assignment 3

Criteria

High Distinction

85 - 100%

Distinction

75 – 84%

Credit

65 – 74%

Pass

50 – 65%

Fail

<50%

Accessing and

summarising resources

(10%)

Evidence of broad,

systematic and creative research.

Demonstrates skilful use of high quality, credible, relevant sources. Selection of sources goes beyond the mainstream literature.

An excellent summary of relevant information.

Evidence of

controlled and systematic research.

Demonstrates selection of credible, relevant sources from relevant, quality literature.

Accurate summary of relevant information.

Evidence of good

research skills. Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. Information is gathered from a good range of electronic and non-electronic sources. But could be extended.

Summary of information could be improved.

Research conducted

demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources. Information is gathered from a limited range of electronic and non- electronic sources

Some capacity to summarise information.

Limited research skills

demonstrated.

Very limited range of sources utilised.

Unable to demonstrate ability to summarise information.

Acknowledging

Resources (10%)

Wide range of sources

accurately reference.

Good range of

sources with minor referencing errors.

Reasonable range of

sources, some referencing errors.

Limited resources

with a number of referencing errors

Major errors in

referencing.

Analysis

(30%)

Excellent ability to interpret complex

data, to appraise evidence , evaluate arguments and to formulate and express very sound conclusions.

Good demonstration of the capacity to

critically analyse information, formulate own conclusions and express own ideas.

Reasonable analysis of information. Able

to draw warranted conclusions and generalizations and demonstrate some original thought.

Limited ability to interpret data,

appraise evidence or evaluate arguments. Conclusions need improvement and need to express own ideas.

No critical analysis of information, poor

conclusions and no original thought.

Application

(30%)

An extensive analysis

of options available and their relevance to the case in point.

An excellent application of interpretation rules and procedural analysis steps and clearly articulated arguments which provided a strong frame work.

A good analysis of

options available and their relevance to the case in point.

Very good application of the appropriate interpretation rules and procedural analysis steps.

A reasonable attempt

at analysis of options available and their relevance to the case in point. Analysis requires more depth

Appropriate interpretation rules and procedural analysis steps identified and a reasonable attempt to apply to case study

Some attempt at

analysis of options available and their relevance to the case in point. Explores a few dimensions but lacks depth.

Some reference to interpretation rules and procedural analysis steps required but not adequately applied to the task

Limited analysis of

options available and their relevance to the case in point.

Mainly descriptive report.

Limited or no reference to interpretation rules and procedural analysis steps required.

Synthesis

· Structure

· Logic

· Mechanics

(20%)

Well-constructed assignment:

appropriate, clear, and smooth transitions; arrangement of organizational elements seems particularly apt; uses sophisticated legal wording in

sentences effectively;

usually chooses words aptly; observes professional

Well written and presented

assignment: distinct units of thought in paragraphs; clear transitions between developed, coherent, and logically arranged paragraphs; a few mechanical difficulties or stylistic problems; may make occasional problematic word choices or syntax errors; a few spelling

Reasonably written and presented: some

awkward transitions; some brief, weakly unified or undeveloped paragraphs; arrangement may not appear entirely natural; contains extraneous information, more frequent wordiness; unclear or awkward sentences; imprecise

Not consistently or logically structured:

Narrates/ digresses from one topic to another; awkward use of words, numerous errors in style & presentation including spelling punctuation and grammar. Not comfortable with a formal style of written communication.

Simplistic, tends to narrate or merely

summarize.

Illogical arrangement of ideas & some major grammatical or proofreading errors.

Language frequently weakened by clichés, colloquialisms, and repeated inexact word choices. Unaware of how to present formal

conventions of written English and

report format; free of spelling, grammatical, punctuation and typing errors

or punctuation errors or a cliché; uses

appropriate formal report format.

use of words or over- reliance on passive

voice; some distracting grammatical errors; some spelling, punctuation and typing errors.

correspondence.