BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
1
ASSIGNMENT: Understanding Biology to
Facilitate Species Recovery
Details of Assessment Task – Written Assignment
This document provides an outline of the written assessment task, which is based on the hypothesis that we
need to understand the biology of a species to adequately conserve it.
This task aims to bring together your knowledge of the evolution of Australian wildlife, basic wildlife biology
and how these factors can influence conservation outcomes for a species. Using one of the species listed in
Table 3, you will then synthesise relevant aspects of the species biology and review conservation
management actions to discuss the importance of understanding the basic biology of a species when
designing conservation management actions.
This task is worth 25% of your final grade for this unit of study.
This assessment is marked as compulsory, meaning you must attempt it in order to pass the unit. Failure to
submit this assessment will result in an Absent Fail (AF) grade for this unit, irrespective of your performance
in other assessable tasks for this unit of study.
Key Learning Outcomes
After this assessment task, students should be able to:
1. Succinctly summarise information on the biology, conservation status and threats to a given species,
using appropriate sources of information
2. Determine key links between biological knowledge and its application for conservation management
actions (i.e. developing a Species Recovery Plan)
3. Critically evaluate:
a. The contents of species recovery plans, identifying how biology and threats have informed
the development of the plan’s objectives, and
b. The success of conservation programs and the relative importance of baseline scientific
knowledge, using evidence from appropriate sources
Background
Australia’s long history of geographic isolation appears to have made its fauna especially vulnerable to the
negative impacts of introduced species, be they predators, competitors or pathogens, especially when
combined with other threats (e.g. habitat loss and degradation). This has led to a poor record in species
conservation, with high rates of species extinction since European settlement in 1788. Species extinctions
have not been spread evenly across taxonomic groups, highlighting the fact that some groups are more at
risk of extinction because of their own intrinsic characteristics, the environments they occupy and/or their
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
2
evolution in isolation from current threatening processes. With many more species classified as threatened
(i.e. vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered) on the IUCN Red List (http://www.iucnredlist.org),
there is a need for conservation management and action for a large number of Australian species.
Conservation action is informed by Species Recovery Action Plans
(http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/threatened/recovery-plans) and these Recovery Action Plans
should ideally be based on a sound knowledge of the basic biology and ecology of threatened species to be
most effective.
Written Assignment Task
DUE DATE:
Monday 3rd November, 11:59pm. Submit online via Canvas. Submit as a word doc or pdf.
ASSIGNMENT TOPIC:
The broad topic for the assignment is:
How is the understanding of species biology instrumental in wildlife conservation programs?
Students should answer this question by selecting one species from those listed in Table 3 as a case study.
ASSIGNMENT STRUCTURE:
Students should include the following sections, headings, and Table in their assignment:
• SID (not your name)
• TITLE: Conservation of [insert Species name]
• Introduction: Briefly introduce the species, its biology, and the key threats whilst referring to Table
1 (below) which you will complete and include in your assignment.
Table 1. Summary of Conservation Status of and Threats to [insert species name]
Taxonomy
Order [insert Order]
Family [insert Family]
Species name [Genus species]
Conservation Status
Classification [Near threatened, Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered]
Note: A species may have different classifications, depending on the
source used. Ensure you cite the source of your chosen classification.
Key Threats
Threat 1 [briefly summarise the top threats to the species, based on your review
of the recovery plan – maximum of 2-3 sentences per threat]
Threat 2
Threat 3 Note: Include a maximum of three threats. In many cases there may be
more than three threats – choose those that you think are most
important.
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
3
– In your introduction you should briefly discuss the taxonomic significance of the species, e.g.
is it an endemic species? Is it the sole representative of its genus or family (i.e. is it part of a
paleoendemic genus or family)? Does this make it more or less important to conserve?
– Key threats to the species: Provide a brief summary of the key threats and then refer to Table
1, which will list what you think are the key threats to the species in more detail. For example:
“The key threats to the species include X, Y, and Z (Table 1)… [you could also briefly mention
any other threats that may be relevant to your discussion about the biology of the species,
but keep it succinct]
Note that words in your table do not count towards the total word count.
– Introduce details of how the threats are linked to their biology and/or evolution, referencing
peer-reviewed scientific literature wherever possible, or government reports if there is no
peer-reviewed literature. Part of your marks for this section will be based on your
interpretation of what the top threats are and their biological link.
Tip: There is no need to repeat information from your table in the body of the text – just a
brief linking sentence (see the example above) is enough to draw the reader’s attention to
the Table and its key points. Take advantage of this by referring to the table in-text to save
on words.
• Biological knowledge and conservation outcomes
Critical review of how well knowledge of the biology of the species has been incorporated into the
species recovery plan and conservation actions, AND how this has influenced conservation outcomes?
This section should comprise the bulk of your assignment (50%).
Tip: For the main body of text, use the bolded heading above, and then choose a layout (i.e.
subheadings, sections…) suited to your species to create a clear of logical flow of ideas to the
reader.
When deciding what information to include in this section, you should consider the following key
points. BUT you do not need to answer all these questions - they are designed to stimulate your
thinking and point you in the right direction in terms of where you should be looking for information:
- Is the basic biology of the species well-known, or is the biology of a closely related species well
known, and how does this baseline knowledge inform conservation management actions? To
gauge this, you should look at the primary scientific literature to see what is known about the
species (or even closely related species with justification).
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
4
Tip: “Biological knowledge” could include things like: knowledge of reproductive biology or
genetics for captive breeding programs or intensive reintroductions, knowledge of the ecology,
habitat requirements, and/or behaviour for reintroductions, knowledge of diet, migration
patterns, interactions with other species, nesting… etc. (note that this list is not exhaustive). The
specific biological aspects you focus on will depend on your chosen species, their biology, and
the Recovery Actions.
- If the basic biology is not well understood, does the recovery plan include actions to address
knowledge gaps? Are these actions appropriate and relevant to the proposed conservation
activities and threats and how could this new knowledge help inform conservation actions? If
there are no specific plans to address this, what types of data do you think should be collected,
providing evidence from other successful conservation case-studies and scientific literature,
linking all this to the species biology.
- Are current or historic management actions based on an appropriate knowledge base? Were
these actions successful or not? Was success or failure related to a lack of basic knowledge? (i.e.
has a lack of basic knowledge of the biology of a species impeded conservation? Or, conversely,
has a conservation program been successful because it was based on a solid foundation of
knowledge for the species? Or, was there no relationship, and if so do you think this is likely to
be the same for other species?)
In this section ensure to also provide supporting metrics of the success, or otherwise, of
conservation actions (including reference to the source of this information). These can be found
through government reports and scientific literature.
- If you are struggling to find any quantitative update on the species since the recovery plan, you
could do one of two things:
a) If there is a previous recovery plan, you can refer to previous management plans or actions,
and discuss (with supporting metrics) whether success or failure was the result of lack of
biological knowledge and whether this has been addressed in the new plan
b) If there is no prior recovery plan (which may be the case for newly designated species/sub
species or under-investigated species), you should critically review whether you think the
proposed actions in the recovery plan are based on an appropriate knowledge base, and
whether you think they are likely to be successful, drawing on other examples from the
literature, which may include other species that have similar life history strategies or are
closely related.
In addressing these components of the assignment, you should provide clear evidence and examples
from the recovery plan and primary scientific literature, drawing clear links between the two. In cases
where knowledge has been lacking or has not been incorporated, provide a description of what
knowledge should have been included, perhaps drawing on examples from other species that were
well-managed with successful conservation outcomes.
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
5
Tip: If your species has a number of different management options that could potentially be
discussed in this way, you can choose a subset of these to discuss in more detail (you do not need
to discuss all of them).
NOTE: Your assignment should not just be a summary of the recovery action plan. You are required
to critically analyse and incorporate key components using your understanding of species biology and
scientific peer-reviewed literature.
Remember that the key components for this section are for you to demonstrate:
– your understanding of the importance of biological knowledge in developing recovery plans
– your capacity to critically review recovery plans, using appropriate evidence from the
scientific literature (and some government reports if and when required)
• Conclusion: a concise summary of main take home points from your report – i.e. think back to the
original question we wanted you to address: “How is the understanding of species biology
instrumental in wildlife conservation programs?” and set out to answer this (briefly) for your species
in the conclusion.
• Word Count: State word count (The word count excludes reference list, tables and figures and their
captions, but in text citations and sub-headings are included)
• References: Use APA reference style. An example for referencing journal articles can be seen below.
An example of it’s in-text referencing can be seen further below in the example excerpt of scientific
writing:
For more information on referencing bodies of work other than journal articles see
https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/references/examples
WORD COUNT:
Maximum of 1000 words (with a 5% buffer). A smaller word count is acceptable, though we expect you to
use most of the available word count.
In-text citations, headings, and subheadings are included in the word count. The reference list, Table 1, and
any other additional figures or tables (including their content and captions) are not included in the word
limit.
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
6
Your word count must be clearly stated within your document. Staying within the word limit and displaying
the word count on your document will account for 5% of your mark (see rubric).
If you exceed the word limit, you will lose 5% of your marks (as mentioned above), and the examiner will
stop reading once they reach 1050 words (i.e. any content beyond 1050 words will not be marked).
Adhering to a maximum word limit is a challenging yet crucial skill. In any career, clear and concise
communication is essential.
SCIENTIFIC WRITING: IMPORTANT TIPS
This assessment is directed towards a scientific audience which you can assume a basic biological
understanding. Species- specific terms may need to be expanded in further detail.
Your style of writing and referencing should also suit a scientific format. For those who are new to the format
of scientific writing we strongly encourage you to look at examples (i.e. peer-reviewed journal articles) in
addition to extra resources provided by the university. Please note this assessment’s required style of
referencing (below).
The following is a general example of the format of scientific writing, where ideas from multiple sources are
synthesized into a central concept and cited where used. This paragraph also demonstrates logical flow.
“Understanding the distribution of koalas (Phascolarctos cinereus) is essential for implementing
effective conservation strategies as it provides critical insights into habitat requirements,
population trends, and areas of vulnerability. Accurate distribution data enables the
identification of priority regions for habitat protection and restoration, particularly as
urbanisation and land clearing continue to fragment their habitats (Rhodes et al., 2006).
Furthermore, spatial data help predict how environmental factors, such as climate change, will
alter koala ranges, allowing for proactive management interventions (Adams-Hosking et al.,
2012). For instance, models predicting range shifts under various climate scenarios can inform
the establishment of wildlife corridors to facilitate movement between suitable habitats (Santika
et al., 2015). By integrating distribution data into conservation planning, stakeholders can ensure
targeted and adaptive actions that address the specific needs of koala populations across their
range.”
In the above example, you will see the following structure:
- Sentence 1: succinctly introduces the topic that is the focus of the paragraph
- Sentence 2: introduces more specific information, supported by evidence, which is then referenced
by an in-text citation.
- Sentence 3: dives into the topic in a little more depth (with evidence in the form of another in-text
citation of a relevant reference)
- Sentence 4: provides a more specific example, to help flesh out the broad idea (again, with an in-text
citation of a relevant reference)
- Sentence 5: rounds off the paragraph, linking the description in the paragraph to the big picture (or
possibly the topic of the next paragraph, or a later paragraph)
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
7
Not all paragraphs will have this exact structure – some may be shorter, but the broad pattern is:
(1) Open with a statement that makes it clear where the paragraph is going. This may include an in-text
citation (which would be necessary if you are referring to someone else’s work), or it might be a more general
introductory sentence as given in the example above. (2) Build on the topic, providing more detail with
evidence - this may be done over several sentences, depending on the complexity of the topic/idea. (3) Last
sentence - sum up the paragraph and/or provide some sort of segue to the next paragraph (with or without
citations, depending on whether you are referring to someone else’s work).
All in-text citations would appear in full at the end of the document in an alphabetically organised reference
list
REFERENCES:
One of the aims of this activity is to encourage students to focus on primary scientific literature (i.e. scholarly
sources) wherever possible, along with appropriate government reports. Avoid using references to other
random websites unless there is justification. Part of your training as a scientist, or someone interested in
science and science communication, is to be able to evaluate the credibility of the work you are referring to
and to only refer to appropriate sources.
Primary scientific literature includes scholarly journals (which are peer reviewed) and books (e.g. books that
have an editor and a series of chapters authored by different people are usually peer reviewed). Other
material that has been rigorously reviewed may include joint reports by panels of experts in the field, such
as some Government sponsored reports.
How do I determine if a source is scholarly?
Generally speaking, scholarly sources:
- Have an abstract before the main text of the article
- Are written by professionals in their field and the authors, and their affiliations, are listed in the
source (usually on the first page, but sometimes the last page)
- Always cite their sources and have extensive reference lists
- Usually publish first-hand research results in a strict format (i.e. Introduction, Methods, Results,
Discussion), but may also be review papers (which usually have very extensive reference lists)
- Are written using discipline-specific language
- Have a date of publication
- Cover a topic objectively and use evidence to support their assertions
- Do not use sensational language
[Modified from: https://www.library.illinois.edu/ugl/howdoi/scholarly/, accessed 13.10.18]
For those new to the field of scientific literature searching the university library website has useful resources
which may assist you in developing these skills: Searching (sydney.edu.au)
Scholarly sources should be used wherever possible in this assignment. If there is no primary scientific
literature you may have to use other sources, but for the purposes of this exercise these should only include
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
8
sources such as Government reports or websites, or other sources provided by active conservation
organisations which comply with most of the above criteria. As the different state and federal government
agencies are often responsible for approving conservation programs these are legitimate sources of
information about conservation programs. The use of appropriate references will be assessed in this task
(see marking criteria and associated rubric). In the rubric, you will notice that failure to reference properly
will mean that the maximum mark you can get for most sections of the assignment is a credit grade. This is
designed to highlight the importance of appropriately citing other people’s work AND to highlight the need
to use credible sources of evidence to support scientific arguments.
In scientific writing we generally do not insert quotes from external sources. Instead, we synthesise ideas
(ideally from multiple peer-reviewed sources) and report them in our own words, citing where that
information was sourced from.
Note your final reference list is not a bibliography. A reference list has all its listed references used in-text
MARKING CRITERIA
This assignment is worth 25% of your final mark for this unit of study.
Marks will be awarded based on the criteria outlined in Table 2, with a more detailed marking rubric
provided at the end of these notes.
Table 2. Summarised marking criteria for the assessment
Criteria %
Taxonomic status clearly and correctly defined and appropriately discussed with respect to
conservation significance
5%
Key threats to the species are correctly identified and clearly and succinctly articulated using
appropriate references and appropriately link to the species biology
15%
Incorporation of Biological Knowledge: How well has knowledge of the biology of the species been
incorporated into the species recovery plan and conservation actions?
30%
Biological Knowledge and Conservation Outcomes: How has the extent of incorporation of biological
knowledge into the plan influenced the conservation outcomes, or, how likely is the conservation plan
to be successful based on the degree of biological knowledge incorporated?
20%
Word Count stated and within the stipulated limit (a mark of 5 or 0 will be given here, nothing in
between)
5%
Use of appropriate references (scientific literature or relevant Government or Conservation
organisation documents, unless justification for other sources provided)
15%
Structure, clarity and presentation of the assignment, including spelling, grammar and overall
document structure (including appropriate referencing of figures and tables in text)
10%
SPECIES
Each student should choose a species from the list provided in Table 3. If you click on the scientific name, it
will take you to the webpage containing the latest Recovery Plan for the species, if not, you can search using
the link underneath the table. While these federal plans will have large amounts of information,
states/territories will have further information and programs for threatened species, which often provide
updates. Links to these can be found in Table 4.
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
9
Table 3.
List of species options for the assessment. Students must focus their assignment on one of the
species listed below. Clicking on the scientific name should take you to the Recovery Plan.
Species Common Name Species Scientific name (with link to Recovery Plan)
Stuttering frog
Mixophyes balbus
Northern bettong
Bettongia tropica
Red goshawk
Erythrotriorchis radiatus
Regent parrot
Polytelis anthopeplus monarchoides
Spectacled flying fox
Pteropus conspicillatus
Pygmy Blue-tongue Lizard
Tiliqua adelaidensis
Western swamp tortoise
Pseudemydura umbrina
Smoky mouse
Pseudomys fumeus
Links to Recovery Plans and other species information can be found at Species Profile and Threats Database:
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/publicshowallrps.pl
Table 4.
Links to State Government Threatened Species Information
ACT
https://www.act.gov.au/environment/animals-and-plants/act-threatened-species#Related-links- and-downloads
NSW
https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and-plants/threatened-species/saving- our-species-program
NT https://nt.gov.au/environment/animals/threatened-animals
SA
https://www.environment.sa.gov.au/topics/biodiversity/threatened-species-and-ecological- communities/threatened-species/threatened-species-in-sa
QLD
https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/plants-animals/conservation/threatened-species/our- work-and-partners/program
TAS
https://nre.tas.gov.au/conservation/threatened-species-and-communities/recovery- plans#FaunaRecoveryPlans
VIC
https://www.environment.vic.gov.au/conserving-threatened-species/threatened-species- overview
WA
https://www.wa.gov.au/service/environment/conservation/threatened-species-and- communities
The detailed marking rubric is provided on the following two pages, highlighting how grades will be
awarded for each marking criteria.
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
10
MARKING RUBRIC
Criteria Description
%
Outstanding
High Distinction
Distinction
Credit
Pass
Fail
Not completed
Taxonomic status
5%
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
< 2.5
0
Taxonomic status clearly and
correctly defined and
appropriately discussed (in text,
and in Table 1) with respect to
conservation significance
Taxonomic status correctly
described with respect to
Family, Genus and species
level; and extent of
endemism correctly
identified, with
appropriate references,
and linked to conservation
importance
AS for outstanding, but
with very minor editorial
(e.g. minor typographical
errors) or other very minor
issues with clarity or
linkage
AS for outstanding, BUT
with editorial or other
minor issues with clarity
(e.g. confusing sentence
structure) or linkage; OR
minor omission(s) with
evidence/references (i.e.
some referencing
present but should be
more
detailed/appropriate)
An error with one element of
the description (e.g. error with
taxonomic status, OR extent of
endemism not correctly
identified), OR more significant
issues with clarity, linkage, or
referencing (including linking the
table in text)
Minor errors with multiple
elements of the taxonomic
status, OR no clear evidence
of understanding of the
significance of the taxonomic
status, OR absent
referencing
Taxonomic status
mentioned but with
significant errors with
respect to taxonomic
classification
Section not
included
Key threats
15%
15
14
12
10.5
8.5
< 7.5
0
Key threats to the species are
clearly and succinctly articulated
(in text, and in Table 1) using
appropriate references and
appropriately linked to the
species biology
Key threats are correctly
identified, succinctly and
clearly described in the
Table and in text, and are
appropriately linked to
species biology whilst
providing appropriate
evidence.
AS for outstanding, but
with very minor editorial
(e.g. minor typographical
errors) or other very minor
issues with clarity.
AS for outstanding, BUT
with minor editorial or
other minor issues with
clarity (e.g. confusing
sentence structure, but
the meaning can be
interpreted) OR minor
omission(s) with respect
to: evidence/references
or links to species biology
Key threats are correctly
identified and described BUT
with two or more of the
following: threats lacking some
relevant detail; limited
links to
species biology;
minor issues
with clarity; minor omission(s)
with respect to:
evidence/references; OR text
not linked to threats in the
table.
Threats described, BUT
EITHER the most important
threat(s) not identified OR
description lacking clarity and
omitting appropriate several
references in places; OR links
to species biology very
limited or incorrect.
Threats minimally
described, AND/OR the
most important threat(s)
not identified AND/OR
omitting references
AND/OR no links to species
biology
Section not
included
Incorporation of Biological
Knowledge
30%
30
28.5
24
21
16.5
< 15
0
Critical review of how well the
knowledge of the biology of the
species been incorporated into
the species recovery plan and
conservation actions
Very clear links between
specific aspects of species
biology and specific
conservation actions, using
explicit evidence from the
appropriate literature AND
well written/ structured.
AS for outstanding, but
with very minor editorial
(e.g. minor typographical
errors) or other very minor
issues with clarity.
As for outstanding, BUT
lacking clear and
explicitly stated links
between biology and
conservation actions for
up to one example OR
minor omission(s) with
respect to:
evidence/references, OR
minor omissions in the
logic/argument
development.
Links between biology and
conservation management are
generally appropriate BUT with
two or more of the following:
discussion of the linkage(s) is not
logically framed; minor
ambiguity in the links between
biology and management; minor
issues with clarity; minor
omission(s) with respect to
evidence/ references.
Links between biology and
conservation management
are discussed BUT there is a
mismatch in the link between
biology and management, OR
description lacking clarity
AND more significant
omissions of appropriate
evidence/ references
No evidence of a good
understanding of the link
between biology and
conservation actions; OR
many sections
unsupported by evidence
/referencing AND/OR lack
of clarity of the section so
that it is difficult to
interpret.
Section not
included
Please turn over for continuation of Table
BIOL2032/WILD2002 Australian Wildlife Biology
Individual Written Assignment 2
11
Criteria Description
%
Outstanding
High Distinction
Distinction
Credit
Pass
Fail
Not completed
Biological Knowledge and
Conservation Outcomes
20%
20
19
16
14
11
< 10
0
Critical review of the extent to
which incorporation of biological
knowledge into the plan
influenced the conservation
outcomes.
Clear, succinct AND well
evidenced critique of the
role of fundamental
biological knowledge in
promoting successful
conservation outcomes,
which flows logically from
earlier evidence, including
the use of supporting
metrics when available.
AS for outstanding, but
with very minor editorial
(e.g. minor typographical
errors) or other very minor
issues with clarity, including
the use of supporting
metrics when available.
As for outstanding, BUT
minor omissions in the
logic/argument
development OR lacking
appropriate outcome
metrics (when available)
OR minor editorial or
other minor issues with
clarity (e.g. confusing
sentence structure, but
the meaning can be
interpreted)
Links between biological
understanding and outcomes
are appropriate BUT critical
appraisal of the links between
biology and outcomes has some
issues with logical development
of arguments OR two or more of
the following:
lacking
appropriate outcome metrics
(when available); minor
omission(s) with respect to in- text citations; minor issues with
clarity (e.g. confusing sentence
structure, but the meaning can
be interpreted)
Links between biology and
conservation outcomes are
discussed BUT the evidence
presented does not support
the appraisal in a number of
places OR insufficient
supporting references/
evidence / outcome metrics
(but the overall narrative is
valid), OR overall narrative
lacks clarity making it difficult
to interpret (but can be
interpreted or inferred with
effort on the behalf of the
reader).
No evidence of a good
understanding of the
potential role of
fundamental biological
knowledge and
conservation outcomes; OR
significant lack of
evidence/ references and
lack of clarity of the section
so that it is difficult to
interpret.
Section not
included
Word count
5%
5
0
Word count stated and
within the specified limit
(< or = 1000 words)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Word count not
stated OR >1000
words
References
15%
15
14
12
10.5
8.5
< 7.5
0
Referencing provides an
appropriate evidence base for
statements and arguments
formulated throughout the text
and reference list is complete.
Faultless referencing - In
text citations and
reference list complete
and without errors,
consistent formatting and
no use of inappropriate
references (i.e. use of
scientific literature
wherever possible and no
use of unscholarly sources
unless appropriately
justified).
As for Outstanding, but
with a small number of
minor formatting errors
(e.g. font, minor typos).
As for Outstanding, BUT
with inconsistencies in
reference style which do
not affect the capacity to
identify reference
sources.
Reference list is
complete, and all
references cited in text.
Generally, well referenced, BUT
some cited references missing
from reference list (or vice
versa), OR some references are
not clearly presented causing
difficulty in locating the sources
OR too much reliance on non- scholarly references.
Additional referencing
required and/or
inappropriate referencing in
a number of instances (e.g.
lacking necessary references
or using third party websites
when other peer reviewed or
official (e.g. governmental)
sources could have been
used.) OR more significant
omissions from reference list
(or of in text citations)
Reliance on inappropriate
references (i.e. non- academic or relevant
government/organisational
sources) throughout;
and/or significant errors in
the reference list; and/or a
large number of
unsupported statements
throughout.
Limited referencing
throughout the
document OR no
reference list at the
end.
Structure, clarity and
presentation
10%
10
9.5
8
7
5.5
< 5
0
Structure, clarity and
presentation of the assignment,
including spelling, grammar and
overall document structure
Well-structured and
coherent document
throughout, logical flow
throughout, excellent
linkage between sections,
and virtually no spelling or
grammatical errors.
Well-structured and
coherent document
throughout, with very
minor spelling and
grammatical errors, or
minor impact to clarity or
flow of the document.
Generally well- structured, with minor
spelling or grammatical
errors, but these
generally do not detract
from the overall
document, but may make
some sentences or
sections difficult to
follow.
Some poor paragraph
structuring and spelling or
grammatical errors making parts
difficult to understand, but the
overall document is relatively
clear OR more significant issues
with linkage between sections.
Some elements of the
document were disjointed
from the whole, with spelling
and/or grammatical errors,
which detract from the
overall clarity of the
document.
Document lacked
consistency in either
structure or the logical flow
of ideas, such that it did
not read as a coherent
document.
Document was not
coherent and could
not be understood.
51作业君版权所有
