Food studies investigation Assessment

Assignment Overview

Layout of investigation:

• SACE cover page- find this on files
• Contents page
• Introduction- own page
• Focus Question- every one should begin on it's own page
• Conclusion- on it's own page
• Reference list- own page

Page formatting

Font: Arial, calibri

Size: 11

Lines: 1.5 spacing

Header: hypothesis and SACE Number

Footer: Page numbers

Harvard referencing

Don’t use first person

Don’t forget the contents pages

What I need you to complete:

Introduction – 250 – 300 words

1 ^st – state hypothesis and area of study

• Include a relevant quote – can outline how it is a contemporary issue.
• Example of how to write in the area of study: this study relates to economic and environmental area of study, as the issue being investigated is how restaurants survive in Adelaide where consumers are only prepared to pay up to certain price for their food.

2 ^nd – Scope of study (provide focus and direction): This is the aim of the study. To prove context to the reader. E.g. therefore the aim of this investigation is to determine how pricing of a menu can influence the viability and sustainability or market share of a restaurant in the Adelaide food scene. Pricing of a menu refers to an alacarte menu for the purpose of this investigation.

• Include focus questions here in a dot points.

3 ^rd – Methodology: how you will use primary and secondary sources.

• Possible limitations and bias needs to be included here.

MY CHOSEN AREA OF STUDY:

Area of Study 5: Technological Influences

This area of study could include topics such as the following:

• current and emerging technological advances in the food and hospitality industry
• contemporary technological developments in food supply and distribution and the impact of these on food availability, storage, preparation, and presentation
• the influence of the Internet on the food and hospitality industry
• the impact of engineered food sources on food and hospitality.

How are hospitality businesses using innovation and technology to meet changing consumer expectations?

Focus Question 1:

How are digital ordering systems and contactless payment technologies improving customer experience in the hospitality industry?

Introduction

• Define consumer expectations in today’s hospitality environment (e.g. speed, convenience, safety).
• Introduce digital innovations (e.g. QR code menus, mobile apps, kiosks, contactless payment).
• State your position or aim of the investigation.

Overview of Technology in Hospitality

• Brief history of tech adoption in the industry.
• Examples of common digital systems currently in use.

Impact on Customer Experience

• How these technologies increase speed and efficiency.
• Reducing wait times, improving ordering accuracy.
• Enhancing convenience (e.g. pre-ordering, table-side payment).

Safety and Hygiene Expectations

• Rise of contactless services during and after COVID-19.
• Impact on customer perception of hygiene and safety.

Challenges and Considerations

• Cost of implementation for small businesses.
• Technical issues or reduced human interaction.

Industry Examples

• Case studies of local or national venues using these technologies.
• Customer feedback or reviews.

Conclusion

• Summarise key findings.
• Reflect on the importance of balancing innovation with personalised service.
• Briefly discuss potential future developments.

???? Focus Question 2:

What role does kitchen and food preparation technology play in helping hospitality venues meet modern demands for speed, consistency, and dietary needs?

Introduction

• Introduce modern consumer expectations (quick service, dietary requirements, consistent quality).
• State the importance of technology in commercial kitchens.

Overview of Kitchen Technology

• Examples: combi ovens, automated fryers, programmable blenders, prep tools, allergen detection tech.
• Tech used for dietary-specific prep (e.g. gluten-free zones, labelling tools).

Meeting Demand for Speed and Efficiency

• How prep equipment and automation reduce wait times.
• Batch cooking, time-saving appliances.

Ensuring Consistency and Quality

• Pre-programmed cooking settings.
• Tech for portion control, quality assurance.

Managing Dietary Needs Safely

• Importance of separate equipment and allergen tracking systems.
• Labelling tools and software to avoid cross-contamination.

Examples from Industry

• Interviews, videos, or examples from commercial kitchens or local venues.
• Comparison between traditional vs tech-enhanced kitchens.

Conclusion

• Summary of how kitchen technology meets current consumer demands.
• Consider limitations (cost, training needs) and future innovations.

Focus Question 3:

To what extent are hospitality businesses using technology to personalise service and build customer loyalty in a competitive market?

Introduction

• Define personalisation and loyalty in the hospitality context.
• Brief overview of technological tools used (apps, loyalty programs, customer data).
• State the purpose of the investigation.

Understanding Consumer Expectations

• Modern consumers expect personalised offers, convenience, and engagement.
• Importance of loyalty in a saturated market.

Tools Used for Personalisation

• Mobile apps and ordering platforms (e.g. customised menus, saved preferences).
• Email marketing, CRM systems, loyalty programs.

Impact on Customer Loyalty

• How personalised service encourages repeat business.
• Examples of successful loyalty programs (e.g. coffee rewards, birthday deals).

Ethical and Operational Considerations

• Use of customer data—privacy concerns, regulations.
• Managing tech for both marketing and service.

Industry Examples

• Case study: A café or chain with a strong loyalty program or app.
• Evidence of increased customer retention.

Conclusion

• Recap how technology enhances personalisation and loyalty.
• Final thoughts on the balance between tech and human service.
• Future possibilities and consumer expectations.

Critea form sace:

Assessment Type 3: Investigation

It was pleasing to see students address a wide range of contemporary issues affecting the food and

 hospitality industry in the Investigation. A number of students followed up topics with a local focus, including

new issues such as regional food security and availability, and the impact of inflation and staff shortages

on hospitality menus. Other issues such as the impact of single use plastic bans, the use of social

media in the industry, management of waste, ghost kitchens, the use of Australian native ingredients and

locally sourced farm to table foods remained popular and were embedded in topics investigated by students.

Teachers may elicit more successful responses by:

• assisting students to identify areas of interest. Brainstorming current local, national or global issues from information gathered through the media, guest speakers, industry visits etc is an effective strategy to provide a broad picture of potential areas of investigation. Students are encouraged to develop original ideas and individual perspectives.
• ensuring students select an appropriate contemporary issue as the focus for the investigation It is essential the issue is clearly linked to the food and hospitality industry and to one of the Stage 2 Food and Hospitality areas of study from the subject outline.

ICA 1: Investigation and critical analysis of contemporary trends and/or issues related to the Food and Hospitality Industry.

The more successful responses commonly:

• selected an issue with a clear link to an area of study from the subject outline, and explained this in the introduction providing an effective focus for the investigation
• articulated and maintained a clear, strong and direct link to the food and hospitality industry
• refined and focussed the issue to ensure the research scope wasn’t too broad and developed a clear hypothesis or research question
• developed clear and relevant focus questions, enabling a focussed and structured response
• demonstrated that students had selected more open-type questions, which enabled them to show greater depth and analysis, such as a ‘to what extent’ type of question to compare a balanced view of information and develop an argument
• were able to show critical analysis by linking key ideas and comparing and contrasting information from different sources; often students presented information from secondary sources as a context or basis for discussion
• provided local examples that enabled students to provide relevant and focused information, adding depth
• showed the ability to think critically by thoroughly analysing data and information; in these papers students tended to offer reasons for data or results after comparing and contrasting findings
• used a variety of research methods to inform their argument
• supported claims with evidence from various sources, made their own predictions and presented recommendations based on both primary and secondary data.
• The less successful responses commonly:
• focused on topics rather than issues or were not linked to an area of study from the Food and Hospitality subject outline
• had unclear or only superficial links to the food and hospitality industry, for example diet related disease where the research focussed on nutrition (eg veganism) rather than how the food and hospitality is responding to this trend
• focussed on a food topic, without making links to the food and hospitality industry, for example issues related to food ethics
• used focus questions that were too broad (or too narrow) or were not clearly linked to the overall research question or hypothesis
• used ‘what’ as a question stem for all three focus questions- leaving little opportunity for valid discussion and analysis
• presented obvious information that required little or no analysis, such as the history of energy drinks or daily nutritional requirements.

ICA2: Analysis of information for relevance and appropriateness, with appropriate acknowledgement of sources

• The more successful responses commonly:
• incorporated survey or interview results that were synthesised, clearly presented, and used with secondary research to inform findings
• presented relevant research showing views from a range of perspectives or stakeholders
• utilised the views of experts, whether from primary or secondary sources, and explained the persons position or area of expertise as this added depth and credibility to their findings
• added depth by analysing data, interpreting and discussing the implication of results. These students also often interpreted and analysed graphical information which enhanced their discussion
• used quotes succinctly, offering pertinent evidence followed by relevant and well-explained examples to demonstrate analysis while maintaining student voice
• incorporated photos to support discussion and analysis of information
• were discerning in the use of internet sources. Data which was related to a local context such as online menus, blogs and reviews was often effective than data from international settings which may not apply to local food and hospitality settings
• referenced sources appropriately and used a variety of research methods to inform their argument with all methods reflected in their reference list
• used relevant images to support discussion and referenced these appropriately.
• The less successful responses commonly:
• presented information with minimal interpretation and discussion, showing research rather than analysis
• used survey results to validate points inappropriately, for example a survey of the public may be used to gauge opinion but does not reflect expert evidence (eg some surveys were limited to peers only)
• used resources that were not the most relevant (e.g. statistics from other countries so the information did not connect to the claim or point being made)
• indicated surveys or interviews had been conducted, but these were not used
• outlined interview responses in question and answer style, without discussion or analysis of results
• relied on one or two sources of information only and generalised points from these sources
• wrote from a personal perspective rather than based on research
• made limited links to the food and hospitality industry, even though the broad topic selected was focussed on food.

ICA3: Application of literacy and numeracy skills, and use of appropriate terminology

• The most successful responses commonly:
• used appropriate terminology, relevant to the food and hospitality industry
• appeared to have carefully drafted and proofread their work, presenting a logical flow of ideas with minimal repetition
• had clearly presented visual data, such as graphs, that were well labelled and explained, which ensured the information gleaned was analysed and clearly referred to in the body of the report
• ensured that information contained in graphs was clear and easy to read (not too small).
• were written using nominalised language
• used linking sentences in paragraphs to relate back to the topic and focus questions.
• The least successful responses commonly:
• contained spelling or grammatical errors which detracted from the flow of ideas
• included visual information that was not referred to, making it unclear what inference should be made from data
• inserted tables, graphs or diagrams that were blurry to difficult to read and had limited value
• did not include any numerical data or statistical information
• used casual language and features such as pictures that were not related back to the narrative in the body of the work.

E4: Evaluation of contemporary trends and/or issues related to the food and hospitality industry in different settings

• The most successful responses commonly:
• evaluated evidence throughout their investigation, in addition to analysing findings in the conclusion. Students who did this tended to have a clear and in-depth final conclusion
• showed insight and depth in the conclusion, often suggesting implications or offering future solutions
• explicitly addressed their main issue and research questions and reflected on results
• used contemporary references, both primary and secondary.
• The least successful responses commonly:
• presented a short or minimal conclusion
• summarised and recounted, rather than demonstrating an in-depth evaluation of the issue related to the food and hospitality industry
• reflected on the success or limitations of their research
• occasionally stated new findings
• struggled to link the conclusion to the original question or hypothesis.

Summary of Assessment Requirements

The assessment was an investigation report under SACE Stage 2 Food and Hospitality – Area of Study 5: Technological Influences. Students were required to:

1. Follow a structured layout :

   • SACE cover page

   • Contents page

   • Introduction (250–300 words)

   • Focus Questions (each on its own page)

   • Conclusion (own page)

   • Reference list (Harvard style, own page)

2. Formatting guidelines :

   • Font: Arial or Calibri, size 11

   • Line spacing: 1.5

   • Header: Hypothesis and SACE Number

   • Footer: Page numbers

3. Content expectations :

   • State a clear hypothesis and area of study.

   • Provide a scope of study and methodology (primary and secondary sources, limitations, bias).

   • Develop three clear focus questions:

     • Digital ordering systems and customer experience.

     • Kitchen technology and meeting consumer demands.

     • Technology, personalisation, and customer loyalty.

   • Critically analyse and evaluate findings with local and contemporary examples.

   • Apply Harvard referencing, avoid first person, and include contents page.

4. Assessment criteria focus (ICA & E standards) :

   • ICA1: Investigation and analysis of contemporary issues in food and hospitality.

   • ICA2: Critical use of primary/secondary sources, acknowledgement of evidence.

   • ICA3: Literacy, terminology, and presentation skills.

   • E4: Evaluation of trends/issues and reflection in conclusion.

Step-by-Step Mentoring Approach

The academic mentor guided the student through a structured process to ensure clarity, depth, and alignment with SACE requirements:

Step 1 – Understanding the Task

• Mentor explained the layout and formatting requirements so the student could set up the document correctly.

• Hypothesis was refined under Technological Influences in Hospitality.

• The mentor helped the student connect the issue to consumer expectations and technological innovation.

Step 2 – Building the Introduction

• Guided the student to open with a relevant quote to highlight the contemporary nature of the issue.

• Structured introduction into three parts:

  1. Hypothesis & area of study (technology in hospitality).

  2. Scope of study (aims, focus, direction).

  3. Methodology (use of primary and secondary data, limitations).

• Mentor ensured the introduction was concise (250–300 words) and linked back to the focus questions.

Step 3 – Developing Focus Questions

• Mentor explained how to phrase focus questions as “how” or “to what extent” instead of broad “what” questions, to allow critical analysis.

• For each focus question, the mentor guided the student through:

  • Background and definitions (contextual framing).

  • Technological examples (QR codes, combi ovens, loyalty apps).

  • Impact on the industry and consumers.

  • Challenges and limitations.

  • Case studies or local examples.

Step 4 – Research and Critical Analysis

• Mentor emphasised the use of both primary (surveys, interviews, observations) and secondary sources (articles, reports, case studies).

• Encouraged integration of local examples (Adelaide hospitality, Australian café chains).

• Trained the student to compare and contrast evidence, not just describe it.

• Highlighted biases and limitations (e.g. cost for small businesses, over-reliance on tech).

Step 5 – Writing the Conclusion

• Mentor instructed the student to:

  • Summarise key findings across all focus questions.

  • Provide an evaluation of implications (e.g. balancing technology with personalised service).

  • Suggest future possibilities (AI-driven personalisation, sustainability tech).

• Ensured the conclusion was evaluative rather than descriptive.

Step 6 – Referencing and Final Checks

• Mentor reviewed Harvard referencing style for accuracy.

• Guided on integrating quotes, statistics, and visuals with proper acknowledgement.

• Proofread to remove first-person language and ensure formal, academic tone.

• Checked formatting, numbering, and page layout against requirements.

Final Outcome and Learning Objectives Covered

Outcome

• The student produced a well-structured investigation report meeting SACE formatting and content requirements.

• The work addressed all three focus questions with depth, analysis, and evaluation.

• Local case studies and industry examples added credibility and relevance.

• Final report included a strong introduction, well-analysed body, and evaluative conclusion, supported by accurate referencing.

Learning Objectives Achieved

1. Critical Thinking & Analysis – Ability to evaluate how technology influences hospitality rather than just describing it.

2. Research Skills – Using both primary and secondary sources, acknowledging limitations, and integrating evidence.

3. Academic Writing Skills – Structuring arguments, using correct referencing, and maintaining formal tone.

4. Industry Relevance – Linking investigation to real-world contemporary issues and local contexts.

5. Evaluation Skills – Drawing insights, reflecting on challenges, and suggesting future directions.

Get Expert Help with Your Assignments

Looking for guidance on how to approach your assignment? You can download the sample solution provided on this page to see how ideas are structured, arguments are developed, and referencing is applied. Remember, this solution is for reference and study purposes only. Submitting it directly as your own work may lead to plagiarism issues.

If you need a fresh, plagiarism-free assignment solution tailored to your specific requirements, our team of professional academic writers can help. By ordering a custom-written solution, you’ll receive:

• 100% original content written from scratch

• Well-researched answers aligned with your assignment brief

• Properly formatted and referenced work

• On-time delivery to meet your deadlines

• Full confidentiality and support from academic experts

Take the smarter route use the sample as a study aid and order your own unique solution for guaranteed originality and peace of mind.

Disclaimer:

The sample file is provided strictly for reference. It should not be submitted as your own work. To avoid academic misconduct, always use original, custom-written assignments.

Download Sample Solution                           Order Fresh Assignment