Your assignment will be marked using the Postgraduate coursework marking rubric. You can use this to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit. Postgraduate coursework marking rubric Criteria 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 0-29 Knowledge and understanding 30% Exceptional display of understanding, exploration, insightful contextualisation and originality of approach to the topic and area of law. Accurately states the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; defines precisely legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates in-depth understanding, exploration, insightful contextualisation and an original approach to the topic and area of law. Accurately states the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; defines precisely legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates a good to very good understanding, exploration, appropriate contextualisation and a comprehensive and appropriate approach to the topic and area of law. No significant inaccuracies, misunderstandings or errors in stating the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; correctly uses legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates sound understanding and exploration anda standard approach to the topic and area of law. No significant inaccuracies or misunderstandings in stating the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; sound use of legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates inadequate understanding and exploration of major ideas with little insight and a basic approach to the topic and area of law. Some minor inaccuracies or misunderstandings in stating the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; inadequate use of legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates limited understanding and exploration of major ideas with very little insight and a poor approach to the topic and area of law. Some significant inaccuracies or misunderstandings in stating the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; unsatisfactory use of legal terminology relevant to the topic covered. Demonstrates limited, little or no understanding and exploration of major ideas with very little insight and a poor approach to the topic and area of law. Some significant inaccuracies or misunderstandings in stating the legal authorities for given legal propositions and scholarly points of view; unsatisfactory use of legal terminology relevant to the topic covered.
Critical evaluation 30% Inspirational, innovative, authoritativeand rigorous approach to analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Engages in academic debate in an intellectually rigorous way; demonstrates independence of judgment. Evidence of high to very high quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Engages in academic debate in a professional way, including excellent discussion of potential alternative arguments. Evidence of high quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Engages in academic debate in a professional way, including good to very good discussion of potential alternative arguments. Sound analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Engages in academic debate in a sound way, including discussion of potential alternative arguments. Largely descriptive; some, but limited, evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisalof relevant law and literature. Some, but limited, engagement in academic debate and discussion of potential alternative arguments. Too descriptive; insufficient evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Insufficient engagement in academic debate. Mainly or too descriptive; insufficient or little evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal of relevant law and literature. Insufficient or little engagement in academic debate. Criteria 80-100 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 30-39 0-29 Research skills 15% Outstanding, rigorous, in-depth research. Demonstrates high levels of initiative and ability to effectively identify, locate and extract information from a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Excellent, in-depth research. Demonstrates high levels of initiative and ability to effectively identify, locate and extract information from a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Evidence of good to very good research. Demonstrates good levels of initiative and ability to effectively identify, locate and extract information from a good to very good range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Evidence of sound and appropriate research. Demonstrates ability to identify, locate and extract information from an adequate range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Evidence of inadequate. Information identified, located and extracted from a very limited range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Minimal research. Information has been identified, located and extracted from a very limited range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Inadequate research. Information has been identified, located and extracted from a very limited range of relevant primary and secondary sources. Writing skills 15% Writing style is outstanding, clear, fluent and effectively communicates the work. The organisation and structure of the work is exemplary. Word count is adhered to. Writing style is excellent, clear, fluent and effectively communicates the work. The organisation and structure of the work is excellent. Word count is adhered to. Writing style is good to very good, clear, coherent and effectively communicates the work. The work is well organised and well structured. Word count is adhered to. Writing style is clear and effectively communicates the work. The work is suitably organisedandstructured. May be some minor aberrations from the word count. Writing style may lack clarity but adequately communicates the work. The work is inadequately structured and organised. May be some minor aberrations from the word count. Writing style does not adequately communicate the work. The work is disorganised and/or poorly structured. May be some significant aberrations from the word count. Writing style does not adequately communicate the work. The work is disorganised and/or poorly structured. May be some significant aberrations from the word count. Presentation and referencing skills 10% Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is exemplary throughout. Referencing is accurate, consistent and in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is excellent throughout. Referencing is accurate, consistent and in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is good to very good. Referencing is good to very good and in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is at least sound, with no significant aberrations. Referencing is adequate in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is inadequate, with some minor aberrations. Referencing is barelyadequate in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is inadequate, with some significant aberrations. Referencing is inadequate in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. Standard of presentation, referencing and acknowledgement of sources is unsatisfactory, with some significant aberrations. Referencing is unsatisfactory in accordance with the Studying Law Guide. |