Fail (0 – 19.5) Fail (0 – 14.5) The requirements of assessment are not sufficiently covered and/or supported. The format of the assessment is not appropriate. The specified word length exceeds 1100 words/is less than 900 words. The writer’s position and purpose often lacks clarity. Information and ideas are insufficiently extended and/or supported for the audience. Those presented are often irrelevant, repetitive and/or inadequate. Logic and meaning not clear. The introduction is poorly written; does not address the main identifying features (purpose, thesis statement and blueprint). No thesis statement provided. No logical conclusion. Fails to summarise the main ideas which have been discussed or make a final comment about the paper’s main idea. Information and ideas lack a clear progression and coherence. Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is often erroneous or missing, and internal headings are missing and/or inappropriate. Paragraphing may be missing, and the main idea of paragraphs is often unclear.

Most major aspects of the assessment are addressed (minor aspects may be missing), but some parts lack appropriate support and/or extension. The format of the assessment may not be appropriate and/or the specified word length (1000 words +/-10%) is not met. The writer’s position and/or purpose lacks clarity. Information and ideas may be insufficiently extended for the audience, and there may be a lack of clarity and/or relevance. There may be some repetition. Writing generally communicates adequately but logic and meaning not always clear. Most attempts at paraphrasing and synthesising are insufficient, inaccurate, and/or inappropriate; not all originating author(s) cited with corresponding reference. Overreliance on quotes (where appropriate); some errors in citation. In-text and end-of-text referencing lacks accuracy and/or consistency. Vocabulary is adequate but is sometimes used inaccurately and/or inappropriately (for audience), and spelling errors may occur.

Some aspects of the introduction are sufficient; although at times overly vague with broad generalisations; greater clarity and direction needed. Thesis statement makes an overly general claim and is somewhat ambiguous in meaning. Conclusion attempted but does not appropriately sum up findings or link back to the Information and ideas may not always have a clear progression, and there may be a lack of coherence in some areas. Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is sometimes helpful (although errors, repetitive use, or underuse occur), but internal headings may be missing and/or inappropriate. Paragraphing is evident but may not always be logical and/or the main idea of some paragraphs is unclear.

Nearly all aspects of the assessment are addressed with appropriate support (although more support may be needed in some areas). The writer’s position and/or purpose are generally developed and clear. The specified word length is met (1000 words +/– 10%). Most information and ideas are extended sufficiently, but there may be a minor lack of clarity or focus and/or relevance in some supporting ideas/material. Writing generally communicates effectively but logic and meaning not always clear. The introduction is adequate; outlines identifying features but greater clarity required. The thesis statement makes an overly broad claim and is somewhat ambiguous in meaning. Conclusion addresses most main areas adequately. Information and ideas are generally organised logically (lapses/loss of coherence may occur). Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is helpful (although errors, repetitive use, or underuse occur), and some internal headings are well-managed. Paragraphing is generally effective and appropriate but may not always be logical, and/or the main idea of the paragraph may not always be clear.

1. Purpose and Audience (40%) 2. Structure and Organisation (30%) High Distinction (34 – 40) High Distinction (25.5 – 30) All aspects of the assessment are comprehensively and appropriately explored, supported and covered. The writer’s position and/or purpose is clear and fully developed throughout the assessment. All ideas are relevant and appropriate for the audience. Reference to required number of relevant sources. The specified word length is met (1000 words +/– 10%). Writing communicates meaning clearly and achieves purpose of the task. The introduction is solid and thorough and includes all identifying features. Strong and relevant thesis statement with controlling idea(s) linked to topic sentences. Conclusion clearly relates back to the title, thesis statement and main points. Presents a well-defined summary of the whole paper. Well-defined argument. Information and ideas are logically organised and easily followed. Cohesion between sentences and paragraphs is highly effective, and all internal headings are used effectively and sufficiently. Paragraphing is used appropriately and skillfully.Format enhances readability of the paper.

Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction 0 - 49 50 - 64 65 - 74 75 - 84 85 - 100 <12.5 12.5 – 15.5 16 – 18 18.5 – 20.5 21+ Multiple parts of the assignment are missing or incomplete. Student fails to answer the question. Essential elements are imprecise or absent. Work at a level that would be considered basic. Key elements are presented but could be further developed and given ore depth. Most aspects included in a final, well-developed form. The assignment contains all required elements and is of the highest order.

3.Research & Language Integrating evidence (paraphrasing, synthesising and quotations) Referencing – in-text (citing) and referencelist. Sentences – spelling, punctuation, grammar. Is there evidence of research? Is it properly referenced? Are source materials properly integrated and referenced in-text? Is there a range of vocabulary? Are sentences grammatically correct? Are sentences accurate and complete? Has a spell check been used? Is spelling accurate? 30%

Marking criteria/weighting Evaluation criteria Task Weighting 1.Purpose & Audience Understanding and addressing the question Has the student understood the task and covered the key points? Does the response adequately address the topic and task? Does this document take into account the needs of the audience? Does this document provide adequate information for the reader? Does the writer thoroughly address any potential questions from the reader? 40% 2. Structure & Organisation Thesis/argument, introduction, conclusion, paragraphs. Using referencing in your writing (paraphrasing, synthesising and quotations). Is there a clear structure to the response? Does the introduction, body and conclusion contain all the identifying features ? Do the paragraphs contain one main idea that is explored using relevant evidence? 30%

1. All applications for Special Consideration need to be submitted before the due date of the assessment item. For more information see Computer failure will not be accepted as a reason for missing an assessment deadline: you are strongly advised to backup all of your work, for example on a USB flash drive, to ensure that you are still able to submit to a deadline in the event of a computer related failure. 2. In cases where there are no accepted mitigating circumstances as determined through Special Consideration procedures, late submission of assessment tasks will lead automatically to the imposition of a penalty. Penalties will be applied for late submissions as soon as the deadline is reached. 3. Students are reminded of the extremely serious view the University takes with regard to plagiarism and are strongly advised to read the university’s policies on academic integrity and the penalties associated with academic misconduct