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