Review Report

ADVT7512 Ad Review Report Semester 1, 2020 - Marking Rubric

Criterion Unsatisfactory <3 Fail 0-49%

Satisfactory 4 Pass 50-64%

Good 5 Credit 65-74%

Very Good 6 Distinction 75-84%

Excellent 7 High Distinction 85-100%

Background (5%) Provided a specific and well-focused background of the Ad.

Little or no background with insufficient discussion of the ad and a lack of clarity about the direction for the review.

A basic and broadly written background of the ad or the direction for the review, but which needs more specific insight and lacks engagement..

A broadly written background of the ad and direction for the review lacking in impact.

A succinctly written background and direction for the review with impact.

A succinct yet comprehensively written background for the ad and direction for the review, engaging the reader from the outset.

Ad Analysis (20%) Analysed the main issues in detail. Ascertained whether the Ad works, what works and why and what does not work and why not.

Your analysis of the key issues is largely superficial and shows a lack of commitment to deeper critical analysis. You must pursue your ideas with more determination and care.

Your work evidences a developing capacity for critical thinking and an understanding of the importance of pursuing your ideas. You have provided a convincing analysis of the key issues.

Your work evidences a developed capacity for critical thinking and a commitment to pursuing your ideas fully. You have provided a convincing analysis of the key issues.

Your work evidences a well- developed capacity for critical thinking and an impressive commitment to intellectual inquiry. You have pursued your ideas and provided a detailed analysis of the key issues.

Your work evidences a highly developed capacity for critical thinking and an outstanding commitment to intellectual inquiry. You have pursued your ideas with determination and provided a detailed and precise analysis of the key issues.

Target Audience (15%) Identified, evaluated and discussed the audience. Ascertained whether the Ad was appropriate for the audience.

Your identification of and evaluation of the audience is superficial/erroneous, and fails to identify convincing arguments regarding appropriateness of the ad for the audience.

Your identification of and evaluation of the audience and your arguments regarding appropriateness of the ad for the audience are convincing.

Your identification of and evaluation of the audience and your arguments regarding appropriateness of the ad for the audience are thoughtful.

Your identification of and evaluation of the audience and your arguments regarding appropriateness of the ad for the audience are imaginative and authentic and reflects very good understanding of the nuances.

Your identification of and evaluation of the audience and your arguments regarding appropriateness of the ad for the audience are highly authentic and reflects a high understanding of the nuances.

Brand Positioning (10%) Brand positioning identified and alignment to ad discussed.

Your identification of the brand positioning is superficial at best and fails to discuss alignment to the ad or alignment discussed is incorrect.

Your identification of the brand positioning is vague and lacking in clarity and fails to discuss alignment to the ad or alignment discussed is superficial or vague..

Your identification of the brand positioning is somewhat thought out and alignment to the ad discussion is sound.

Your identification of the brand positioning is well thought out and alignment to the ad discussion shows a good understanding.

Your identification of the brand positioning is very well thought out and alignment to the ad discussion shows a high level of understanding.

Key Messages (10%) Key Messages identified and discussed

Key messages not identified or wrongly identified; or explained. No discussion or irrelevant discussion of key messages.

Key messages and appeal strategies vaguely explained with some discussion, but lacking in clarity, alignment and focus.

Key messages and appeal strategies plausible and sufficiently explained, as well as, appropriate for audience and product/brand.

Key messages and appeal strategies insightful, fully explained with sound justification and supporting theoretical evidence. Aligned with audience and product/brand.

Key messages and appeal strategies, novel, insightful, fully explained with excellent justification and supporting theoretical evidence. Clearly aligned with audience and product/brand.

Ad Improvement Suggestions (15%) Areas for improvement in ad identified and appropriate suggestions for improvements made.

Areas for improvement in ad not identified or wrongly identified. Suggestions for improvement not made or non-sensical.

Areas for improvement in ad vaguely identified and suggestions for improvement made either absent or vague.

Areas for improvement in ad identified. Suggestions for improvement were realistic and sound.

Areas for improvement in ad were well and thoroughly identified. Suggestions for improvement were clear, creative and aligned to the Brand positioning, objectives, target audience and key messages.

Areas for improvement were very well and thoroughly identified and explained. Suggestions for improvement made were excellent, very creative and very well aligned to the Brand positioning, objectives, target audience and key messages.

Summary (5%) Summarized the analysis and major points made.

The summary is not sufficient, relevant and has not been sufficiently supported by research or aligned to the analysis.

The summary is not clear, and has not been sufficiently supported by research or aligned to the analysis.

You have presented a justified course of action, based on a thoughtful analysis of the issues. Your work demonstrates a developed ability to support your argument using your researched sources.

You have explained a well- justified course of action based on a careful and precise analysis of the issues. Your work demonstrates a well-developed ability to synthesise your own ideas with those of your researched sources, in order to support your argument.

You have illuminated a well- justified course of action based on a comprehensive and precise analysis of the issues. Your work demonstrates a highly developed ability to synthesise your own ideas with those of your researched sources, in order to strengthen your argument.

Writing (10%) Used the vocabulary and expression appropriate to a formal review of an ad; structured in paragraphs and edited for spelling/grammatical errors.

Your writing is not readily comprehensible, with significant lapses in grammar, spelling and sentence construction. Paragraphing demonstrates a poor understanding of how to organise your ideas and structure an argument. Vocabulary and expression are not appropriate for the review of an ad and your tone and register are not sufficiently formal for this kind of writing.

Your writing is clear and readable with only minor lapses in grammar, spelling and sentence construction. Paragraphing demonstrates an appropriate understanding of argumentative technique and some knowledge of the vocabulary and expression appropriate to the review of an ad.

Your writing is clear and fluent with no lapses in grammar, spelling or sentence construction. Paragraphing demonstrates a developed argumentative technique and a good knowledge of the vocabulary and expression appropriate to the review of an ad.

Your writing is precise and succinct, with no lapses in grammar, spelling or sentence construction. Paragraphing demonstrates a well developed argumentative technique and an excellent command of the vocabulary and expression appropriate to the review of an ad.

Your writing is sophisticated and succinct, with no lapses in grammar, spelling or sentence construction. Paragraphing demonstrates a refined argumentative technique and an outstanding command of the vocabulary and expression appropriate to the review of an ad.

Referencing (10%) Demonstrated the ability to independently research the topic widely, and to meaningfully and accurately incorporate quotations from the literature to support your points.

Your document shows little to no understanding of the requirements of academic referencing technique. Sources are not referenced or incorrectly formatted, with only a few (< 6) or questionable sources.

Your document shows an appropriate understanding of the requirements of academic referencing technique. Sources are referenced. References are mostly correctly formatted with an adequate number of sources (6-10).

Your document shows a good understanding of the requirements of academic referencing technique. All sources are referenced and quotes are incorporated well. References are correctly formatted with good number of sources (10+).

Your document shows a highly developed understanding of the requirements of academic referencing technique. All sources are accurately referenced and quotes are smoothly incorporated. References are correctly formatted and demonstrate an excellent breadth of research.

Your document shows a sophisticated understanding of the requirements of academic referencing technique. All sources are accurately referenced, and quotes are fluently incorporated. Reference List is correctly formatted and demonstrates an outstanding breadth of research.