1: Write a memo to the director of the Museum advocating either for or against the proposed Project (it is recommended that you cover both sides of the argument in your memo for full credit – although you should advocate for at least one). 2. Include a discussion of pricing, explaining whether you agree or disagree with the pricing proposed and why. 3. Include a discussion of tax implications (if any). 4: Each memo should indicate how the Museum should think about other business aspects of the Museum that will be impacted by the project. The memo should explain the impact the other items might have on the proposal. Instructions: Click on the above link to follow and download the details of the term paper, locate all documentation pertaining to the questions and full instructions1. 30% Argument- Counter 30-24 Memo has advocated for both sides of the argument, counterarguments were accurate, well elaborated, and relevant 23-17 Memo has advocated for both sides of the argument, most counterarguments were accurate and relevant, but some are weak/irrelevant 16-10 Memo has advocated for one side of the argument arguments were accurate, relevant and strong 9-0 Memo has advocated for one side of the argument; arguments had 1 or more inaccuracies 2. 15% Pricing 15-12 Memo has discussed the pricing proposed by the vendor and taken a position on whether it makes sense in the context of the museum. The position is accurate, well supported by at least 3 or more relevant discussions from class lectures/readings and those supporting elements are qualitative and highly relevant. 12-9 Memo has discussed the pricing proposed by the vendor and taken a position on whether it makes sense in the context of the museum. The position is correct, supported by less than 3 identifiable rationales taken from class discussions, lectures/readings and those supporting elements are qualitative and relevant. 8-5 Memo has discussed the pricing proposed by the vendor and taken a position on whether it makes sense in the context of the museum. The position is correct, includes information supported by less than 2 identifiable rationales from class lectures/readings and some of those supporting elements are less than qualitative and some may be somewhat relevant. 4-0 Memo has discussed the pricing proposed by the vendor and taken a position on whether it makes sense in the context of the museum. The position is somewhat correct, includes information supported by less than 2 identifiable class lectures/readings and those supporting elements may be limited in quality and/or relevance and/or may include inaccuracies 3. 15% Tax Implications 15-12 Memo has correctly identified the tax implications of the proposal and its impact. Student has suggested potential ways to mitigate the affect. 12-9 Memo has correctly identified the tax implications of the proposal but failed to correctly identify any ways to mitigate the effect. 8-5 Memo incorrectly identified the tax implications of the proposal, but the student demonstrates an understanding of UBIT. 4-0 Memo incorrectly identified the tax implications of the proposal, the student does not demonstrate an understanding of UBIT. 4. 20% Business Impact 20-16 Memo has identified at least four impacts the proposal might have on other business aspects of the Museum. The memo explains how the other businesses will be impacted and how the Museum should think about the business aspects of the project. Positive and negative business issues have been identified and referenced by the course material. Each impact can receive a maximum of 5%. 15-11 Major points were adequately supported with at least 3 accurate and relevant facts and/or examples. Writer clearly understood the topic in depth and presented their information utilizing the course material convincingly 10-6 Major points were adequately supported with at least 3 relevant facts and/or examples. Some points were supported well, others were not relevant or may have been inaccurate. Writer still seemed to understand the main points of the topics but did not provide enough quality information from the course material. 5-0 Major points were not adequately supported with 2 or less relevant facts and/or examples. Some points were unsupported, others may not have been relevant or may have been accurate. Writer still seemed to understand the main points of the topics but did not provide enough quality information from the course material. 5. 20% Organization: 20-16 Overall arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion 15-11 Most arguments were clearly tied to an idea (premise) and organized in a tight, logical fashion 10-6 Some aspects of the paper were not logical, accurate, relevant or well organized (or a combination thereof) 5-0 Next Credit 2 or more points seemed to be either not well researched, logical, accurate, relevant or well organized (or a combination thereof)
