Assignment 2 – Part 1 CaseWorld Scenario Student’s name: Performance standard Assessment criteria Excellent Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Introduction Weighting 10% Succinct, engaging introduction to the topic; Sound grasp of the case study is evident. Clear outline of scope and purpose of the paper. Provides a description of the steps that will be implemented to reach the conclusion. Clear introduction. Provides an outline of the steps that will be implemented to reach the conclusion. Scope and purpose of the paper is evident Case study is introduced with too much fanfare Introduces the case study only with no description of the steps it will take throughout the paper. Scope and purpose of the paper is minimal or absent. Case Study not well introduced; Scope & purpose of essay is not clear. Rambling and lengthy, too short, uninformative or unclear. Introduction missing. Discussion of the psychological theories to explain the violence/abuse in the White family is dealt with in depth - i.e. Includes sound analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas relating to Bandura’s social learning theory Weighting 30% Discussion is clear and detailed in relation to Bandura’s Social learning theory and is dealt with in depth in all areas - i.e. analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas. Discussion of Bandura’s Social learning theory is dealt with in depth in most areas - i.e. analysis, interpretation, with limited justification of ideas. Discussion of Bandura’s Social learning theory is generalised - i.e. minimal analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas. Discussion of Bandura’s Social learning theory is minimal - i.e. inadequate analysis, interpretation, and no justification of ideas. Discussion of the sociological theories to explain the violence/abuse in the White family is dealt with in depth - i.e. analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas relating to Social determinants of Health Weighting 30% Discussion of the Social Determinants of health is dealt with in depth in all areas - i.e. analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas. Discussion of the Social Determinants of health is dealt with in depth in most areas - i.e. analysis, interpretation, with limited justification of ideas. Discussion of the Social Determinants of health is generalised - i.e. minimal analysis, interpretation, and justification of ideas. Discussion of the Social Determinants of health is minimal - i.e. inadequate analysis, interpretation, and no justification of ideas. Assertions and statements are supported with relevant evidence/examples from the Case World scenario and are linked thoroughly with quality literature. The essay draws on sound peer reviewed sources and journals. Weighting 10% Consistently supports assertions and statements with relevant evidence/examples from academic sources of literature (e.g. peer reviewed journal articles, books, text book). Supports most assertions and statements with relevant evidence/examples from academic sources of literature (e.g. journal articles, books, text book). Does not always support assertions and statements with relevant evidence/examples from the academic literature - i.e. has made reference to some supporting literature but some of these sources are of low quality (e.g. web based, outdated). Most assertions and statements are not supported by relevant evidence/examples from the academic literature. Quality of sources referenced is very poor Conclusion Weighting 10% Conclusion is logically drawn from preceding discussion and is related to the paper’s aims. Succinct summary of the main points & their relevance and/or implications. Conclusion is clearly stated and relevant to the paper’s aims. The main points are summarised & their relevance and/or implications are briefly considered as part of the conclusion. The conclusion is merely a restatement of the introduction however is evident in the work. Summarises by repeating the arguments without explanation Conclusion draws on new material or is not related to the preceding discussion or paper’s aims. Conclusion is not clear, or missing; or relevance and implications not identified. Overall Presentation Weighting 5% Organised, clearly set out and easy to follow and understand. Attention is paid to spelling, grammar and paragraphs. Exemplary logical development Well organised, clearly set out and easy to understand. Some grammatical, spelling and presentation errors. Demonstrates a logical development. Discussion flows however at times paragraphs or sentences become unclear. Many errors in spelling and grammar but this does not detract from the meaning of the writing. Progression of ideas and discussion not always evident. Poor presentation including grammar, spelling and paragraphs. Errors cause meaning to be unclear and confuse the reader. Incoherent and difficult to follow Accurate use of references and correct presentation of the reference list is evident Weighting 5% Uses references accurately throughout. The reference list is presented correctly. References most sources of literature accurately. Minor punctuation errors in the reference list. Has not always referenced sources accurately - i.e. several inaccuracies in the use of references. Generally correct reference list with some errors. Many inaccuracies in the use of references. Significant errors in the reference list. Grade/ Mark Weighting /100% Feedback / Comments Name of marker/ Date