当前位置：文档之家 › Evaluation Stage

Evaluation Stage

  • 格式：doc
  • 大小：5.59 MB
  • 文档页数：98

Group Award Graded Unit 3 (HND

1 Planning Stage

Introduction: The aim of this section is to make the plan to write this thesis. It mainly

covers five parts including what companies I choose and their basic information, the

methodologies that I utilize to choose the companies and the advantages and

disadvantage of the methodologies, the reasons why I choose the four companies, the

time schedule to write this thesis, and the resources of the information.

1.1 Company Selected for Project

In this part, I will introduce some basic information of the four companies.

I intend to invest four companies’ shares as follow:

Sector CN Code Prices EPS P/E DPS MC

(in millions)

Banks Barclays BARC 133.90p-353.50p 30.40p 8.60 5.50p £ 22,168.17

Standard Chartered STAN 1,141.50 - 1,947.50 180.00¢ 15.60 70.00¢ £ 33,616.57

Mining BHP Billiton BLT 1,624.50p-3,344.05p 394.00¢ 10.10 101.00¢ £ 42,600.49

Rio Tinto RIO 2,636.50p - 6,951.16p 713.00¢ 10.10 108.00¢ £ 51,834.43

(Note: CN is short for Company Name. EPS is short for Earning per Share. DPS is

short for Dividend per Share. MC is short for Market Capitalization. The four

corporations all belong to FTSE 100. The data of BARC, STAN, and RIO is 2010 and

the data of BLT is 2011. The price is the price of the previous year.)

Barclays PLC was founded in 1896 and is headquartered in London, the United

Kingdom. It has operations in over 50 countries and territories across Africa, Asia,

European, North American and South American and around 48 million customers. It

offers retail and commercial banking, credit cards, investment banking, wealth

management, and investment management services. In addition, Barclays has been Group Award Graded Unit 3 (HND

2 recognized all over the world for its achievements: from innovative products and

exemplary people to charity work and sustainability initiatives.

Standard Chartered PLC was founded in 1853 and is headquartered in London, the

United Kingdom with operations in more than seventy countries. It operates a

network of over 1,700 branches and outlets and employs around 75,000 people. Its

main products include Credit cards, Consumer banking, corporate banking, finance

and insurance, investment banking, mortgage loans, private banking, and wealth

management. Above all, it is trusted worldwide for upholding high standards of

corporate governance, social responsibility, environmental protection and employee

diversity.

BHP Billiton is a global mining, oil and gas company headquartered in Melbourne,

Australia and with a major management office in London, United Kingdom. It

operates primarily in Australia, the United Kingdom, rest of Europe, China, Japan,

other Asian countries, North America, South America, and southern Africa. It engages

in the exploration, development, production, and marketing of oil and gas properties.

Additionally, it focus on investing in high-quality, expandable resource basins where

large mineralization deposits create significant growth options.

The Rio Tinto Group is a diversified, British-Australian, multinational mining and

resources group with headquarters in London and Melbourne. The company has

operations on six continents but is mainly concentrated in Australia and Canada.

Although primarily focused on extraction of minerals, Rio Tinto also has significant

operations in refining, particularly for refining bauxite and iron ore. Furthermore, the

company is seeking to become a major producer of nickel, with exploration projects

currently underway in the United States and Indonesia.

Group Award Graded Unit 3 (HND

3 1.2 Approach to the Project

In this thesis, I am going to utilize six methodologies, which includes primary

research, secondary research, fundamental analysis, technical analysis, horizontal

analysis, and time analysis.

For primary and secondary research, they belong to the method of data collection.

Primary research consists in research to collect original data and achieve special

purpose. This can be through numerous forms, including questionnaires, direct

observation and telephone interviews amongst others. While, Secondary research

involves the summary, collation or synthesis of existing research rather than primary

research, where data are collected from, for example research subjects or experiments

(). The strengths and weaknesses of the two marketing researches are

in existence as follow:

Advantages Disadvantages

Primary

Research 1. It can address specific research issues as the

researcher controls the search design to fit their

needs

2. It enables the researcher to have a higher

control over how the information is collected.

3. Compared with secondary research, it can give

more details to the researchers and the data are

reliable.

1. It may be very expensive in

preparing and carrying out the

合集下载

Effective evaluation

Effective evaluation

EFFECTIVEEVALUATIONTips and Techniques forGiving Helpful EvaluationsWHERE LEADERS ARE MADEEVALUATIOEFFECTIVENTOASTMASTERS INTERNATIONALP.O. Box 9052 • Mission Viejo, CA 92690 USAPhone: 949-858-8255 • Fax: /members© 2011 Toastmasters International. All rights reserved. Toastmasters International, the Toastmasters International logo, and all other Toastmasters International trademarks and copyrights are the sole property of Toastmasters International and may be used only with permission. Item 202 2011 Rev. 6/WHERE LEADERS ARE MADE

2 EFFECTIVE EVALUATIONCONTENTSIntroduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3When You Are the Evaluator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3The Evaluator’s Role . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3How to Prepare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Your Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4How You Say It . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Your Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5As You Conclude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Follow Up with the Speaker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Follow Up with the Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6When You Are the Speaker or Leader . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Put Some Variety into Evaluations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Would You Like to Learn More? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7Recommended Evaluation Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Experimental and Numerical Evaluation of the Performance of Supersonic Two-Stage High-Velocity O

Experimental and Numerical Evaluation of the Performance of Supersonic Two-Stage High-Velocity O

Ｊｏｕｒｎａｌ　ｏｆ　Ｔｈｅｒｍａｌ　Ｓｃｉｅｎｃｅ　Ｖｏ１．２０，Ｎｏ．１（２０１　１）８８－９２　

Ａｒｔｉｃｌｅ　ＩＤ：１００３－・２１６９（２０１１）０１－・００８８－０５　

Ｅｘｐｅｒｉｍｅｎｔａｌ　ａｎｄ　Ｎｕｍｅｒｉｃａｌ　Ｅｖａｌｕａｔｉｏｎ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　Ｐｅｒｆｏｒｍａｎｃｅ　ｏｆ　Ｓｕｐｅｒｓｏｎｉｃ　

Ｔｗｏ－Ｓｔａｇｅ　Ｈｉｇｈ－Ｖｅｌｏｃｉｔｙ　Ｏｘｙ－Ｆｕｅｌ　Ｔｈｅｒｍａｌ　Ｓｐｒａｙ（Ｗａｒｍ　Ｓｐｒａｙ）Ｇｕｎ　

Ｈ．Ｋａｔａｎｏｄａｌ，Ｈ．Ｍｏｒｉｔａ　，Ｍ．Ｋｏｍａｔｓｕ２，ａｎｄ　Ｓ．Ｋｕｒｏｄａ２　

１．Ｄｅｐａｒｔｍｅｎｔ　ｏｆ　Ｍｅｃｈａｎｉｃａｌ　Ｅｎｇｉｎｅｅｒｉｎｇ，Ｋａｇｏｓｈｉｍａ　Ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙ，１—２１・４０　Ｋｏｒｉｍｏｔｏ，Ｋａｇｏｓｈｉｍａ　８９０—００６５，Ｊａｐａｎ　

２．Ｈｙｂｒｉｄ　Ｍａｔｅｒｉａｌｓ　Ｃｅｎｔｅｒ，Ｎａｔｉｏｎａｌ　Ｉｎｓｔｉｔｕｔｅ　ｆｏｒ　Ｍａｔｅｒｉａｌｓ　Ｓｃｉｅｎｃｅ，１－２—１，Ｓｅｎｇｅｎ，Ｔｓｕｋｕｂａ，Ｉｂａｒａｋｉ　３０５－００４７，Ｊａｐａｎ　

＠Ｓｃｉｅｎｃｅ　Ｐｒｅｓｓ　ａｎｄ　Ｉｎｓｔｉｔｕｔｅ　ｏｆＥｎｇｉｎｅｅｒｉｎｇ　Ｔｈｅｒｍｏｐｈｙｓｉｃｓ．ＣＡＳ　ａｎｄ　Ｓｐｒｉｎｇｅｒ－Ｖｅｆｌａｇ　Ｂｅｒｌｉｎ　Ｈｅｉｄｅｌｂｅｒｇ　２０１０　

Ｔｈｅ　ｗａｔｅｒ－ｃｏｏｌｅｄ　ｓｕｐｅｒｓｏｎｉｃ　ｔｗｏ—ｓｔａｇｅ　ｈｉｇｈ—ｖｅｌｏｃｉｔｙ　ｏｘｙ－ｆｕｅｌ（ＨＶＯＦ）ｔｈｅｒｍａｌ　ｓｐｒａｙ　ｇｕｎ　ｗａｓ　ｄｅｖｅｌｏｐｅｄ　ｔｏ　ｍａｋｅ　

ａ　ｃｏａｔｉｎｇ　ｏｆ　ｔｅｍｐｅｒａｔｕｒｅ—ｓｅｎｓｉｔｉｖｅ　ｍａｔｅｒｉａｌ，ｓｕｃｈ　ａｓ　ｔｉｔａｎｉｕｍ，ｏｎ　ａ　ｓｕｂｓｔｒａｔｅ．Ｔｈｅ　ｇｕｎ　ｈａｓ　ａ　ｃｏｍｂｕｓｔｉｏｎ　ｃｈａｍｂｅｒ　

（ＣＣ）ｆｏｌｌｏｗｅｄ　ｂｙ　ａ　ｍｉｘｉｎｇ　ｃｈａｍｂｅｒ（ＭＣ），ｉｎ　ｗｈｉｃｈ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｏｍｂｕｓｔｉｏｎ　ｇａｓ　ｉｓ　ｍｉｘｅｄ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｔｈｅ　ｎｉｔｒｏｇｅｎ　ｇａｓ　ａｔ　ｒｏｏｍ　

presentation evaluation criteria

presentation evaluation criteria

Professional Studies

Presentation Evaluation Criteria

The numbers in the top of the boxes are points in a continuum. For example, you can assign 20 points for Organization.

As long as you do not give more points than suggested in the leftmost box, the score will range between 0 and 100 when

you add up the numbers.

Organization (20%) 20 Consistently clear,

concise, well organized.

Points were easy to follow

because of the organization.

Transitions between sections

smooth and coordinated. 15 Usually clear, concise,

well organized. Most of the

presentation was easy to

follow. Transitions between

sections usually coordinated. 10 Not always clear or

concise. Organization was

adequate, but weak.

Occasionally wandered and

was sometimes difficult to

follow. Transitions between

sections weak. 5 Often unclear and

EVALUATION OF STAGE-DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP IN COMPOUND CHANNELS

EVALUATION OF STAGE-DISCHARGE RELATIONSHIP IN COMPOUND CHANNELS

Ａｖａｉｌａｂｌｅ　ｏｎｌｉｎｅ　ａｔ　ｗｗｗ．ｓｃｉｅｎｃｅｄｉｒｅｃｔ．ｃｏｍ　

ＳｃｉｅｎｃｅＤｉｒｅｃｔ　

Ｊｏｕｒｎａｌ　ｏｆ　Ｈｙｄｒｏｄｙｎａｍｉｃｓ　

２００８，２０（１）：８ｌ一８７　８１　

ｓｄｌｊ　ｃｈｉｎａｊｏｕｒｎａ１．ｎｅｔ．ｃｎ　

ＥＶＡＬＵＡＴＩＯＮ　ＯＦ　ＳＴＡＧＥ．ＤＩＳＣＨＡＲＧＥ　ＲＥＬＡＴＩＯＮＳＨＩＰ　ＩＮ　ＣｏＭＰｏＵＮＤ　

ＣＨＡＮＮＥＬＳ　

ＭＯＨＡＧＨＥＧＨ　Ａ．，ＫＯＵＣＨＡＫＺＡＤＥＨ　Ｓ．　

Ｃｏｌｌｅｇｅ　ｏｆＷａｔｅｒ　Ｃｏｎｓｅｒｖａｎｃｙ　ａｎｄ　Ｈｙｄｒｏｐｏｗｅｒ　Ｅｎｇｉｎｅｅｒｉｎｇ，Ｈｏｈａｉ　Ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙ，Ｎａｎｊｉｎｇ　２１００９８，Ｃｈｉｎａ　Ｃｅｎｔｒａｌ　Ｈｙｄｒａｕｌｉｃ　Ｒｅｓｅａｒｃｈ　Ｌａｂｏｒａｔｏｒｙ，Ｗａｔｅｒ　Ｅｎｇｉｎｅｅｒｉｎｇ　Ｄｅｐａｒｔｍｅｎｔ，Ｔｅｈｒａｎ　Ｕｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙ，Ｋａｒａｊ，Ｉｒａｎ，　Ｅ－ｍａｉｌ：ｍｏｈａｇｈｅｇｈ１９７４＠ｙａｈｏｏ．ｃｏｍ　

（Ｒｅｃｅｉｖｅｄ　Ｍａｙ　１　ｌ，２００７，Ｒｅｖｉｓｅｄ　Ｎｏｖｅｍｂｅｒ　７，２００７）　

Ａｂｓｔｒａｃｔ：Ｅｘｐｅｒｉｍｅｎｔａｌ　ｒｅｓｕｌｔｓ　ｗｅｒｅ　ｃｏｍｐａｒｅｄ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｔｈｅ　ｃｏｍｐｕｔｅｄ　ｒｅｓｕｌｔｓ　ｏｂｔａｉｎｅｄ　ｆｒｏｍ　ｔｈｅ　ｎｉｎｅ　ｍｏｓｔ　ｗｅｌ１．ｋｎｏｗｎ　ｍｅｔｈｏｄｓ　ｆｏｒ　

ｃｏｍｐｕｔａｔｉｏｎ　ｏｆ　ｄｉｓｃｈａｒｇｅ　ｉｎ　ａ　ｃｏｍｐｏｕｎｄ　ｃｈａｎｎｅ１．Ｔｈｅ　ｒｅｓｕｌｔｓ　ｄｅｍｏｎｓｔｒａｔｅ　ａ　ｈｉｇｈ　ａｃｃｕｒａｃｙ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｄｉｖｉｄｅｄ　ｃｈａｎｎｅ１　ｍｅｔｈｏｄ　ｗｉｔｈ　ｔｈｅ　ｈｏｒｉｚｏｎｔａ１　ｄｉｖｉｓｉｏｎ　１ｉｎｅｓ，ｗｈｉｌｅ　ｔｈｅ　ｌｅｎｇｔｈ　ｏｆ　ｄｉｖｉｓｉｏｎ　１ｉｎｅ　ｉｓ　ｉｎｃｌｕｄｅｄ　ｗｉｔｈｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｃａｌｃｕｌａｔｉｏｎ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ｗｅｔｔｅｄ　ｐｅｒｉｍｅｔｅｒ．Ｉｎ　ａｄｄｉｔｉｏｎ．ａｓ　ｒｅｌａｔｉｖｅ　ｄｅｐｔｈ　ｉｎｃｒｅａｓｅｓ，ｔｈｅ　ｒｅｓｕｌｔｓ　ｏｆ　ｔｈｅ　ａｌ１　ｍｅｔｈｏｄｓ　ｃｏｎｖｅｒｇｅ　ｔｏ　ｅａｃｈ　ｏｔｈｅｒ　ａｎｄ　ａｌｓｏ　ｉｎ　ｃａｓｅ　ｏｆ　ｓｔｅｅｐｅｒ　ｓｌｏｐｅｓ　ｉｎ　１ｏｗｅｒ　ｒｅｌａｔｉｖｅ