Student Name: Description Excellent Good Average Needs Improvement Weak Poor Information, analysis and presentation of findings from interview 25% weighting Evidence of a well structure interview; gathering and analysis of trait and characteristic information; articulation of interviewee information and controlled interviewer opinion and bias. Evidence of insightful and critical reporting and understanding of issues from the interview. Evidence of a very good understanding of the interview findings and issues. Evidence of a sound presentation and understanding of the issues from the interview. Evidence of a satisfactory understanding of the issues and advice from the interview. Limited understanding or consideration of the interview issues. Describes what's in literature rather than presents interview findings. Has not demonstrated understanding or consideration of issues from the interview. Critical Evaluation and Relevance of Discussion 40% weighting Knowledge and critique based on important ideas, theoretical concepts and research findings. Cohesive and quality analysis and discussion. Evidence of insightful and critical understanding of issues. Critical evaluation is informed by the literature. Demonstrates well developed understanding of the topics and coherent development of ideas discussed to appropriate depth. Evidence of a good understanding of the issues. Offers perceptive opinion informed by the literature. Demonstrates good understanding of the topics and development of major ideas that are discussed to an adequate depth. Evidence of a sound understanding of the issues. Offers opinion informed by the literature. Demonstrates an understanding of the topics and consistently develops the major ideas. The discussion has depth in parts. Evidence of a satisfactory understanding of the issues. Offers opinion on some of the issues. Demonstrates an understanding of the topics. In parts, the discussion needs to be in more depth. Limited understanding or consideration of the issues. Describes rather than evaluates. Provided some reference to the topics and had some ideas about it. Discussion lacks clarity and depth. Has not demonstrated understanding or consideration of the issues. Has not demonstrated an understanding of the topics. Organisation, Structure and Written Presentation 25% weighting Clear, logical and evident structure to the organisation and presentation of the discussion in the paper. Demonstrates acceptable standards of written work The report is well organised with a logical, clear and evident structure. Carefully edited with no errors. Accurate referencing. Appropriate length. The report is appropriately organised with a logical structure. Carefully edited with few errors. Appropriate referencing and length The report shows evidence of acceptable organisation and logical structure. Well edited but with some errors that may hinder readability. Appropriate referencing and length. The report has a satisfactory structure with mostly logical presentation. Satisfactory editing, but a few errors that hinder readability. Appropriate referencing and length. The report is poorly organised and lacks clear structure. Errors that hinder readability. Referencing incomplete, or inappropriate. Length -too long or too short. The report is disorganised with no clear structure. Multiple errors hindering readability. Referencing incomplete and/or inappropriate. Length -too long or too short Use of Literature 10% weighting Quality of and use of supporting literature and references Excellent use of a wide variety of academically appropriate literature. References used an integrated manner that substantiates the assertions. Very good use of academically appropriate literature. References used appropriately to support assertions. Good use of literature to support discussion and assertions. Adequate use of literature to support some of the discussion and assertions. Limited use of literature to support discussion and assertions. Poor or no use of literature to support discussion and assertions. Total /100 Comments: Marker: Date: 7411MED Interview Report Assignment Marking Criteria