i got an assignmnet done before through you l but got lo marks. i look forward to receive good mrks an dilso i was told tht i can get a good discount onsidering what happened last time. The expected format of the assessment task is a standard university ‘essay' (i.e., opening with an introduction, followed by a body of content setting out the arguments, finishing with a conclusion summarising the key points). It is not a ‘report'; hence do not provide an executive summary or table of contents.

3 – 3.4 Satisfactory organisation of arguments that flow reasonably well in reaching conclusions, expression is reasonably clear and coherent, and follows essay and citation conventions with only minor errors 3.5 – 3.9 Well executed organisation of arguments leading coherently to conclusions, expression is clearly articulated and the content follows correct essay writing and citation conventions. 4 - 5 Exceptional organisation of arguments that are both coherent and informative in reaching their conclusions, expression is exceptional, and the content follows correct essay writing and citation conventions.

Communication with effective structure and presentation of essay according to assignment instructions and consistent with the expectations of university-level essay writing. Total: 10 marks (GLO2) 0 – 1.9 Disorganised structure, significant grammar and spelling errors, sizable portions incomprehensible, essay writing and citation conventions are ignored, paraphrased too closely and extensively, and/or essay writing conventions are ignored (i.e., introduction, body and conclusion). 1.5 – 1.9 Many inconsistent or contradictory arguments, sections of the essay are incomprehensible, paraphrasing too closely, portions of the essay are incomprehensible, and/or essay writing and citation conventions are only vaguely followed. 2.5 – 2.9 Some disorganisation of arguments, some awkwardness in expression, and/or minor misdemeanours in following essay and citation conventions, but meet minimum acceptable standards.

9 – 10.4 points Understanding of the competing arguments is satisfactory. The analysis is reasonable. The sources used are adequate and the analysis is balanced across the competing arguments, with the description offered being in parts limited, vague and/or containing some errors. 10.5 – 11.9 points Understanding of the competing arguments is very good. The analysis provides excellent coverage and is balanced across the arguments, the sources used are relevant, and the description offered is generally sound, with only minor limitations, vagueness and/or errors. 12 -15 points Understanding of competing arguments is exceptional. The analysis provides outstanding coverage and is balanced across the arguments, the sources used are highly relevant, and the description offered is comprehensive, and free of limitations, vagueness and error.

Critical thinking, exemplified in the analysis of competing arguments associated with practice of enterprise bargaining. Total: 15 marks (GLO4) 0 – 4.4 points Demonstrates little or no understanding of the competing arguments. 4.5 – 7.4 points Understanding of the competing arguments is inadequate. The analysis is either partial, one-sided, draws on inadequate sources, and/or the description provided is either very limited, extremely vague or contains numerous errors. 7.5 – 8.9 points Understanding of the competing arguments is acceptable. The analysis is basic. The sources used are limited and/or are only partially adequate, and/or the analysis lacks balance across the competing arguments and/or the description provided is either limited, vague, and/or contains some errors.

6 – 6.9 points Understanding of the legal requirements that need to be observed is satisfactory. The coverage provided contains only minor omissions, and/or the description offered is in parts limited, vague or contains some errors. 7 – 7.9 points Understanding of the legal rights that need to be observed is very good. The coverage provided contains no omissions, and the description offered is generally sound, with only minor limitations, vagueness and/or errors. 8 – 10 points Understanding of processes, organisations and institutions is exceptional. The coverage provided contains no omissions, and the description offered is comprehensive, and free of limitations, vagueness and error.

Discipline specific knowledge of the legal requirements that need to be observed during enterprise bargaining under the Fair Work Act 2009. Total: 10 marks (GLO1) 0 – 2.9 points Demonstrates little or no understanding of the legal requirements that need to be observed. 3 – 4.9 points Understanding of the legal requirements that need to be observed is inadequate. The coverage provided contains numerous omissions, and/or the description offered is either incomplete, extremely vague or contains numerous errors. 5 – 5.9 points Understanding of the legal requirements that need to be observed is acceptable. The coverage provided is very basic, with some omissions, and/or the description offered is either limited, vague, or contains some errors.

Very good Exceptional 28 or more 32 or more 7 – 7.9 points Understanding of the processes, organisations and institutions is very good. The coverage provided contains no omissions, and the description offered is generally sound, with only minor limitations, vagueness and/or errors. 8 – 10 points Understanding of processes, organisations and institutions is exceptional. The coverage provided contains no omissions, and the description offered is comprehensive, and free of limitations, vagueness and error.

MMH349 Marking Rubric – Assignment (Trimester 2 2017) Satisfactory Good 20 or more 24 or more 5 – 5.9 points Understanding of the processes, organisations and institutions is acceptable. The coverage provided is very basic, with some omissions, and/or the description offered is either limited, vague or contains some errors. 6 – 6.9 points Understanding of the processes, organisations and institutions is satisfactory. The coverage provided contains only minor omissions, and/or the description offered is in parts limited, vague and/or contains some errors.

Criteria Very inadequate Unsatisfactory 0 or more 12 or more Discipline specific knowledge of the processes of enterprise bargaining and the organisations and institutions involved in enterprise bargaining under the Fair Work Act 2009. Total: 10 marks (GLO1) 0 – 2.9 points Demonstrates little or no understanding of the processes, organisations and institutions. 3 – 4.9 points Understanding of the processes, organisations and institutions is inadequate. The coverage provided contains numerous omissions, and/or the description offered is either incomplete, extremely vague or contains numerous errors.