques. The implications of the data analysis are presented with an excellent attempt at contextualisation so as to bring out a clear and coherent interpretation and evidence for tying this to the decision-making problem. Excellent clarity and structure of the report and referencing.

 

Very Good 70-79% The explanation for the choice of data is very good with appropriate contextualisation provided to construct the research problem. Very good logic provided for the analysis and choice of statistical techniques which is followed by very good and clear analysis of the data. The representation of the results provides evidence of very good understanding of techniques. The implications are presented with very good attempt at contextualisation so as to bring out a clear meaning of what was found and what does this imply. Very good clarity and structure of the report and referencing.
Good 60-69%

Good use of data in the analysis with a good choice of statistical techniques for a meaningful analysis of the data. The representation of the results provides evidence of a good understanding of techniques. The implications are well explained and discussed with good contextualisation of the results. Good clarity and structure of the report and referencing.

Satisfactory 50-59%
Unsatisfactory 40-49% Very limited use to data, and inadequate use of statistical techniques to analyse the data. The representation of the results is basic with no clear evidence for using a meaningful and purposive representation model. The implication from the results is not discussed in-depth with inadequate contextualisation and without an in-depth discussion on the significance of the findings. Partial clarity and structure of the report and referencing.
Inadequate 30-39% Limited use of data and inappropriate use of statistical techniques to analyse the data. The representation of the results is basic with limited evidence of using simple models for data extraction and analysis. The implications of the results are not appropriate and insignificant in the context of decision making. Presentation of the findings is inadequate and confusing. Limited clarity and structure of the report and referencing.
Poor  

 

20-29%

Poor use of data and inappropriate use of statistical techniques to analyse the data. The representation of the results is very basic with minimal evidence of using even simple models for data extraction and analysis. The implications of the results are not appropriate and very insignificant in the context of decision making. Presentation of the findings is poor and confusing. Poor clarity and structure of the report and referencing.

 

Very Poor  

10-19%

Poor use of data and incorrect use of statistical techniques to analyse the data. The representation of results is inappropriate with confusing interpretation and lack of detail in descriptions. The implications of the results are not considered in the data analysis. Presentation is not clear and often not logically connected. Very poor clarity and structure of the report and referencing.

 

Extremely Poor 0-9% Work at all levels will be brief, fragmentary and unstained. There will be no attempt to meet the requirements of the assignment. No knowledge of the module or basic understanding of the subject will be demonstrated. Extremely poor clarity and structure of the report and referencing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Level 7– Generic Descriptors

 

Extremely  poor

 

Very  poor

 

 

Poor

 

Inadequate

 

Unsatisfactory

 

Satisfactory

 

Good

 

Very Good

 

Excellent

 

Outstanding

 

 

1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Knowledge Totally inadequate demonstration of required knowledge.  Not able to link theory to practice.  No appropriate themes identified. Virtually no relevant knowledge demonstrated.  Fails to adequately demonstrate links between theory and practice.  Very poor identification of key themes. Inconsistent or inaccurate knowledge.  Limited and inappropriate  or inaccurate links between theory and practice.  Poor identification of key themes. Limited evidence of knowledge.  Inappropriate links between theory and practice.

Inadequate identification of key themes.

Basic knowledge with occasional inaccuracies appropriate yet basic integration of theory and practice.  Superficial depth or limited breadth with

unsatisfactory

identification of key themes.

Mostly accurate knowledge with satisfactory depth and breadth of knowledge.  Sound integration of theory and practice with satisfactory identification of key themes. Consistently relevant accurate knowledge with good depth and breadth.  Clear and relevant application of theory to practice.  Good identification of key themes. Comprehensive knowledge demonstrating very good depth and breadth.  Clear insight into links between theory and practice. Demonstrates ability to transfer knowledge between different contexts appropriately. Integrates the complexity of a range of knowledge and excellent understanding of it’s relevance.

Excellent depth of knowledge in a variety of contexts.  Coherent and systematic application of theory to practice.

Outstanding knowledge.  Theory is linked to practice to an exceptional level and may be used to formulate new questions, ideas or challenges.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Extremely  poor Very  poor

 

Poor Inadequate Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Cognitive processes

 

 

 

 

 

Cognitive Processes

 

 

 

 

No demonstration of analysis, evaluation or synthesis.  No evidence of reflection.  Unsatisfactory professional judgement No meaningful analysis or evaluation.  Unable to identify appropriate issues for reflection.  Arguments presented are inappropriate and very poorly linked.  Very poor professional judgement. Descriptive occasionally attempts to analyse or evaluate material but lacks critical approach.  Confusion and/ or weakness in academic argument.  Identifies issues for reflection but lacks evidence of reflective processes.  Poor professional judgement. Mainly descriptive evidence of analysis, inconsistent critical approach, little evaluation or synthesis.  Follows processes of reflection but fails to demonstrate insight.  Inconsistent and/ or inaccurate  professional judgement. Critical analysis evident, with some evaluation and synthesis, although limited.  Limited evidence of reflection.  Some appropriate academic argument although not well applied and lacking in clarity.

Unsatisfactory

professional judgement.

Sound critical analysis and evaluation.  Relevant academic argument.  Demonstrates basic ability of synthesise information in order to formulate appropriate questions and conclusions.  Reflective process is utilised, with insight demonstrating planning for future practice.  Integrates relevant information in order to make sound professional judgements. Clear, in depth critical analysis, evaluation and academic argument with synthesis of different ideas and perspectives.  Utilises reflection to develop self and practice.  Aware of the influence of varied perspectives and time frames.  Uses a wide range of sources to inform clinical decision making and prioritises plans. Very good analysis and synthesis of material with evidence of critique and independent thought.  Balanced and mature approach to reflection used to enhance practice and performance in a range of contexts.  Demonstrates ability to make sound decisions in complex and unpredictable contexts. Excellent critical analysis and synthesis.  Arguments handled skilfully with imaginative interpretation of material.  Willingness to challenge self and practice. Outstanding critical analysis and synthesis. Incorporates evidence of original thinking.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Extremely  poor

 

Very  poor

 

 

Poor

 

Inadequate

 

 

Unsatisfactory

 

Satisfactory

 

Good

 

Very Good

 

Excellent

 

Outstanding

1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
                                                          Communication

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Presentation is extremely poor.  Work has no structure or clarity.  Extremely poor use of language.

 

Presentation is very poor.  Work has little discernable structure or clarity.  Very poor use of language.

 

Presentation is poor.  Work is disorganised and lacks clarity.  Poor use of language.

 

Presentation is unsatisfactory.  Work is limited in terms of structure, coherence and clarity.  Limitations in academic style.

 

Presentation of work is unsatisfactory  in terms of structure, coherence, clarity and academic style. Some inconsistencies. Some grammar and syntax errors which detract from the content

 

Presentation of work is satisfactory

in terms of structure coherence, clarity and academic style.  But some inconsistencies in grammar and syntax.

 

Presentation of work is well organised with good use of language to express ideas/argument.  Very few inconsistencies; grammar and syntax good.

 

Presentation is of a very good standard, demonstrating a scholarly style. Very good grammar and syntax

 

Presentation is excellent, well structured and logical.  Demonstrates a scholarly style. Excellent grammar and syntax.

 

Presentation is outstanding demonstrating a fluent academic style.

 

 

 

Extremely  poor

 

Very  poor

 

 

Poor

 

Inadequate

 

Unsatisfactory

 

Satisfactory

 

Good

 

Very Good

 

Excellent

 

Outstanding

1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Referencing and using evidence No references.  No attempt to provide evidence of sources used. Lack of ability to source adequate material.  Very poor referencing Poor use of reference material.  Inappropriate or out dated sources with numerous referencing errors. Unsatisfactory referencing with frequent error.  Limited ability to support content with relevant sources. Narrow range of sources.  Referencing in presented work is unsatisfactory

with some inconsistencies or inaccuracies.  Over utilises secondary sources.  References used are inappropriate in terms of currency.

Satisfactory

range of sources identified with appropriate referencing and few inaccuracies.  Appropriate use of primary and secondary sources.

Good range of sources.  Well referenced, very few inaccuracies.  Good use of primary and secondary sources. Clear evidence of referencing to a wide range of primary and secondary sources which are used effectively in supporting the work. Detailed use of predominantly primary sources which are well referenced and are used creatively to develop the work. Synthesis of reference material from a wide range of sources both within and across professions

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *