APG5082 Assessment 1: Creative Positioning Statement (Marking Rubric)
Marking
Criteria
HD D C P N
Articulation of
creative
practice and
values (25%)
• Compelling and
nuanced articulation of
creative practice,
themes, and driving
values.
• Demonstrates
sophisticated self- awareness, evident
throughout.
• Demonstrates clear
awareness of what
differentiates their
approach (cultural
background, networks,
skills, philosophical
commitments).
• Clear articulation of
creative practice,
themes, and values.
• Identifies
distinctive
perspective with
clarity and self- awareness.
• Explains what
differentiates them
from peers.
• Adequate
description of
creative practice and
values.
• Demonstrates
reasonable self- awareness.
• Identifies some
differentiating
factors. Positioning is
present but could be
more developed or
specific.
• Basic articulation
of creative practice,
though may be
somewhat general.
• Some elements of
values and drivers
identified with
limited depth of
reflection.
• Limited
explanation of what
makes their
approach particular.
Positioning is
somewhat unclear.
• Unclear or generic
articulation of creative
practice.
• Values and drivers
insufficiently
developed, lacks
authentic engagement
with own work.
• Fails to articulate
distinctive perspective
or claims only generic
distinctiveness.
Engagement
with field and
community
(25%)
• Sophisticated
understanding of
positioning within
creative sector/cultural
community.
• Identifies peers,
collaborators,
influences, and
conversations with
specificity.
• Articulates how they
want to contribute with
clarity and nuance.
• Good
understanding of
field and community
context.
• Identifies relevant
peers and
conversations.
• Explains their
positioning within
the field reasonably
well.
• Demonstrates basic
awareness of creative
field or community.
• Identifies some
relevant context.
• Engagement is
somewhat general or
could be more
developed.
• Limited
engagement with
field or community
context.
• May identify peers
or conversations but
without depth.
• Positioning within
field is unclear.
• Shows little
understanding of
creative field or
community.
• Fails to articulate
positioning within
context.
Vision and
future direction
(25%)
• Articulates clear,
thoughtful vision
grounded in stated
values and practice.
• Vision encompasses
strategic thinking
(commercial,
community,
experimental, or
hybrid approaches).
• Demonstrates
realistic and developed
sense of creative
trajectory.
• Articulates
reasonably clear
vision for creative
future.
• Vision connects to
practice and values.
• Some strategic
thinking evident.
• Articulates a vision
for creative future.
• Connection to
broader positioning
may be somewhat
general.
• Vision is present but
could be more
developed.
• Basic articulation
of future direction.
• Vision may be
somewhat generic or
lack clear
connection to
practice.
• Vision is unclear,
generic, or
disconnected from
stated creative practice
and values.
Marking
Criteria
HD D C P N
Written
expression,
presentation
and referencing
(25%)
• Integrates minimum
three high-quality,
relevant sources.
• Strong synthesis of
sources with student's
own thinking.
• Written expression
skilfully
communicates
meaning with clarity
and fluency.
• Accurate citing and
referencing
throughout.
• Submission adheres
to presentation
requirements and word
limit.
• Integrates three
relevant sources.
• Generally strong
integration with
adequate critical
engagement.
• Written expression
generally conveys
meaning clearly.
• Citing and
referencing generally
appropriate and
accurate.
• Submission adheres
to presentation
requirements and
word limit.
• Includes three
sources that are
broadly relevant.
• Sources present but
critical engagement
could be deeper.
• Written expression
generally conveys
meaning, although
may contain some
errors.
• Some errors in
citing and referencing
may persist.
• Submission
generally adheres to
presentation
requirements and/or
is slightly over or
under word limit.
• Includes three
sources but
relevance or quality
may be limited.
• Integration is
attempted but may
be unclear or
disconnected from
main argument.
• Written expression
is inconsistent and
inaccurate in parts,
somewhat impeding
meaning.
• Citing and
referencing
attempted but may
be faulty.
• Submission
sometimes adheres
to presentation
requirements and/or
is over or under
word limit.
• Fewer than three
sources OR sources are
poorly selected,
irrelevant, or
minimally engaged
with.
• Numerous errors and
inaccuracies in written
expression.
• Referencing
consistently inaccurate
or not attempted.
• Submission does not
adhere to presentation
requirements and/or is
substantially over or
under word limit.
Total: /100
Comments:
51作业君版权所有
