Policy Brief Project S2 2019
Policy Brief Project S2 2019
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart A
Presentation of Indicator 1
2.0 to >1.5 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Clear labelling of the axis, scale, the time period and an indicator. Graph is visually appealing and neatly presented.
1.5 to >1.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Graph presented with clear labelling of the axis, scale, the time period and an indicator but lacks visual clarity or not neatly presented.
1.0 to >0.5 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
Table/graph presented, but a lack of critical information (such as labels, axis, scale etc)
0.5 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Table/figure not presented
2.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart A
Observations of Indicator 1
4.0 to >3.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at an excellent level; na
ative presented is strongly linked to the data.
3.0 to >2.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at a satisfactory level; na
ative presented is moderately linked to the data; lacks detailed discussion.
2.0 to >1.0 Pts
Partial Marks - unsatisfactory
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at an undesirable level; na
ative presented is only weakly linked to the data
1.0 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Observations and comments are absent.
4.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart A
Presentation of Indicator 2
2.0 to >1.5 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Clear labelling of the axis, scale, the time period and an indicator. Graph is visually appealing and neatly presented.
1.5 to >1.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Graph presented with clear labelling of the axis, scale, the time period and an indicator but lacks visual clarity or not neatly done.
1.0 to >0.5 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
Table/graph presented, but a lack of critical information (such as labels, axis, scale etc)
0.5 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Table/figure not shown
2.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart A
Observations of Indicator 2
4.0 to >3.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at an excellent level; na
ative presented is strongly linked to the data.
3.0 to >2.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at a satisfactory level; na
ative presented is moderately linked to the data; lacks detailed discussion.
2.0 to >1.0 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at an undesirable level; na
ative presented is only weakly linked to the data
1.0 to >0.0 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
Problem identified and communicated through advanced use of knowledge accumulated in the course at an undesirable level; na
ative presented is only weakly linked to the data
0.0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Observations and comments are absent.
4.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Subject Line
1.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
The subject is
ief and appropriately descriptive
0.5 Pts
Partial marks - satisfactory
The subject is overlong and/or insufficiently descriptive
0.0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
The subject line is absent.
1.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Executive Summary
3.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
The core message succinctly and accurately summarises the
ief as required by the template. The language used in the summary is appropriate and the recommendations are clearly explained.
2.0 Pts
Satisfactory
The core message partially summarises the
ief. There may be a lack of clarity, omissions and/or inaccuracies
1.0 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
The core message does not effectively summarise the
ief and/or the message is overlong.
0.0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Executive summary is absent.
3.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Recommendations
3.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Recommendation(s) are clearly and concisely stated with no extraneous information.
2.0 Pts
Satisfactory
The recommendation(s) substantially address the problem identified. Recommendation(s) may be lacking in clarity, and/or contain some extraneous information.
1.0 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
The recommendation(s) are insufficient to address the problems identified and/or substantially deviate from the requirements of the task.
0.0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
The recommendation(s) are absent.
3.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Economic Rationale
15.0 to >10.0 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Begins by providing the context for the
ief. Effective use of subheadings to organise the explanations for the recommendation(s). The key information and justifications are presented clearly and concisely.
10.0 to >6.0 Pts
Satisfactory
The key information provides the context for the
ief. The rationale for the recommendation(s) is present and supported by logical argument, but lacking in clarity. The key information may lack clarity, includes extraneous elements.
6.0 to >1.0 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Economic rationale fails to support recommendation(s). The arguments presented are weak in relation to problems raised in section A. Contains significant assertions unsupported by key observations. Significant logical flaws present and/or substantially mispresents the economic rationale behind the recommendation(s).
1.0 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Economic rationale section is absent.
15.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Structure and Organisation of Overall Brief
2.0 to >1.5 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Structure and sequence are used effectively to help integrate ideas or support logical argument. Soundly structured throughout.
1.5 to >1.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Ideas are sequenced in a logically satisfying way; connections between different themes or sections are well made.
1.0 to >0.5 Pts
Partial marks - unsatisfactory
Sequence and structure are illogical and difficult to follow. Introductory and concluding sections used ineffectively.
0.5 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Not structured to make sense; could be better organised and more tightly focused upon the topic. Instances of i
elevance or confusion.
2.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePart B
Language use of Overall Brief
2.0 to >1.5 Pts
Full marks - Excellent
Powerful, confident and precise use of language; mastery of style and tone.
1.5 to >1.0 Pts
Satisfactory
Language use demonstrates precision and expressiveness as well as clarity.
1.0 to >0.5 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Language is generally unsound and unclear throughout.
0.5 to >0 Pts
Zero marks - not present
Not clear enough to be understood; largely confused or unclear expression. Spelling, punctuation & grammar generally unsatisfactory.
2.0 pts
Total points: 38.0
Page 1 of 8
ECON1010, 2019S2, Policy Brief Instructions
Page 1 of 8
ECON 1010 – Macroeconomics 1
Policy Brief Project (40 marks)
1. Overview
We have developed the analytical tools that economists use when discussing policy options
and have discussed its likely impacts on the economy in theory.
In this assignment you take the role of the policy advisors, employed by government
departments or big corporations (your clients are therefore the government and its ministers
and big corporate organisations) to apply those skills and expertise knowledge accumulated
in this course so far.
As an expert’s role in the government /corporation decision making process, your task has
the following two objectives:
Analysis: Experts are responsible for analysing the economic scenario (depicting the likely
impact of the policy on the economy), using the specialised knowledge and the technical
expertise in the discipline.
Communication skills: Experts must communicate their finding and recommendations
effectively to the decision-makers in government – ministers, senior public servants – and
executives of corporations as an independent/third party observer.
This assignment is designed to help you develop the skills of critically interpreting and
analysing macroeconomic data and effectively communicating your findings to the targeted
audience.
Page 2 of 8
ECON1010, 2019S2, Policy Brief Instructions
Page 2 of 8
There will be three parts to this assignment:
Part A: Diagnostics (macroeconomics data collection and interpretations)
Task: You apply knowledge to the macroeconomics data and present a diagnostic
analysis of the economy. Make important observations and assess the cu
ent
situation of the economy; finally, identify if economy is ‘stable’ or showing
any signs of ‘economic downturn’ or any other problem.
Part B: Policy
ief report
Task: Based on your ‘Diagnostics’ in Part A, you suggest the ‘Policy
Recommendations’. These recommendations must be backed by proper
justification and rationale. As the last step, communicate everything
(diagnostics, policy recommendations, justification
ationale) effectively to
your client in the form of a policy
ief. Policy
iefs aim to be practical and
well-researched to make it useful and worthwhile for your clientele.
Part C: Micro-credential (Information Literacy)
Task: You are required to complete the micro-credential (Information Literacy)
which will help enhance your skills in searching for, organising and
interpreting information.
1. Submission
In principle, you need to form a group with a size of TWO(2) students. All group
members must be enrolled in the same tutorials (a strict requirement).
In the case that you would like to form a group with a student from a different tutorial or you
like to submit as the individual work, you will need to seek approval from the course
coordinator, explaining the valid reasons (please email to XXXXXXXXXX)
Turnitin: As you upload your work to Canvas, note that it will be automatically transfe
ed
to the Turnitin1 website and screened for plagiarism.
See below for the university policy on academic plagiarism and penalties;
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/assessment-and-exams/academic-integrity
There is Turnitin checking tool available in Canvas. The benchmark for good submission is less than
50% of similarity. If the similarity report indicates over 50%, we will investigate the presence of any
academic plagiarism on the submitted assignment. If there is a severe offence, we will pose the
penalties following the university policy outlined above. So, please check the similarity before you
submit the final version.2
1 https:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turnitin
2 Please note that it is fairly easy for us spot any plagiarism from the following websites; Trading Economics
- https:
tradingeconomics.com/
mailto: XXXXXXXXXX
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/assessment-and-exams/academic-integrity
https:
tradingeconomics.com
Page 3 of 8
ECON1010, 2019S2, Policy Brief Instructions
Page 3 of 8
2. Grading
This assignment is worth of 40 marks. Grade allocations are summarised in the following table: (see
u
ic outlining marking criterion is provided on Canvas).
In the case of group submissions, the marks are equally distributed (ie, marks for the group
will become each member’s marks). For this reason, we expect the equal contributions of
each member of the group to this project. Please also note that Part C for Micro-credential is
an individual task (and marked individually).
3. Formatting requirements:
Your assignment must be typed using Student template. The system will reject