1500 word essay for which students must answer either question 1, 2 or 3 from the list that will be available from the start of the unit (or before, in the Detailed Unit Guide' on the unit iLearn site)

Submit the essay to the Turnitin link on the unit iLearn site

Due date 11 September, 4pm.

Please ensure you have read and understood the material on proper referencing. http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/academic_honesty/policy.html

Any of the main social science methods (not law) maybe used, e.g. Harvard, Cambridge, or endnote)

One research essay of 2500 words (of text - notes and bibliography are extra). The essay is due on 3 November, 5pm. The date has been deferred as late as possible. It is strongly advised to begin working on your essay sooner rather than later.

Use scholarly sources and ensure that the essay is properly referenced.

Time management is an important part of coping with university requirements. Questions are available from the start of the unit and there is a week without lectures or tutorials (October 2-6) for students to work on their essays. Use this time wisely. No extensions are necessary. Late essays will lose 2 marks per day.

submit to the Turnitin link on the unit iLearn site

Please reference properly

Indication of what is expected across the essay grading categories is shown below:

Criterion

< 50% Fail

51-64%

Pass

65-74%

Credit

75-84%

Distinction

85% + High Distinction

Argument

Does not answer the question asked and/or provides an inadequate answer in terms of relevance, logic and consistency.

Some argument presented, but with weaknesses in relation to relevance, logic, consistency, coherence and sustainability. 

Puts forward a competent argument which clearly answers the question asked – logical, consistent, coherent and sustained throughout the essay.  Some attempt to use relevant theoretical concepts.

Strong argument in terms of complexity, logic, consistency and coherence that clearly addresses the question and which makes good use of relevant theoretical concepts.

Argument which is highly complex, logical, consist, and engaging.  Shows a strong development of conceptual/theoretical points.

Critical Analysis

No real attempt at critical analysis of opposing viewpoints. Highly descriptive. 

Analysis at a largely descriptive level.  Does makes some attempts at critical analysis of opposing viewpoints but with deficiencies in terms of logic, rigor and fairness.

Good analysis of opposing views - logical, consistent and fair evaluation of opposing arguments.  Attempts to provide some original and creative contribution to debate.

Strong critical analysis, well evaluated in terms of logic, rigor and fairness.  Attempts to get behind the evidence via engagement with underlying assumptions.  Develops an original and creative contribution to debate. 

Sharp and insightful critical analysis, excellent interrogation of underlying assumptions and contested concepts. Highly original and creative contribution to debate. 

Knowledge & Understanding

Content based on shallow reading, demonstrates poor understanding of topic, substantial inaccuracies in knowledge.  May paraphrase to an unacceptable level.

Work demonstrating a largely broad and descriptive knowledge of the relevant subject matter but with overall accuracy.  Tendency to over-paraphrase in parts. 

Highly competent work showing a deep and accurate understanding of relevant theories, concepts.  Makes a good attempt to explain using own words.  Evidence of relatively wide reading.  Also attempts to apply theoretical knowledge.

Superior work showing in-depth and highly accurate knowledge of relevant subject matter. Evidence of wide reading and understanding of theoretical concepts and a good attempt to apply this knowledge. 

Exceptional in-depth knowledge of the relevant subject matter. Provides a clear and complex explanation of theories and concepts using own understanding with a sophisticated attempt to apply this knowledge. Evidence of very wide reading and insightful interpretation of evidence.

Evidence/

Resources

Evidence used is largely irrelevant, arguments not supported by evidence, use of non-academic sources to an unacceptable level.

Evidence used is relevant to the question asked, on the whole, and provides support for the arguments made, but with some weaknesses.   Some use of relevant examples.  Use of scholarly sources most of the time.

Arguments supported by solid range of relevant academic/scholarly sources.  Good use of relevant examples.

Use of a wide range of highly relevant academic sources.  Insightful use of relevant examples.  Evidence clearly supports the arguments presented.

Use of a very wide range of highly relevant academic sources which clearly support the arguments presented.  Insightful and creative use of relevant examples. 

Structure/

Organisation

Inconsistent and illogical essay structure, purpose of large sections is unclear. Poor use of sign-posting making the argument very difficult to follow.  Ineffective use of introduction and conclusion.  May be over or under the required word length.

Essay structure is generally logical and consistent but with some weaknesses with coherence and clarity.  Attempt made to use introduction and conclusion to structure ideas raised but with deficiencies.  May be over or under required word length. 

Majority of the essay organised with logic and coherence, evidence of linkages/signposting of arguments.  Good use of introduction and conclusion as structuring tools.  Keeps within required word length. 

Logical, coherent and consistent essay structure throughout, supportive of main arguments presented.  Purpose of paragraphs/subsections clear through good use of signposting.  Developed use of introduction and conclusion to structure argument made. Keeps within required word-length. 

Highly logical and consistent structure throughout which strongly supports the arguments presented.  Content highly purposeful with excellent use of sign-posting.  Excellent use of introduction and conclusion as structuring tools. Keeps within the required word length.

Style & Presentation

Serious problems with grammar and expression making the argument very difficult or impossible to be understood. 

Correct English grammar and expression used on the whole.  Meaning of expressions used is generally clear, but with some minor problems.  Low level of spelling and typographical errors.  

Correct English Grammar and expression throughout.  Meaning of language used clear.  Rare spelling and typographical errors. 

Correct use of English grammar and expression.  Language used is clearly understandable, with evidence of creativity and flair.   

Correct use of English grammar, clear expression, shows high level of  creativity and flair in the use of language.

Referencing

Significant levels of incorrect academic referencing and/or plagiarism.

Fair use of sources, most of the time.  Correct use of referencing styles in general, but with some small errors.

Fair use of sources throughout, referencing styles used correctly with rare errors. 

Fair use of sources, no evidence of plagiarism, correct use of referencing styles throughout. 

Fair use of sources with no evidence of plagiarism, correct use of referencing styles throughout. 

There will be an exam in the examination period. The date, time and location are determined by the Academic Programs Section. You will be informed of those details when they are known. 2 hours + 10 minutes reading time will be available for the exam. The exam content could be drawn from across the entire unit.  All students, internal and external, must attend an exam.

External Students outside Sydney may complete the exam at an approved examination centre.

For external students the exam component is 40% of the total assessment