POL1001: Democracy and Power in Australia Marking Rubric for Assignment 5 (40%)

POL1001: Democracy and Power in Australia

Marking Rubric for Assignment 5 (40%)

Student:

Marker:

Selection and coverage of key issues (20%)

(LO1, 2, 3)

Emerging

(0-49%)

Developing

(50-64%)

Proficient

(65-74%)

Advanced

(75-84%)

Exemplary

(85-100%)

Marks

Identifies and articulates at least three specific relevant issues/questions from course topics that must be answered to investigate the essay question adequately.

Articulates significance of key issues/questions to investigation

Does not identify at least three issues or questions.

Issues may be irrelevant or tangential to the essay question.

Minimal or no attempt to articulate significance of issues to investigation.

Identifies and articulates at least three issues/questions, but only at a superficial level.

Some issues may be irrelevant or tangential to the essay question.

Attempts to articulate significance of issues to investigation. May be slightly illogical.

Identifies and articulates at least three issues/questions. Some of these may lack depth.

One or two issues may be irrelevant or tangential to the essay question.

Articulates significance of issues to investigation, however, may be unclear.

Identifies and articulates at least three issues/questions at a good level of depth.

Issues are relevant to the essay question.

Clearly and logically articulates significance of issues to investigation.

Identifies and articulates at least three issues/questions with substantial depth of explanation.

All issues are clearly relevant to the essay question.

Clearly, logically, and insightfully articulates significance of issues to investigation.

0 – 9

10 – 13

14 – 15

16 – 17

18 – 20

/20

Comments:

Use of independent research and course content (30%) (LO3, 4)

Emerging

(0-49%)

Developing

(50-64%)

Proficient

(65-74%)

Advanced

(75-84%)

Exemplary

(85-100%)

Marks

Utilises and presents an appropriate quantity of research materials to investigate the essay question, both from course content and private research

Demonstrates awareness of sources’ quality through the selection of appropriate research evidence

Presents and summarises research material in a clear, concise manner.

Articulates the significance of this research material to the issue being investigated, as well as the essay question.

Minimal or no relevant factual or concrete material presented. A great deal may be misunderstood or misrepresented.

Material largely gathered from un-trustworthy or partisan sources with no recognition of this. Reader can have no confidence in any evidence presented.

Little or no research material summarised. Material so poorly presented that its meaning or relevance is hard to understand.

Wild overstatement of significance for debate on the essay question of material presented.

Presents a modest amount of credible concrete evidence that is relevant to debate on essay topic. Meaning of some may be misunderstood or a little misrepresented.

Shows limited or no awareness of quality of sources. Has modest impact on essay’s credibility.

Evidence presented reasonably reliably.

Majority of research material can be understood. Some may be presented in such general terms that its meaning is unclear.

Some attempt to explain the meaning or relevance of majority of research for debate on the essay question.

Explanation may lack clarity.

Presents a reasonable amount of concrete evidence that is result of credible research. A little may be misinterpreted.

Shows limited awareness of sources’ quality, but this only minimally impacts essay’s credibility.

Most evidence reliably presented Overall research material can be easily understood. A few sections where the meaning of material may be unclear.

Reasonable explanation of meaning of majority of research material for debate on question or some key proposition.

Presents a lot of concrete evidence that is the result of high-quality research; this enables reader to draw some conclusions about debates on essay topic.

Shows some awareness of sources’ quality.

Eg: identifies & appropriately qualifies some material from partisan sources.

Summaries of research are reasonably specific and concrete. All evidence presented clearly, accurately, and reliably.

.

Good explanation of the meaning of most research material for debate in question or some key proposition.

Presents substantial concrete evidence that is the result of high-quality research; gets to heart of debates on the essay topic.

Demonstrates aware-ness of sources’ quality.

Eg: correctly identifies and appropriately qualifies material from partisan sources.

Summarises specific relevant research conclusions; and

Mentions relevant limitations to research conclusions. All evidence presented accurately, reliably, and

with great conciseness and clarity.

Meaning of most research material for debate in essay question &/or some key proposition is clearly and precisely explained.

0 – 14

15 – 19

20- 22

23 – 25

26- 30

/30

Comments:

Quality of analysis, balance and objectivity (20%) (LO3, 4)

Emerging

(0-49%)

Developing

(50-64%)

Proficient

(65-74%)

Advanced

(75-84%)

Exemplary

(85-100%)

Marks

Through the discussion and analysis of the key issues and evidence, provides reasoned answers to specific issues/questions that aid in working to answer the essay question.

Considers a range of ideas, evidence and theories that enable a balanced evaluation of specific issues, as well as the overall essay question.

Does not provide clear answers to any specific issues/questions raised.

Considers a narrow selection of ideas and theories and does not consider opposing ideas.

Gives answers to specific issues/questions raised, but these may imprecise or implausible. Limited supporting evidence.

Considers a narrow selection of ideas and theories and only very briefly considers opposing ideas.

Provides plausible answers to specific issues/questions raised. May lack supporting evidence or be somewhat vague or imprecise.

Considers a range of ideas and theories, although this may be somewhat unbalanced and favourable to a particular conclusion.

Provides plausible and well-reasoned answers to issues/questions raised using appropriate examples and evidence.

Considers a range of ideas and theories which enable a reasonably balanced evaluation of specific questions as well as the overall issue of whether liberal democracy in Australia in working.

Provides well-reasoned, convincing, and nuanced answers to specific issues/questions raised using appropriate examples and evidence.

Considers a wide range of ideas and theories which enable a balanced evaluation of specific questions as well as the overall issue of whether liberal democracy in Australia in working.

0 – 9

10 – 13

14- 15

16 – 17

18 – 20

/20

Comments:

Quality of conclusions (20%) (LO3)

Emerging

(0-49%)

Developing

(50-64%)

Proficient

(65-74%)

Advanced

(75-84%)

Exemplary

(85-100%)

Marks

Conclusion answers the essay question.

Evaluation is based upon and connects with analysis of issues raised in the essay body

Evaluation is based on reason and balance, considering competing views and evidence when coming to a conclusion on a specific issue.

Does not draw a conclusion on the overall question.

Evaluation is unconnected to the points made on specific topics.

Evaluation is not supported by any argument or reasoning.

Draws a conclusion, though this might be somewhat implausible, ambiguous, or imprecise.

Evaluation is only weakly connected to the points made on specific topics.

Evaluation is based on plausible reasons but does not consider competing views.

Draws a clear and plausible conclusion.

Evaluation draws from the analysis of specific questions and evidence presented from each topic, although this connection may not be very convincing.

Evaluation is based on plausible reasons and goes some way to considering competing views.

Draws a clear and convincing conclusion.

Evaluation follows from the analysis of specific questions and evidence presented from each topic.

Evaluation is well-reasoned and balanced. Considers competing views.

Draws a clear, convincing, and nuanced conclusion to the essay question.

Evaluation follows directly from the analysis of specific questions and evidence presented from each topic.

Evaluation is very well-reasoned and highly balanced. Fairly considers competing views and evidence.

Notes limitations of what be drawn from the evidence at hand.

0 – 9

10 – 13

14- 15

16 – 17

18 – 20

/20

Comments:

Writing and Referencing (10%) (LO3)

Emerging

(0-49%)

Developing

(50-64%)

Proficient

(65-74%)

Advanced

(75-84%)

Exemplary

(85-100%)

Marks

Quality of writing

Errors in spelling and grammar make the assignment consistently difficult to understand.

Vague or wordy writing make the assignment consistently difficult to understand.

The assignment and/or paragraphs appear to have no logical structure.

Errors in spelling and grammar make the assignment sometimes difficult to understand.

Vague or wordy writing make the assignment sometimes difficult to understand.

The assignment suffers from a lack of structure in sections and paragraphs.

There are some errors in spelling and grammar.

Writing is mostly clear, but may sometimes be unclear or wordy.

Sections and paragraphs mostly make logical sense.

There are minimal errors in spelling and grammar.

Writing is consistently clear and concise.

The assignment is mostly logically structured. Sections and paragraphs are mostly well-organised.

There are no errors in spelling or grammar.

Writing is always very clear and concise.

The assignment is logically structured. Sections and paragraphs are well-organised. mostly well-organised.

Writing in your own words

Excessive quotation.

Minor plagiarism by directly copying without using quotation marks.

Minor plagiarism by closely paraphrasing sources, e.g. copying and substituting some words/reordering sentences; borrowing specific phrases.

Some overuse of quotations.

No copying of sources without proper attribution.

Most information, evidence, and ideas from sources is presented in the student’s own words, but there is some evidence of borrowed phrasing/close paraphrasing.

Minimal use of quotations.

No copying of sources without proper attribution.

All information, evidence, and ideas from sources are presented in the student’s own words with minimal signs of borrowed phrasing.

No unnecessary quotations.

No copying of sources without proper attribution.

All information, evidence, and ideas from sources are presented in the student’s own words with no sign of borrowed phrasing.

No unnecessary quotations.

No direct copying of sources without proper attribution.

All information, evidence, and ideas from sources are presented in the student’s own words with no sign of borrowed phrasing.

Referencing

Fails to clearly indicate the source of information and arguments.

Errors make finding and assessing sources very difficult (e.g. in-text reference does not match reference list entry).

Few of the required references or page numbers are provided.

Does not consistently use a recognised referencing system.

Errors make finding and assessing sources more difficult (e.g. reference list is not alphabetically organised).

References or important information such as page numbers are frequently missing.

Correctly and consistently uses APA 7 or Harvard AGPS.

Errors are noticeable but do not reduce the reader’s ability to find and assess sources.

Provides almost all necessary references. Some page numbers may be missing.

Correctly and consistently uses APA 7 or Harvard AGPS.

Errors are minimal and inconsequential.

Provides almost all necessary references, including page numbers where appropriate.

Correctly and consistently uses APA 7 or Harvard AGPS.

There are no errors.

Provides all necessary references, including page numbers where appropriate

0 – 4

5

6-7

8

9-10

/10

Comments:

Overall Comments:

Total Mark

/100