DEM511 Emergency and Disaster Management in Context
Assessment-3: ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION
Description/Focus: Academic Paper
TOPICS: Based on the selected question – consult with the unit coordinator.
Value: 60% of the total grade. This assessment item must be attempted in order to pass the unit.
Due Date: 25 May, 2018
Task: Academic paper. This paper should be developed based on the topic of abstract (i.e. Assignment-3)
Length: 5000 words excluding references (for longer papers, seek guidance from Unit Coordinator).
Grading System for Assessment-3
Grading Schema F: 50% P: 50 to 65% C: 65 to 75% D: 75 to 85% HD: 85 to 100% Mark
1. Layout and Layout and Layout and Layout and Layout and
Clarity formatting are formatting have formatting are formatting are formatting are
of confusing and been considered, clear, and very clear. exceptionally
present unclear but remain a appropriate well presented
ation little unclear Grammar,
Poor use of Grammar and spelling and Grammar,
grammar or spelling are expression are spelling and /100
frequent spelling acceptable used effectively expression is
errors. exceptional. /10
2. Little or no Introduction, Introduction, Excellent Outstanding
Structu apparent Body and Body and structure and macro and
re and structure Conclusion are Conclusion are argumentation micro-level
argume identifiable at present throughout structure and
ntation Content is not macro-level argumentation
linked to the Micro-level Effective use of
topic or its value Mechanical or structuring is macro and Logical and
in answering the ineffective present most of micro-level nuanced
question is not micro-level the time, and structuring argument
explicit (paragraph makes an techniques, presented
level) identifiable where
Conclusions are structuring argument paragraphs Clear
not techniques (e.g develop introduction that
substantiated by topic or The introduction argument engages reader
argument summary and conclusions effective use of
sentences) are clear, Excellent evidence to
relevant, and introduction and substantiate
Limited largely conclusion, argument
supporting substantiated. which are throughout
evidence, a substantiated by
weakly Reasonable the evidence and Comprehensive
substantiated Evidence is arguments and insightful /100
conclusion identified in presented conclusion
support of throughout /30
Quality of content Lacking relevant content and detail.
Lack of depth and breadth of Relevant content included, although with limitations: either not
current, more Relevant content included, and comprehended. Details are current,
complete and Relevant content included, and fully comprehended. Details are
current, Relevant content included, and clearly comprehended. Details are
enagement with academic and other literature.
Fundamentally flawed interpretation of data /evidence.
Terminology and concepts not defined, or used appropriately. detail required or evidence/conten t either too broad or too detailed.
Satisfactory grasp of data/evidence.
Sources cited are relevant but are largely constrained to core texts in the unit materials.
Terminology and concepts defined and appropriately
Sources cited are relevant with adequate depth and breadth, and support the essay question.
Terminology and concepts defined and appropriately used. complete and appropriate.
Sources cited are: relevant with adequate depth and breadth; used effectively to develop a strong argument.
Terminology and concepts are engaged with conceptually and critically utilizing academic literature. complete and highly illustrative.
Excellent use of sources to demonstrate depth and breadth of research and to develop a powerful argument.
Terminology and concepts are engaged with conceptually and critically utilizing academic
Critical analysis No critical engagement with literature on the topic. Satisfactory attempt made to engage critically with the topic
Identification of differing positions in literature.
Over- dependence on non-academic texts for analysis at lower end of the scale. Consistent attempt to engage critically with the topic and the question.
Clear identification of differing positions in literature, used to substantiate an argument.
Minor limitations in the interpretation of the literature. Thorough, consistent and structured use of the literature to engage critically with the question and the topic.
Demonstrated ability to evaluate existing arguments and to develop an original argument. Exemplary use and critique of existing literature to engage critically with the question and the topic, producing a new and insightful argument.
Nuanced analysis of flaws, assumptions and strengths in existing approaches, and able to develop a novel or highly advanced original
Academi c Integrity and word length Penalties apply if: sources are frequently not acknowledged or APA 6th referencing not used or there is excessive use of quotations (more than 20 % of word count).
5000 words excluding references (or longer paper agreed with the Unit Coordinator).
More substantial issues of academic integrity will be dealt with in accordance with CDU’s Academic and Scientific Misconduct Policy and Students – Breach of Academic Integrity
1. Clarity of presentation (Maximum 10%)
2. Structure and argumentation (Maximum 30%)
3. Quality of content (Maximum 30%)
4. Critical analysis (Maximum 30%)
Academic Integrity– apply any penalties -
Total grade (Maximum 100%) for Assignment 4
Contribution to overall unit grade (Maximum 60%)
CDU Grading Schema (Grades awarded subject to Review Panel not included)
Did Not Submit
(DNS) Fail (F) Pass (P) Credit (C) Distinction (D) High Distinction
Did not complet e 50% or more of the assessm ent Fails to satisfy the requir ements of the unit. Satisfies all of the basic learning requirements of the unit, such as knowledge of fundamental concepts and performance of basic skills; demonstrates satisfactory, adequate, competent, or capable achievement. Demonstrates ability to use and apply fundamental concepts and skills of the unit going beyond mere replication of content knowledge or skill to show understandin g of key ideas, awareness of their relevance, some use of analytical skills, and some originality or insight. Demonstrates awareness and understandin g of deeper and less obvious aspects of the unit, such as ability to identify and debate critical issues or problems, ability to solve non-routine problems, ability to adapt and apply ideas to new situations, and ability to evaluate new
ideas. Demonstrates imagination, originality or flair, based on proficiency in all aspects of the unit; work is interesting or surprisingly exciting, challenging, well-read or scholarly.
Range (%) 0 50% 50 to 65% 65 to 75% 75 to 85% 85 to 100%
Preparation: Timely completion of study materials; research using library resources
Presentation: Academic Paper to be submitted in MS-Word format
Assessment Criteria: The paper will be assessed based on: the accuracy of information, appropriate use of information sources and interpretation of data, correct use of technical terms and methodology, clear structure and presentation, and reasonable and persuasive arguments.
All papers are suggested to use the CDU APA 6th bibliographic referencing style for their bibliography and in-text citations. Please refer to CDU guidelines for the correct bibliographic format. If you use different style of referencing, please be consistent throughout.
Paper Classification: The category, which most closely describes your paper, should be selected from the list below. Source: http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/products/journals/author_guidelines.htm?id=dpm
• Research paper. This category covers papers which report on any type of research undertaken by the student. The research may involve the construction or testing of a model or framework, action research, testing of data, market research or surveys, empirical, scientific or clinical research.
• Viewpoint. Any paper, where content is dependent on the student's opinion and interpretation, should be included in this category; this also includes journalistic pieces.
• Technical paper. Describes and evaluates technical products, processes or services.
• Conceptual paper. These papers will not be based on research but will develop hypotheses. The papers are likely to be discursive and will cover philosophical discussions and comparative studies of others' work and thinking.
• Case study. Case studies describe actual interventions or experiences within organizations. They may well be subjective and will not generally report on research. A description of a legal case or a hypothetical case study used as a teaching exercise would also fit into this category.
• Literature review. It is expected that all types of paper cite any relevant literature so this category should only be used if the main purpose of the paper is to annotate and/or critique the literature in a particular subject area. It may be a selective bibliography providing advice on information sources or it may be comprehensive in that the paper's aim is to cover the main contributors to the development of a topic and explore their different views. Guide to literature review is available here: http://libguides.cdu.edu.au/literaturereview
• General review. This category covers those papers which provide an overview or historical examination of some concept, technique or phenomenon. The papers are likely to be more descriptive or instructional (-how to- papers) than discursive.
(i) 30 tips for successful academic research and writing: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2012/11/28/lupton-30-tips-writing/
(ii) How to structure your article: http://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/authors/guides/write/structure.htm
(iii) How to write a literature review:
Referencing: Referencing is an important aspect of academic writing. CDU Library Referencing Guide is available here: http://libguides.cdu.edu.au/cdureferencing . Students should follow APA 6th Referencing Style (see Style Guide here: http://libguides.cdu.edu.au/cdureferencing/apa)