WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
Turnitin Value
Introduction (15%)
-
-
-
Introduces
research topic and
its context
Briefly describes
previous research
and identifies
research gap
Presents a clear,
achievable aim and
shows how it fills a
gap in the research
States why
research is
important
Fail
Absent
0
No
attempt/
Irrelevant
Inadequat
e
1
Developing
Adequate
Competent
Proficient
2
3
4
5
Text fails to
establish context for
the research topic
Text attempts to
establish context for
the research topic
Text establishes
some context for the
research topic
Text clearly
establishes context
for the research topic
Previous research
may not be
explored or may not
be relevant
Relevant previous
research is listed
Relevant previous
research is basically
explored
Relevant previous
research is
competently
explored
Research gap may
be missing or
unclear
Research gap is
identified and clearly
expressed
The research aim is
missing, unclear,
unachievable or
does not link back
to the gap.
Research gap is
identified but may
not be clearly
expressed
The research aim is
included and
achievable but may
not link clearly to
the gap.
Research gap is
identified and
competently
expressed
Includes a welldefined and
achievable research
aim that clearly links
back to the gap in
the research
Does not state the
importance of the
research.
Partially states the
importance of the
research.
Succinctly states the
importance of
Includes a clear and
achievable research
aim that somewhat
links back to the
gap.
Text expertly
establishes context
for the research
topic
Relevant previous is
expertly explored
Research gap is
identified and
expertly expressed
Includes an
accurately and
expertly expressed,
achievable research
aim that links directly
back to the gap in
the research.
Competently states
Expertly states the
the importance of the importance of the
research.
research.
Page 1 of 6
WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
Literature Review (10%)
-
Sources are
critically
evaluated and
synthesised
into a cohesive
text.
No
attempt/
Irrelevant
No
Results/Data Commentary attempt/
(5%)
Irrelevant
- Presents significant
findings related to
research aim.
- Location statement
and summary
- Highlighting
statement
Interpretation/Evalu
ative statement
Concluding statement
Little
understanding of
links
between
specific
ideas
and arguments
in the sources
cited.
No
effective attempt
to identify or
engage with key
issues,
perspectives,
and debates in
relation to the
topic.
A Data
Commentary is
attempted but most
of the criteria
required are absent
Contains several
arguments which are
individually relevant,
but these are
fragmented and not
effectively organised
into an overarching
thesis or argument.
Generally
summarises
scholarly sources
with little critical
analysis, showing a
limited amount of
understanding of
links between
specific ideas and
arguments in the
sources cited
A basic Data
Commentary is
included but not all of
the required criteria
are met
Shows evidence of
critical analysis and
understands links
between specific
ideas and arguments
in the sources cited.
Generally attempts
to identify competing
claims and
perspectives in
relation to the topic,
and goes some way
toward incorporating
these into the critical
analysis
Shows evidence of
critical analysis and
understands links,
agreements,
disagreements, and
differences between
specific ideas and
arguments in the
sources cited.
Usually aware of
competing claims in
relation to the topic,
and incorporates
these into a critical
analysis
Shows a clear
understanding of
links, agreements,
disagreements, and
differences between
specific
ideas and
arguments in
sources cited. Uses
these to offer a wellreasoned, critical
analysis and
evaluation.
An adequate Data
Commentary is
included and meets
some of the criteria
required
A Data Commentary
is included and
meets most of the
criteria required
A Data Commentary
is included and
meets all criteria
required
Page 2 of 6
WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
Turnitin Value
Discussion 15%
- States main findings and
significance
- Explains the meaning of
findings Compares and
contrasts findings to
previous studies
- Identifies implications
(weaknesses and
limitations)
- Identifies limitations of
current research and
suggestions for further
research
.
Fail
Absent
0
Inadequate
Developing
Adequate
Competent
Proficient
1
2
3
4
5
No
attempt/
Irrelevant
Discussion has no clear
or logical overarching
argument. Does not
show awareness of
scope and implications
of the selected topic, as
significant amounts of
material is off- topic or
irrelevant or
superfluous. Movement
between topics appears
to be random, with little
or no connection
between points made
Discussion does
have basic sense of
argument, but with
some problems with
cohesion. Irrelevant
or superfluous
information is
included. Covers
several issues which
are individually
relevant, but these
are fragmented and
not effectively
organised into an
overarching
argument
Discussion is clear,
logical and covers
competing
perspectives well.
Very little irrelevant
or superfluous
information is
included. Offers a
central argument,
but it is not
consistently
articulated or
always supported
with effective
evidence
Discussion is clear,
logical and covers
competing
perspectives very
well. Offers a central
argument that is
mostly consistently
articulated and
supported with
convincing evidence
Discussion is rigorous
and shows strong
critical analysis.
Content covers a
range of relevant
issues and competing
perspectives with a
strong sense of the
appropriate weight to
be given to each
issue. Makes
coherent,
sophisticated, and
effective points in
establishing a central
argument, supported
by relevant and
convincing evidence
Page 3 of 6
WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
Fail
Absent
Inadequate
Developing
Adequate
Competent
Proficient
Uses a basic
range of
vocabulary; some
errors impede
communication.
Uses a range of
vocabulary;
minor errors.
Uses an advanced
range of
vocabulary mostly
accurately.
Uses a sophisticated
range of vocabulary
in a consistently
accurate manner.
Formality
-non-colloquial,
academic expression
used
Uses a very limited
range of vocabulary;
multiple errors impede
communication.
Errors in formality
(contractions, informal
language) and
objectivity are
frequent.
Objectivity
-Impersonal and objective
voice
Markers of stance
Use of hedging, attitude
markers, citation, self- mention
Markers of stance
frequently misused or
omitted
Some
misuse/omission of
markers of stance
Language: (30%)
Vocabulary (10%)
Range
Short
sample
Some errors in
formality
(contractions,
informal language)
and objectivity
Grammar (10%)
Impact of grammatical
errors and punctuation on
message delivery
Short
sample
Multiple errors largely
impede
understanding of the
message
Frequent errors
sometimes impede
understanding of
the message
CoherenceandCohesion (10%)
-Logical progression of
ideas
-Cohesive paragraphs and
sentence structure.
Short
sample
Coherence poorly
managed
Coherence
adequately
managed
Most simple
sentence
structures are
error free.
Frequent errors in
complex
sentences and in
the use of
cohesive devices
Mainly simple
sentence structures
used. Errors in
complex sentences
and cohesive devices
are frequent and
impede
communication.
Minor errors in
formality and
objectivity
Occasional
misuse/omission
of markers of
stance
Infrequent
grammatical
errors. Message
is clear but
articulated in a
basic manner
Coherence is
generally well
managed
Some complex
sentences
attempted; the
use of cohesive
devices show
minimal errors.
Appropriate formality
and objectivity used
skilfully throughout
Appropriate
formality and
objectivity used
throughout
Good use of
markers of stance
Excellent use of
markers of stance
Grammatical errors
are rare. Message is
clear and articulated
competently
Almost no
grammatical errors.
Message is clear
and articulated
proficiently
Coherence well
managed
High degree of
coherence
A variety of
sentence
structures
competently used.
Some errors in
complex sentences
persist. Cohesive
devices used
mostly accurately
A variety of
sentence
structures used
accurately. Errors
are rare. Cohesive
devices used
skilfully
Page 4 of 6
WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
Use of sources (20%).
Selection and
evaluation of at
least 5 reliable and
appropriate
sources.
Use of voice
Referencing
In-text references
Reference list
Formatting and word
count (5%)
Specified formatting
(font type, font size,
headings,
subheadings,
paragraph use, etc.)
followed throughout.
1,200 words
Fail / Absent
Inadequate
Sources included are
irrelevant and/or
unreliable.
Developing
Some sources are
used, but they are
not all reliable or
relevant.
Relevant sources are
not analysed in depth
and/or with clarity.
Adequate
Competent
Proficient
5 relevant/reliable
sources are used.
5 relevant/reliable
sources are used.
5 relevant/reliable
sources are used.
The analysis at
times lacks depth
and/or clarity.
Clear and in-depth
analysis of most
sources
Clear and indepth analysis of
all sources
Writer’s voice not
distinguished from
sources.
Some attempt to
distinguish writer’s
voice from sources.
Quite good attempt
to distinguish
writer’s voice from
voice of sources
with only
occasional lapses.
Writer’s voice is
clearly distinct from
voice of sources.
Writer’s voice is
clearly and skilfully
distinct from voice
of sources.
In text references and
referencing list are
either omitted or do
not accurately follow
referencing
guidelines.
Some In-text
references are
omitted from the
reference list. Some
errors in formatting
in in-text and/or in
end of text
references.
Omissions of in
text references
from the reference
list are rare. Only
minor errors in
formatting.
In text references
and reference list
are mostly correctly
formatted
In text references
and reference list
are always
correctly
formatted.
Inconsistent formatting
throughout.
Somewhat
consistent
formatting; some
variations or errors.
Generally
consistent
formatting with
some minor
variations or errors.
Generally consistent
formatting; with few
minor variations or
errors.
Formatting
consistent
throughout, no
variation or errors.
Word count > +/-20%
of 1200 words
(i.e. < 960 or > 1440)
Word Count +/15% of 1,200 words
(i.e. < 1,020 or >
1380)
Word Count +/- 5%
of 1,200 words (i.e.
< 1,140 or > 1,260)
Word Count 1,200
words
Word Count +/10% of 1,200
words (i.e. < 1,080
or > 1,320)
Deduction for Plagiarism: If the Match Overview score is >10% (and is deemed to be plagiarism), a penalty will be applied to the student’s mark
equal to the percentage of similarity above the 10%. For example:
Page 5 of 6
WACB100 Research Report Marking Criteria
If a student has a Match Overview score of 30%, the penalty is 30% - 10% = 20%.
i.e. 20 % of the total possible marks will be deducted from the student’s total mark for the assessment.
e.g. If the student’s mark for the assessment is 60 out of 100, with the 20% deduction, the student would receive 40 marks (60 – 20 )
Page 6 of 6
Research Report
by Zhuoneng Liu
Submission date: 08-Nov-2018 08:27PM (UT C+1100)
Submission ID: 1035235000
File name: 257423_Z huoneng_Liu_Research_Report_4839811_1455522713.docx
Word count: 1333
Character count: 8019
Language needs improvement.
punctuation missing
Cit at ion Needed
the gap is
missing!
aim is not clear!
start each paragraph with a good topic sentence in your own voice!
not necessary
no clear argument and no effective
comparison and contrast of the findings of
others in relation to your topic!
irrelevant to the topic
not necessary
lack of cohesion
should be in numbers
Cit at ion Needed
R/O
???
unclear
incomplete sentence!
what do you mean??
Vague
should be on the next page
label?
WC
in Results, only the data of your study should be discussed!
so what?? what is the finding??
wc
Maint ain object ive t one
Awk.
????
Cap. Error
irrelevant
punctuation error
References and in-text citations do not marry!
Improper ref erencing
should be on the next page
Research Report
ORIGINALITY REPORT
6
%
SIMILARIT Y INDEX
4%
0%
4%
INT ERNET SOURCES
PUBLICAT IONS
ST UDENT PAPERS
PRIMARY SOURCES
1
2
3
4
5
2%
Submitted to Macquarie University
St udent Paper
1%
www.wssinfo.org
Int ernet Source
1%
iwaponline.com
Int ernet Source
1%
onlinelibrary.wiley.com
Int ernet Source
1%
ideas.repec.org
Int ernet Source
Exclude quotes
On
Exclude bibliography
On
Exclude matches
< 4 words
Research Report
GRADEMARK REPORT
FINAL GRADE
GENERAL COMMENTS
42
Instructor
/100
PAGE 1
QM
Text Comment.
Language needs improvement.
Text Comment.
punctuation missing
Citation Needed
Cite Source:
Please use the link below to f ind links to inf ormation regarding specif ic citation styles:
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_citation_styles.html
Strikethrough.
Text Comment.
the gap is missing!
Text Comment.
aim is not clear!
Text Comment.
no clear argument and no ef f ective comparison and contrast of the
f indings of others in relation to your topic!
Text Comment.
start each paragraph with a good topic sentence in your own voice!
Text Comment.
not necessary
Text Comment.
irrelevant to the topic
PAGE 2
QM
Text Comment.
not necessary
Text Comment.
lack of cohesion
Text Comment.
should be in numbers
Citation Needed
Cite Source:
Please use the link below to f ind links to inf ormation regarding specif ic citation styles:
http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_citation_styles.html
QM
R/O
Run-on sentence:
T he sentence contains two or more independent clauses. Separate the clauses with a period or
semicolon.
QM
Text Comment.
???
Text Comment.
unclear
Text Comment.
incomplete sentence!
Text Comment.
what do you mean??
Vague
Unclear:
When making a point in one of your body paragraphs, one of the most common mistakes is to
not of f er enough details. A paragraph without much detail will seem vague and sketchy. A paper
is always strengthened when your claims are as specif ic as possible, T he more detailed
evidence you of f er, the more ref erence points your reader will have. Remember that you are
communicating your argument to a reader who has only your description to go by. Someone
who reads your essay will not automatically know what you mean to express, so you have to
supply details, to show the reader what you mean, not just tell him or her.
Text Comment.
should be on the next page
Text Comment.
label?
PAGE 3
QM
WC
Word choice error:
Sometimes choosing the correct word to express exactly what you have to say is very dif f icult
to do. Word choice errors can be the result of not paying attention to the word or trying too
hard to come up with a f ancier word when a simple one is appropriate. A thesaurus can be a
handy tool when you're trying to f ind a word that's similar to, but more accurate than, the one
you're looking up. However, it can of ten introduce more problems if you use a word thinking it
has exactly the same meaning.
Text Comment.
in Results, only the data of your study should be discussed!
Text Comment.
so what?? what is the f inding??
PAGE 4
QM
wc
Word choice error:
Sometimes choosing the correct word to express exactly what you have to say is very dif f icult
to do. Word choice errors can be the result of not paying attention to the word or trying too
hard to come up with a f ancier word when a simple one is appropriate. A thesaurus can be a
handy tool when you're trying to f ind a word that's similar to, but more accurate than, the one
you're looking up. However, it can of ten introduce more problems if you use a word thinking it
has exactly the same meaning.
QM
Maintain objective tone
Make sure you have stated this idea in an objective way. In an analysis essay, you are not trying
to persuade the readers to agree with you. Instead, you are presenting evidence to support
your claim.
QM
Awk.
Awkward:
T he expression or construction is cumbersome or dif f icult to read. Consider rewriting.
Text Comment.
QM
????
Cap. Error
Capitalization
PAGE 5
Text Comment.
irrelevant
Text Comment.
punctuation error
Text Comment.
Ref erences and in-text citations do not marry!
Text Comment.
should be on the next page
QM
Improper ref erencing
Please check Harvard Ref erencing Style CDU/Monash guide f or a proper ref erencing.
PAGE 6
RUBRIC: RESEARCH REPORT T5 20 18
INT RODUCT ION (15%)
2.10 / 5
2/5
- Introduces research topic and its context - Brief ly describes previous research and identif ies research
gap - Presents a clear, achievable aim and shows how it f ills a gap in the research - States why research is
important
FA
(0)
No attempt/ Irrelevant
INADEQUATE
(1)
T ext f ails to establish context f or the research topic Previous research may not be
explored or may not be relevant Research gap may be missing or unclear T he
research aim is missing, unclear, unachievable or does not link back to the gap. Does
not state the importance of the research.
DEVELOPING
(2)
T ext attempts to establish context f or the research topic Relevant previous research
is listed Research gap is identif ied but may not be clearly expressed T he research aim
is included and achievable but may not link clearly to the gap. Partially states the
importance of the research.
ADEQUATE
(3)
T ext establishes some context f or the research topic Relevant previous research is
basically explored Research gap is identif ied and clearly expressed Includes a clear
and achievable research aim that somewhat links back to the gap. Succinctly states
the importance of the research.
COMPETENT
(4)
T ext clearly establishes context f or the research topic Relevant previous research is
competently explored Research gap is identif ied and competently expressed Includes
a well-def ined and achievable research aim that clearly links back to the gap in the
research Competently states the importance of the research.
PROFICIENT
(5)
T ext expertly establishes context f or the research topic Relevant previous is expertly
explored Research gap is identif ied and expertly expressed Includes an accurately
and expertly expressed, achievable research aim that links directly back to the gap in
the research. Expertly states the importance of the research.
LIT REV (10%)
1/5
- Sources are critically evaluated and synthesised into a cohesive text.
FA
(0)
No attempt/ Irrelevant
INADEQUATE
(1)
Little understanding of links between specif ic ideas and arguments in the sources
cited. No ef f ective attempt to identif y or engage with key issues, perspectives, and
debates in relation to the topic.
DEVELOPING
(2)
Contains several arguments which are individually relevant, but these are f ragmented
and not ef f ectively organised into an overarching thesis or argument. Generally
summarises scholarly sources with little critical analysis, showing a limited amount of
understanding of links between specif ic ideas and arguments in the sources cited
ADEQUATE
Shows evidence of critical analysis and understands links between specif ic ideas and
(3)
arguments in the sources cited. Generally attempts to identif y competing claims and
perspectives in relation to the topic, and goes some way toward incorporating these
into the critical analysis
COMPETENT
(4)
Shows evidence of critical analysis and understands links, agreements,
disagreements, and dif f erences between specif ic ideas and arguments in the sources
cited. Usually aware of competing claims in relation to the topic, and incorporates
these into a critical analysis
PROFICIENT
(5)
Shows a clear understanding of links, agreements, disagreements, and dif f erences
between specif ic ideas and arguments in sources cited. Uses these to of f er a wellreasoned, critical analysis and evaluation.
RESULT S/DAT A (5%)
2/5
- Presents signif icant f indings related to research aim. - Location statement and summary - Highlighting
statement - Interpretation/Evaluative statement Concluding statement
FA
(0)
No attempt/ Irrelevant
INADEQUATE
(1)
A Data Commentary is attempted but most of the criteria required are absent
DEVELOPING
(2)
A basic Data Commentary is included but not all of the required criteria are met
ADEQUATE
(3)
An adequate Data Commentary is included and meets some of the criteria required
COMPETENT
(4)
A Data Commentary is included and meets most of the criteria required
PROFICIENT
(5)
A Data Commentary is included and meets all criteria required
DISCUSSION (15%)
2/5
- States main f indings and signif icance - Explains the meaning of f indings Compares and contrasts
f indings to previous studies - Identif ies implications (weaknesses and limitations) - Identif ies limitations of
current research and suggestions f or f urther research .
FA
(0)
No attempt/ Irrelevant
INADEQUATE
(1)
Discussion has no clear or logical overarching argument. Does not show awareness
of scope and implications of the selected topic, as signif icant amounts of material is
of f - topic or irrelevant or superf luous. Movement between topics appears to be
random, with little or no connection between points made
DEVELOPING
(2)
Discussion does have basic sense of argument, but with some problems with
cohesion. Irrelevant or superf luous inf ormation is included. Covers several issues
which are individually relevant, but these are f ragmented and not ef f ectively
organised into an overarching argument
ADEQUATE
(3)
Discussion is clear, logical and covers competing perspectives well. Very little
irrelevant or superf luous inf ormation is included. Of f ers a central argument, but it is
not consistently articulated or always supported with ef f ective evidence
COMPETENT
(4)
Discussion is clear, logical and covers competing perspectives very well. Of f ers a
central argument that is mostly consistently articulated and supported with convincing
evidence
PROFICIENT
(5)
Discussion is rigorous and shows strong critical analysis. Content covers a range of
relevant issues and competing perspectives with a strong sense of the appropriate
weight to be given to each issue. Makes coherent, sophisticated, and ef f ective points
in establishing a central argument, supported by relevant and convincing evidence
VOCABULARY (10%)
3/5
Range Formality -non-colloquial, academic expression used Objectivity -Impersonal and objective voice
Markers of stance Use of hedging, attitude markers, citation, self - mention
FA
(0)
Short sample
INADEQUATE
(1)
Uses a very limited range of vocabulary; multiple errors impede communication. Errors
in f ormality (contractions, inf ormal language) and objectivity are f requent. Markers of
stance f requently misused or omitted
DEVELOPING
(2)
Uses a basic range of vocabulary; some errors impede communication. Some errors
in f ormality (contractions, inf ormal language) and objectivity Some misuse/omission
of markers of stance
ADEQUATE
(3)
Uses a range of vocabulary; minor errors. Minor errors in f ormality and objectivity
Occasional misuse/omission of markers of stance
COMPETENT
(4)
Uses an advanced range of vocabulary mostly accurately. Appropriate f ormality and
objectivity used throughout Good use of markers of stance
PROFICIENT
(5)
Uses a sophisticated range of vocabulary in a consistently accurate manner.
Appropriate f ormality and objectivity used skilf ully throughout Excellent use of
markers of stance
GRAMMAR (10%)
3/5
Impact of grammatical errors and punctuation on message delivery
FA
(0)
Short sample
INADEQUATE
(1)
Multiple errors largely impede understanding of the message
DEVELOPING
(2)
Frequent errors sometimes impede understanding of the message
ADEQUATE
(3)
Inf requent grammatical errors. Message is clear but articulated in a basic manner
COMPETENT
(4)
Grammatical errors are rare. Message is clear and articulated competently
PROFICIENT
(5)
Almost no grammatical errors. Message is clear and articulated prof iciently
COHERENCE (10%)
2/5
-Logical progression of ideas -Cohesive paragraphs and sentence structure.
FA
(0)
Short sample
INADEQUATE
(1)
Coherence poorly managed Mainly simple sentence structures used. Errors in
complex sentences and cohesive devices are f requent and impede communication.
DEVELOPING
(2)
Coherence adequately managed Most simple sentence structures are error f ree.
Frequent errors in complex sentences and in the use of cohesive devices
ADEQUATE
(3)
Coherence is generally well managed Some complex sentences attempted; the use of
cohesive devices show minimal errors.
COMPETENT
(4)
Coherence well managed A variety of sentence structures competently used. Some
errors in complex sentences persist. Cohesive devices used mostly accurately
PROFICIENT
(5)
High degree of coherence A variety of sentence structures used accurately. Errors
are rare. Cohesive devices used skilf ully
RESOURCES (20%)
2/5
Use of sources Selection and evaluation of at least 5 reliable and appropriate sources. Use of voice
Ref erencing In-text ref erences Ref erence list
FA
(0)
NA
INADEQUATE
(1)
Sources included are irrelevant and/or unreliable. Writer’s voice not distinguished f rom
sources. In text ref erences and ref erencing list are either omitted or do not accurately
f ollow ref erencing guidelines.
DEVELOPING
(2)
Some sources are used, but they are not all reliable or relevant. Relevant sources are
not analysed in depth and/or with clarity. Some attempt to distinguish writer’s voice
f rom sources. Some In-text ref erences are omitted f rom the ref erence list. Some
errors in f ormatting in in-text and/or in end of text ref erences.
ADEQUATE
(3)
5 relevant/reliable sources are used. T he analysis at times lacks depth and/or clarity.
Quite good attempt to distinguish writer’s voice f rom voice of sources with only
occasional lapses. Omissions of in text ref erences f rom the ref erence list are rare.
Only minor errors in f ormatting.
COMPETENT
(4)
5 relevant/reliable sources are used. Clear and in-depth analysis of most sources
Writer’s voice is clearly distinct f rom voice of sources. In text ref erences and
ref erence list are mostly correctly f ormatted
PROFICIENT
(5)
5 relevant/reliable sources are used. Clear and in-depth analysis of all sources
Writer’s voice is clearly and skilf ully distinct f rom voice of sources. In text ref erences
and ref erence list are always correctly f ormatted.
FORMAT T ING (5%)
2/5
Specif ied f ormatting (f ont type, f ont size, headings, subheadings, paragraph use, etc.) f ollowed
throughout. 1,200 words
FA
(0)
NA
INADEQUATE
(1)
Inconsistent f ormatting throughout. Word count > +/-20% of 1200 words (i.e. < 960
or > 1440)
DEVELOPING
(2)
Somewhat consistent f ormatting; some variations or errors. Word Count +/- 15% of
1,200 words (i.e. < 1,020 or > 1380)
ADEQUATE
(3)
Generally consistent f ormatting with some minor variations or errors. Word Count +/10% of 1,200 words (i.e. < 1,080 or > 1,320)
COMPETENT
(4)
Generally consistent f ormatting; with f ew minor variations or errors. Word Count +/5% of 1,200 words (i.e. < 1,140 or > 1,260)
PROFICIENT
(5)
Formatting consistent throughout, no variation or errors. Word Count 1,200 words
WACB Research Report data sources
Human Trafficking
Chon, KY & Khorana, S 2017, 'Moving Forward: Next Steps in Preventing and Disrupting Human
Trafficking', in M Chisolm-Straker & H Stoklosa (eds), Human Trafficking Is a Public Health Issue: A
Paradigm Expansion in the United States, Springer International Publishing, Cham, vol.
10.1007/978-3-319-47824-1_24, pp. 415-441, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-47824-1_24
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
Mara, D, Lane, J, Scott, B & Trouba, D 2010, ‘Sanitation and Health’, PLoS Medicine, vol. 7, no. 11,
doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000363
Gender Income Inequality
Shin, T 2012, ‘The gender gap in executive compensation: the role of female directors and chief
executive officers’, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, vol. 639,
no. 1, pp.258-278, doi 10.1177/0002716211421119
Refugee Resettlement
O’Dwyer, M & Mulder, S 2015, Finding satisfying work: the experiences of recent migrants with low
level English, viewed 17 October 2017,
https://www.ames.net.au/files/file/Research/AMES%20Australia%20Finding%20Satisfying%20Work.
pdf
Purchase answer to see full
attachment