Details of Task:
You will reflect on your lived experiences, values, personal beliefs and their connection to your growing professional identity as a social worker. The purpose is to develop a critical self-awareness through reflection. The other aim is to identify visible and invisible forms of oppression and privilege that shape our values and approaches to issues of racial and ethnic oppression, social and economic disadvantage, gender and disability.
Are you searching a professional writer who helps you in writing your Critical and Creative Thinking Assignment Answers at low cost, don’t worry Assignment Task available online 24*7 for supporting you and the experts provide Assignment Writing Services as according to your needs?
The concepts you can use to develop your essay are:
- Privilege
- Critical reflexive
- Critical Reflection
- Oppression
- Internationalist
I expect that you will use up to 10-15 peer-reviewed references.
Word limit: 2500 words (A variation of 10+/- %)
Value:45%
Rationale of the task: A research essay tests high order thinking, a capacity to examine, analyse, evaluate and develop a sophisticated argument that is well structured and well-argued and supported by literature. The skills you acquire are: capacity for high order thinking, ability to critically analyse complex social theories and constructions, develop research skills, deep understanding of critically reflective skills and the intersection of personal and professional values for improved cross-cultural social work practice.
Marking Criteria:
| High Distinction 80-100 | Distinction 70-79 | Credit 60-69 | Pass 50-59 | Non Pass 0-49
| |
| Analysis/argument (40%)
| Clearly identifies the issues and the embedded challenges. Identifies influence of context and questions assumptions. Integrates different disciplinary and epistemological ways of knowing. Uses wide ranging academic resources to develop arguments. Own position demonstrates sophisticated, integrative thought and is developed clearly throughout. | Clearly identifies the issues and the embedded challenges. Analyses the context and acknowledges the complexity but doesn’t engage in great depth. Fully integrates perspectives from variety of sources and anomalies are used effectively but gaps remain in terms of accuracy and nuance. Clearly presents and justifies own theoretical standpoint while qualifying contrary views. | Identifies and summarises the issue clearly, analyses the context by relying on established literature, engages tentatively in discussion of other positions and the theoretical standpoint is generally clear but gaps exist. | Summarises the issue though some aspects incorrect, presents the context in a limited way, descriptive in analysis and position is simplistic and the theoretical standpoint is simplistic or doesn’t consider other viewpoints. | Doesn’t identify, summarise the issue, consider the international, national context, critique existing literature and develop a clear theoretical standpoint. No evaluation or discussion. There is description or personal opinion only with no supporting logic or evidence; no integration of research |
| Structure and depth of research (20%) (e.g. flow, linking between sections, good paragraph structure) (20%) Depth of research (eg. Peer reviewed journals/books/chapters, critical and analytical works) | Demonstrates a very high level of para organisation, clear structure in the flow and transition between ideas. Demonstrated very high level research with mostly academic peer reviewed academic sources; evidence based on appropriate interpretation of reading | Demonstrates very sound logic, clear flow and linking between paras but few gaps remain in terms of consistency of ideas. Demonstrated very good research skills, using predominantly quality academic sources; juxtaposes alternative evidence | Organisation of ideas, linking of paras is at a reasonable level but is not consistent and some information needs more work. Evidence of some relevant academic reading, using reasonable academic sources; response incorporates research into response | Demonstrates basic level of structure and logic in the organisation of ideas with flow and para organisation either abrupt or not well developed. Low level research skills, relying on only few academic sources; | Doesn’t demonstrate clear and logical development of ideas/arguments. The research is of very poor quality. That is most of references are from Wikipedia or generic websites.
|
| Clarity of Expression (15%)
| Demonstrates highly advanced writing skills. The paper is very well structured, and edited carefully. The presentation of ideas is consistent throughout with no and/or very minor editing errors. | Demonstrates high level of writing skills and is able to express ideas well. The paper is well structured but lacks consistency throughout the paper. Minor editing errors remain. | Presents moderate level of writing skill. An obvious attempt at formal academic expression, but is has some editing errors and is not consistent throughout. | Writing, structure, syntax & presentation is inconsistent. There are many editing errors and the writing lacks consistency in many parts of the paper. | Writing &/or structure &/or presentation is/are poor. The paper is hard to read due to consistent syntax and/or language errors. |
| Referencing style (5 %) | Perfect adherence to all prescribed essay writing conventions | Near perfect adherence to all prescribed essay writing conventions | General adherence to essay writing conventions | Inaccuracy with prescribed format; pervasive citation and referencing errors | Non-adherence to prescribed style (ie. APA) |
Related Links-
Critical Reflection Essay Structure and Assignment Answers
Assessment 3 Instructions FAQs -Assignment Question and Answers
Glossary of Keywords Assessment 3-Assignment Question and Answers