|
Assignment Sections
|
A+/A (70-100%)
|
B+/B (60-69%)
|
C+/C (50-59%)
|
D/D+ (40-49%)
|
Fail (0-39%)
|
|
Social justice in the context of safeguarding
15/100
|
Social justice is clearly defined and linked to the context of safeguarding
|
Social justice is defined and linked to the context of safeguarding
|
Social justice is clearly defined and there is some links to the context of safeguarding
.
|
Social justice is briefly defined and there are limited links to the context of safeguarding
|
Social justice is not defined and does not demonstrate knowledge of the context of safeguarding
|
|
15/100
Psychosocial, economic and physical environments
|
Psychosocial, economic, and physical environments are detailed accurately with clear connection to theory
|
Psychosocial, economic, and physical environments have been detailed with connection to theory
|
Psychosocial, economic, and physical environments have been detailed with some accuracy and connection to theory.
|
Psychosocial, economic, and physical environments have been briefly detailed but this could be more in depth and relate more to theory,
|
The work does not demonstrate understanding of Psychosocial, economic, and physical environments, and does not relate to theory.
|
|
15/100
Role of social worker to promote social justice
|
The outline of the role of the social worker to promote social justice is entirely relevant to the case study and thoroughly explored. Demonstrates exceptional appreciation of the relevance of social justice theory
|
There is a well-developed outline of the role of the social worker to promote social justice. Demonstrates a very good appreciation of the relevance of social justice theory
|
There is a good outline of the role of the social worker to promote social justice. Demonstrates a good appreciation of the limits and/or appropriate use of social justice theory
|
There is a brief outline of the role of the social worker to promote social justice. Demonstrates a good appreciation of the limits and/or appropriate use of social justice theory
|
The role of the social worker to promote social justice is not clearly stated. There is no appreciation of the limits and/or appropriate use of social justice theory
|
|
Use of information to analyse and evaluate
15/100
|
There is an exceptional fluent writing style and organisation and coherence that clearly enhances the argument. All claims are supported with high-quality sources. The relevance of the information is clearly analysed and evaluations are made. References are correctly formatted using the OBU Harvard style as per the guidance.
|
There is a fluent writing style and strong logical organisation that enhances the argument. Claims are supported with high-quality sources although there may be one or two errors or omissions. The relevance of the information is analysed and evaluations are made. The reference list uses a different referencing style or has a small number of errors. But all references should be included.
|
In some parts, there is a fluent writing style and some logic to the organisation. There are references to support claims, but these may be lower-quality or there may be some omissions. There is some analysis of the relevance of the information and limited evaluations are made. The reference list may have multiple errors, but it will be complete, and it should be possible to identify the sources used.
|
Writing has limited fluency and organisation to support arguments. There are minimal references to support claims and they are of a low-quality with omissions. There is limited analysis of the relevance of the information and minimal/no evaluations are made. The reference list may be incomplete or have errors which misses information needed to find sources.
|
Writing is incoherent and disorganised. Referencing may be missing or may not match sources used. There is no analysis of the relevance of the information and no evaluations are made. The errors are found in nearly all references.
|
|
Presentation 40/100
|
The speaking communicates the information in an engaging manner. It demonstrates excellent knowledge of a care plan with clear and concise reference to the service user’s needs. There is an exceptional evaluation of how a care plan reduces a service users’ vulnerability
|
The speaking communicates the information in an engaging manner but with some hesitation or confusion. It demonstrates very good knowledge of a care plan with reference to the service users needs. There is a very good evaluation of how a care plan reduces a service users’ vulnerability
|
The speaker is clear but not always confident and engaging. It demonstrates good knowledge of a care plan with some reference to the service users’ needs. There is a good evaluation of how a care plan reduces a service users’ vulnerability
|
The speaker is communicating with limited confidence and engagement. It demonstrates minimal knowledge of a care plan, with errors or omissions in the reference to the service users needs. There is a brief evaluation of how a care plan reduces a service users’ vulnerability
|
The speaker is presenting content which does not match the assignment brief. It demonstrates unsatisfactory knowledge of a care plan with an incoherent outline of the service users’ needs. The evaluation of how a care plan reduces a services users’ vulnerability is unclear.
|
