1
2018 - PHCA9518 Assignment 3 – Major Essay – A Critical Review of Food Democracy in Practice
Marking Guide
Criterion Fail Pass Credit Distinction High distinction
A. GENERAL assessment criteria
(i) Provides a lucid introduction
and conclusion. Introduction
elates the paper to public health
issues generally
There is no introduction and/or no
conclusion. If there is a conclusion
is a vague and bears no
esemblance to the key arguments
outlined in the paper.
There is an introduction which
either introduces the topic or
alerts the reader to the intended
structure and outcomes and
makes an attempt to relate the
paper to public health issues
generally.
Conclusion is adequate but
vague with respect to the key
arguments in the paper
There is an introduction which
introduces the topic and alerts
the reader to the intended
structure and outcomes and
elates the paper to public
health issues generally.
Conclusion adequately
summarises the key arguments
in the paper.
The introduction, meeting
the credit criteria, is
succinctly written
Conclusion is a well-
crafted lucid synopsis of
the key arguments in the
paper
The introduction, meeting the credit
criteria, is succinctly written and it very
accurately reflects the actual structure
and outcomes of the paper.
Conclusion is a well-crafted lucid
synopsis of the key arguments in the
paper.
(ii) Shows a sophisticated
understanding of key issues &
ability to interpret relevant
information and literature in
elation to the topic
Demonstrates poor understanding
of key issues (food democracy and
its application, public health) OR
No/very limited use of relevant
information/literature to support
arguments.
Demonstrates basic
understanding of key issues AND
some use of relevant
information/literature to support
arguments.
Demonstrates good
understanding of key issues
AND some use of relevant
information/literature to support
arguments.
Demonstrates good
understanding of key
issues AND uses relevant
information/literature to
support arguments.
Demonstrates excellent understanding
of key issues AND uses relevant
information/literature to support
arguments.
(iii) Shows evidence of reading
eyond the core readings. These
should be high quality papers from
peer-reviewed journals. Students
should avoid citing webpages,
NGO’s, blogs or other non-
academic sources.
Essay should draw on and include
significant core topic readings
No evidence of
core topic readings or
quality papers beyond the core
eadings. Instead relies on poor
quality websites, blogs, etc.
Demonstrates inclusion of
adequate core topic readings as
part of assignment.
Limited evidence of reading
eyond the core readings (1-4
elevant papers).
Demonstrates inclusion and
good use of core topic readings
as part of the assignment
Limited evidence of reading
eyond the core readings (1-4
elevant papers).
Demonstrates good use of
core topic readings as part
of the assignment
Strong evidence of
eading beyond the core
eadings (5+ relevant
papers).
Demonstrates excellent use of core
topic readings as part of the
assignment.
Strong evidence of reading beyond the
core readings (5+ relevant papers).
(iv) Complies with normal
academic standards of
presentation , clearly written (clear
structure & relevant sub-headings)
, referencing and reference details
The paper does not have a clear
and logical structure. Referencing
and/or presentation generally do
not meet accepted academic
standards
Reader able to discern structure;
some but minimal use of
headings. Referencing and
presentation complies to an
accepted system but there may
e some minor e
ors
Over and above pass, either
the paper is consistently well
structured or the use of
headings clearly guides the
eader Referencing complies
consistently to an accepted
system and the paper is overall
well presented
The paper is both
consistently well
structured and a
consistent use of headings
to guide the reader
Referencing complies
consistently, with no
e
ors, to an accepted
system and the paper is
consistently well
presented
Distinction level exists and each
section of the paper is well linked to the
adjacent sections and clearly builds on
the overall thesis of the paper
Referencing complies consistently, with
no e
ors, to an accepted system and
the paper is consistently well presented
in every detail.
(v) Clearly written, with accurate
spelling, grammar, sentence, and
paragraph construction.
Written expression is such that it is
difficult to understand the writer’s
meaning. Syntax and grammatical
ules are not adhered to.
Written expression and syntax is
such that the reader can
understand the writer’s meaning
and intention.
Written expression and syntax
is such that the writer’s
meaning is unambiguous.
The paper has an overall
clarity in most of the areas
of expression, syntax,
grammar and sentence
The paper has a consistently high level
in terms of all of the areas of clear
expression, syntax, grammar and
sentence and paragraph construction
2
and paragraph
construction.
Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
B. Provides critical analyses of
food citizenship and civic
agriculture – in particular, as it
applies to the student’s chosen
example.
Inability to apply concepts of FC &
CA in a logical / sensible way to
their example
Inadequate / Non-sensical critical
analysis of food citizenship & civic
agriculture within the chosen
example
Paper lacks/ has no citation of
obvious core readings in this area
No evidence of use/ incorporation
of other relevant literature.
Rudimentary / adequate
application of concepts FC/CA in
a logical / sensible way in their
example.
Very basic / weak/ incomplete
critical analysis of food
citizenship & civic agriculture
within the chosen example.
Paper has limited use of obvious
core readings in
Minimal evidence of having
sourced / incorporated other
elevant literature.
Proficient / good application of
concepts FC/CA in a logical /
sensible way in their example.
Proficient / good/ critical
analysis of food citizenship &
civic agriculture within the
chosen example
Paper has good use of obvious
core readings Good evidence
of having sourced /
incorporated other relevant
literature.
Very good application of
concepts FC/CA in a
logical / sensible way in
their example.
Very good/ strong critical
analysis of food citizenship
& civic agriculture within
the chosen example.
Paper has very good /
strong use of obvious core
eadings
Strong evidence of having
sourced / incorporated
other readings.
Excellent, nuanced application of
concepts FC/CA in a logical / sensible
way in their example.
Excellent, nuanced critical analysis of
food citizenship & civic agriculture
within the chosen example
Paper has excellent and nuanced use
of obvious core readings
Excellent use of core and other
material.
C. Provides a clear understanding
of the practical challenges and
opportunities to build food
democracy (with respect to their
chosen example) and how this
example may impact on public
health
Inadequate attempt –
Section is hard to read /understand
makes no sense in the context of
the Topic. Lacks clearly articulated
discussion challenges &
opportunities.
No discussion of public health
impact. Refs missing or poor.
Some attempt -
Either inadequate detail or
unequal effort in addressing
challenges & opportunities.
Scant discussion of public health
impact / and or poorly referenced
Reasonable discussion –
Both challenges and
opportunities addressed, but
some inconsistences.
Reasonable argument on the
public health impact of food
system transformation, using
high quality academic
eferences
Very good discussion –
Both challenges and
opportunities addressed
equally and well executed.
Strong argument on the
public health impact of
food system
transformation, using high
quality academic
eferences.
Excellent –
Comprehensive, nuanced and equal
discussion on both challenges and
opportunities. Citation of key core
eadings. Sophisticated & nuanced
argument on the public health impact of
food system transformation, using high
quality academic references.
D. Critical Analysis
Using Stevenson et.al. Framework
OR Enderton Framework
Demonstrates critical
understanding and application of
their chosen framework to their
chosen example
AND
the politics of transforming the
food supply.
Poor understanding & analysis of :
(i) key concepts in the framework &
how it applies to their example
(ii) politics of transforming the food
supply.Section is hard to read
understand/makes no sense in the
context of the Topic. Limited or no
use of core readings with respect to
these key concepts. No mention of
additional literature as applicable.
Some understanding of:
(i) the key concepts in the
framework & how it applies to
their example
(ii) politics of transforming the
food supply
But considerable inconsistencies;
unclear , weak analysis, limited
detail or vague in some
instances.
Reasonable understanding &
analysis of:
(i) the key concepts in the
framework & how it applies to
their example
(ii) some attempt at the politics
of transforming the food supply
ut some inconsistencies eg
lacking detail/understanding
Strong understanding &
analysis of:
(i) the key concepts in the
framework & how it
applies to their chosen
example
(ii) politics of transforming
the food supply
Excellent, sophisticated nuanced
understanding & analysis of:
(i) the key concepts in the framework
and how it applies to their chosen
example
(ii) politics of transforming the food
supply
(iii) impact on public health