Law
ancienmchiw
2016mlc703rubric.pdf
MLC703 T2 2016 Assignment Rubric
Performance Indicators
Question 1A
BELOW MINIMUM STANDARD
MEETS STANDARD
EXCEEDS STANDARD
Low Fail (LN) 0-‐29%
Fail (N)
30-‐49% Unsatisfactory
Pass (P)
50-‐59% Satisfactory
Credit (C)
60-‐69% Good
Distinction (D)
70-‐79% Very good
High Distinction (HD)
80-‐100% Exemplary
Identification of the relevant assessable income issues
/2
Failed to identify any issues No analysis of issues
Did not address question
Failed to identify most issues
Insufficient analysis of issues Failed to adequately address question
identified most key issues
Limited analysis of the issues Some issues dealt with
Identified most key issues
Generally identified the issues accurately Advice generally clear and accurate
Identified most key issues Identification of Issues Mostly Accurate
Accurate and clear advice
Identified all relevant issues
Identification of issues accurate Clear, accurate and relevant advice
Researched and applied the law correctly
/6
No evidence of research of the problem
Seriously incorrect application of the law to the facts
Limited evidence of research of the problem
Lacks evidence of legal knowledge Incorrect application of the law to the facts
Some important resources overlooked
Further analysis and discussion required to justify application of the law to the facts
Competently researched Good application of the law to the facts
Well researched Very good application of the law to the facts.
Thoroughly researched Excellent application of the law to the facts
Citing legislation and case authority
/2
No citation of legislation or cases
Inadequate citation of sources
Several missing, incomplete or incorrect citations
Some missing or incomplete citations
Authorities and sources generally correctly cited
Complete and accurate citation of authorities
Overall
/10
Performance Indicators
Question 1B
BELOW MINIMUM STANDARD
MEETS STANDARD
EXCEEDS STANDARD
Low Fail (LN) 0-‐29%
Fail (N)
30-‐49% Unsatisfactory
Pass (P)
50-‐59% Satisfactory
Credit (C)
60-‐69% Good
Distinction (D)
70-‐79% Very good
High Distinction (HD)
80-‐100% Exemplary
Identification of key CGT issues:
/6
Failed to identify any issues No analysis of issues
Did not address question
Failed to identify most issues
Insufficient analysis of issues Failed to adequately address question
identified most key issues
Limited analysis of the issues Some issues dealt with
Identified most key issues
Generally identified the issues accurately Advice generally clear and accurate
Identified most key issues Identification of Issues Mostly Accurate
Accurate and clear advice
Identified all relevant issues
Identification of issues accurate Clear, accurate and relevant advice
Researched and apply law correctly including calculations
/18
No evidence of research of the problem Seriously incorrect application of the law to the facts
Calculations substantially incorrect
Limited evidence of research of the problem
Lacks evidence of legal knowledge Incorrect application of the law to the facts
Incorrect calculations of capital gains
Some important resources overlooked Further analysis and discussion required to justify application of the law to the facts Some errors/omissions in calculation of capital gains
Competently researched
Good application of the law to the facts
Some errors/omissions in calculation of capital gains
Well researched
Very good application of the law to the facts.
Very good calculation of capital gains
Thoroughly researched
Excellent application of the law to the facts Correct calculation of capital gains
Citing legislation and case authority
/6
No citation of legislation or cases
Inadequate citation of sources
Several missing, incomplete or incorrect citations
Some missing or incomplete citations
Authorities and sources generally correctly cited
Complete and accurate citation of authorities
Overall
/30
Performance Indicators
Question 2
BELOW MINIMUM STANDARD
MEETS STANDARD
EXCEEDS STANDARD
Fail (N) 0-‐49%
Unsatisfactory
Pass (P)
50-‐59% Satisfactory
Credit (C)
60-‐69% Good
Distinction (D)
70-‐79% Very good
High Distinction (HD)
80-‐100% Exemplary
Critical Thinking and Analysis
/18
Insufficient analysis of topic
Main arguments are either not made or unsound
Little analysis of issues Main arguments are unclear or underdeveloped, or not well supported.
Some analysis of issues
Some arguments may lack a critical analysis
Good analysis. Arguments developed supported Well argued, demonstrates some critical evaluations.
A thorough critical analysis of the issues raised Persuasively argued, demonstrating critical evaluation.
Research
/14
Limited research
Key research missing
Some important resources overlooked
Limited discussion of key resources
Further analysis and discussion required to justify arguments
Competently researched
Good use of sources to support arguments, but further identification and application of important resources required Good discussion of key issues arising from question
Well researched
Appropriate use of sources to support arguments
Very good discussion of issues with good reference to quality materials
Thoroughly researched
Effective use of sources to support argument
Sources accurately and appropriately used
Communication and Presentation
/8
Disorganised structure and
Some organisation but structure and
Generally organised and coherent
Generally well presented
Assignment well presented with
Did not conform with instructions
Generally conformed with instructions
Generally conformed with instructions
Logical Structure
Well structured with clear analysis
Overall
/40 Total
/80
