Assessments will be made having regard to the following criteria:
• Demonstration of the development of the body of knowledge in the field
• The application of theoretical concepts to the case
• Demonstration of Understanding regarding the topic construct
• Referencing
• Clarity of structure
• Evidence of reading and appropriately researching the topic (minimum of five (5) academic sources required)
Commentary will not normally be physically placed upon the submitted paper. An assessment report and a grade provided upon an A4 sheet will be provided.

The viva voce presentation will be assessed against the following criteria with the examiner awarding a mark against the selected criteria. For this item, as a general rule, a=(up to 15 marks); b=(up to 12 marks); c=(up to 10 marks); d=(up to) 7.5 marks

1. Preparation and Presentation – Method and Detail. This segment is worth 15 marks.
a. The Group has shown a high level of appropriate preparation and presentation.
b. The Group has demonstrated a reasonable level of appropriate preparation and presentation.
c. The Group’s preparation and presentation was adequate.
d. The Group has not prepared and presented adequately.

Submitted Papers will be assessed against the following criteria with the examiner awarding one of the selection items (a) through (d) to the paper in each criteria. For this item, as a general rule, a=(up to) 5 marks, b=(up to) 4 marks, c=(up to) 3 marks, d=(up to) 2.5 marks. The examiner’s final comment has a maximum weighting of (up to) 5 marks:

1. Hurdle requirement Pass/Not Pass: a. The item has been presented in the medium of written English. Sentences are structured and conform to academic writing guidelines. The paper has an identifiable structure including an introduction, a main body, and conclusion. The paper follows the Harvard Referencing Style. The examiner can proceed with further assessment. b. The item has not been presented in the medium of written English and the examiner cannot proceed with further assessment. Sentences are not structured and do not conform to academic writing guidelines. The paper does not have an identifiable structure including an introduction, a main body, and conclusion. The paper does not follow the Harvard Referencing Style.
2. Research – Method and Detail. This section has a total potential value of 5 marks. a. Comprehensive and detailed references to the literature. b. Detailed reference to relevant literature in the field. c. Adequate reference to relevant literature in the field. d. Insufficient reference to literature in the field.
3. Evidence of Analysis. This section has a total potential value of 5 marks. a. Comprehensive and detailed analysis of the question. b. Detailed analysis of the question. c. Adequate depth in analysis of the question. d. Insufficient depth in analysis of the question.
4. Communication of Understanding. This section has a total potential value of 5 marks. a. The response indicates an advanced level of understanding of the field. b. The response indicates a high level of understanding of the field. c. The response indicates a thematic understanding of the field. d. The response does not indicate an understanding of key issues of the field.
5. Assignment Structure. This section has a potential value of 5 marks.
a. The assignment shows thoughtful development and clarity of structure.
b. The assignment shows developed structure.
c. The assignment lacks clarity and development in structure.
d. The structure and message is impeded by written English expression
6. Final Comment. This section has a total potential value of (up to) 5 marks