Assessment Criteria

We appreciate that not all students possess the same degree of verbal confidence, and not all are equally articulate. In the same way, not all are equally good at written work, problem solving, essay writing, or any other form of assessment. The reason a variety of assessment strategies has been used in the unit is to cater to a range of different strengths, as well as to develop a range of desired skills. If you anticipate difficulties with class participation, talk to your tutor EARLY to discuss strategies to assist you. One of the reasons for assessing class participation is to encourage students to develop oral communication skills through practice, in an environment far less intimidating than the world of professional practice. What we are keen to see is real effort to develop and/or enhance existing oral skills. Asking questions is a very good way of learning, and frequently the student who asks the “dumb question” is voicing what others are also thinking, with the result that everybody is helped to clarify the material. Your tutor cannot identify and deal with misunderstandings unless you speak up. The point of seminars is to come sufficiently prepared to enable you, and others, to benefit from the class, and to go away having increased your understanding. Marks for class participation encourage active learning, regular reading, elucidation and clarification of difficulties, questioning and analysis of material, and enhance oral skills. Attendance at seminar classes is relevant to the mark you receive, but by itself will not attract marks. Please bear in mind that attendance without participation is comparable to handing in blank pages for a written assignment.

Your work will be assessed according to the extent of your:

Excellent

= HD-D

Good

= Credit

Satisfactory

= Pass

Unsatisfactory

= Fail

Preparation for class: Demonstrated by relevance of participation to general discussion

Has the capacity to notice important information in the readings and use it to build new arguments in class discussion and enhance learning in class

States information in the readings to help learning in the class discussion

Attempts to contribute to discussion but contributions show little real preparation eg repeats what other students have said, or blurts out comments that are not based on the readings

Has not prepared for class - eg does not contribute to class discussion, is not able to answer questions adequately when asked directly

Understanding and expressing abstract and complex ideas orally

Can articulate own position on the readings and evaluate the efficacy of the ideas from a number of standpoints and see differences in points of view

Can articulate own position and with assistance can synthesise different ideas arising from the readings into a larger idea 

Limited capacity to synthesise a number ideas from the readings into a larger argument - analysis is descriptive and largely confined to the student's own point of view

Does not usually participate in class and when participation occurs responses are basic and factual

Assisting other class members by contributing to student learning

Elucidates complex ideas succinctly, building on the ideas expressed by others or distinguishing their own ideas

Some interaction with other students' views but does not integrate in discussion 

Listens to other views but can tend to paraphrase what other students have said

Does not usually participate in class, finds it difficult to articulate their own point of view or see another point of view

Expressing and countering arguments orally

Articulates a position supported by the readings, and is able to defend that position or is able to modify that position on the basis of alternative viewpoints on the readings; is able to effectively counter other student viewpoints basing their arguments on the readings

Expresses a position based on the readings, but may be unable to support or modify that position when challenged; attempts to counter other student viewpoints using the readings mainly

Can express a viewpoint that is not explicitly based on the readings and is unable to maintain or modify their own viewpoint; mainly uses personal opinion to counter other student viewpoints

Does not usually participate in class, has difficulty formulating own opinion or relating to another’s opinion

Listening attentively and showing respect to other students participating in class

Independent thinker, takes initiative in discussion as well as co-operating effectively with others

Relates professionally to colleagues. Makes sound contributions to the discussion

Attempts to relate to colleagues and engage in discussion

Does not make an effort to relate to colleagues and engage in discussion

Your work will be assessed according to the extent of your:

Excellent

= HD-D

Good

= Credit

Satisfctory

= Pass

 Unsatisfactory

= Fail

Establishing your research question

Thorough and accurate understanding of the topic area and of its impact on Indigenous peoples. Sufficient in scope - ie not too narrow or broad

Good understanding of the topic area and its impact on Indigenous peoples. Is not too narrow or broad.

Basic understanding of the topic of the topic area and its impact on Indigenous peoples. Could be too narrow or broad.

 Knows little about of topic area and its impact on Indigenous peoples. Is too narrow or broad.

Identify the aims of your research

Is clear in stating the objectives of their research and the parameters of their research with respect to the existing literature in the field. Begins to articulate the conclusions they will draw from their research based on initial research findings and can explain why their research is important. 

States the objectives of their research, can relate it to the literature in the field, is able to draw some conclusions and has some insight into why their research is important. 

States the objectives of their research, makes some connections to the literature and draws some conclusions but stops short of giving clear picture of why their research is important.

States the objectives of the research and links them to the field and draws conclusions but only at a superficial level. 

Review of the Literature 

Identifies relevant sources to their research topic and can make strong connections between them. 

Identifies relevant sources to their research topic but the connections are not completely clear.

Identifies some relevant sources to their research topic but the connections are not completely clear. Some sources may be irrelevant.

Identifies some relevant sources to their research topic but the connections are not completely clear. More sources may be irrelevant than relevant.

Develop a reform agenda

Proposed conclusions/reforms strongly link to research question and build on existing literature. Original contribution to the field

Proposed conclusions/reforms link to research question and build on existing literature but could be more strongly linked and original. 

Attempt has been made to link proposed conclusions/reforms to research question and existing literature but may be tenuous and not always relevant or original. 

No attempt has been made to link proposed conclusions/reforms to research question and existing literature. 

Methodology

Chosen methodology is appropriate for their chosen topic, the background literature and proposed conclusions/reform agenda. Clear rationale for methodology provided.

Not a complete match between methodology and their chosen topic, background literature and proposed conclusions/reform agenda. 

Attempt has been made to establish methodology but only at a superficial level.

No attempt has been made to establish methodology.  

Initial bibliographay

Bibliography contains all sources cited in the Research Proposal and contains a variety of relevant primary and secondary sources. 

Bibliography contains most sources cited in the Research Proposal but could contain more varied primary and secondary sources.. 

Bibliography contain most sources cited in the Research Proposal but not enough varied primary and secondary sources.  

Bibliography contains most sources cited in the Research Proposal and contains a variety of primary and secondary sources. 

Use of AGLC Style Guide for footnotes and bibliography

References and citations, including the bibliography use accurate, consistent and appropriate styles. Good effort at adapting the approach to different disciplinary conventions when using non-law literature.

References and citations, including the bibliography are mostly accurate, consistent and appropriate.

References and citations are basically accurate in style. Some lack of consistency; reasonable acknowledgment of the sources of information

Absence or inaccurate use of referencing and citation conventions

Your work will be assessed according to the extent of your:

Excellent

= HD-D

Good

= Credit

Satisfactory

= Pass

Unsatisfactory

= Fail

Knowledge of the law and understanding of the issues arising in your area of research.

Thorough and accurate understanding of rules, concepts and processes of law. Uses this knowledge to abstract principles and applies them in novel situations. Uses concepts to build new knowledge and understanding. Recognises the limitations of current law and theories about them.

Thorough and accurate understanding of rules, concepts and processes of law and can analyse and apply them in new situations.

Knows basic concepts and rules and can use them to solve problems and extend to new areas

Knows a few rules and concepts. Does not use any theoretical understanding of the issues.

Introduction: uses to explain structure of essay,methodology, articulate an argument and enumerate issues that will be discussed to substantiate the argument

Uses the introduction to formulate a clear argument, identify parts of the argument, relevant issues and theories that will be addressed.

Recognises the limitations of current thinking and the need for new ways of thinking. Identifies methodological framework for analysis and devlopment of argument.

Uses the introduction to set out structure of the essay. Can formulate an argument, and identify relevant issues and theories to be addressed. Methodological framework noted.

Basic introduction that contains all the formal elements but stops short of giving a clear picture of the essay and methodology

There is an introduction but it does not provide a clear articulation of the argument or structure or methodology.

Depth of analysis: the depth of analysis as demonstrated by moving beyond descriptive analysis of the research materials and development of one's own argument

Uses principles to formulate a position or an argument about the literature. Can articulate the limited nature of their argument and can challenge the boundaries of disciplinary understanding.

Recognises competing explanations and can identify the relative merits and limitations of an argument. Can describe and defend their own view or position.

Mostly reports others' views without assessing them. Little interpretation or translation to a new problem or issue.

Descriptive account of the available literature without any or very little analysis.

 Argument:  Ideas drawn from the research materials should be synthesized in a systematic and coherent structure

 Uses available ideas and theories accurately. Abstracts and applies them in novel situations. Uses concepts to build new knowledge and understanding. Recognises the limitations of current thinking and makes original contribution to the literature.

 Shows a thorough and accurate understanding of concepts and processes. Has the capacity to analyse and apply them in new situations and develop their argument.

 Knows basic concepts and rules. Requires more effort in synthesizing own arguments.

  Knows some of the ideas and rules. Does not extend own analysis or argument

Coherent Structure: Systematic and coherent organisation of ideas in sentences/paragraphs/sections; Separate Introduction and Conclusion; Use of sub-headings

Written Expression: Clear written expression, ideas structured in sentences, correct grammar/spelling

 Meets all expectations and conventions. Distinctive personal style in the specific execution of the task. A unique but appropriate presentation of work. Good use of headings.

 Fulfils the basic standard conventions with all expected attributes present including use of headings. Some translation and interpretation of the conventions to suit personal style and the specific execution of the task.

 Fulfils the basic but not all of the expectations regarding the formatting and presentation of work. E.g., titles name on work, introduction, conclusion, but inconsistent use of headings. Spell checked & grammatically correct.

  Lacks a coherent structure of argument, organization of ideas into different sections, fails to use spell checker, some sentences fail to use correct grammatical rules.

Use of AGLC Style Guide for footnotes and bibliography

 References and citations, including the bibliography use accurate, consistent and appropriate styles. Good effort at adapting the approach to different disciplinary conventions when using non-law literature.

References and citations, including the bibliography are mostly accurate, consistent and appropriate.

References and citations are basically accurate in style. Some lack of consistency; reasonable acknowledgment of the sources of information.

 Absence or inaccurate use of referencing and citation conventions.