ACC520 Written Hypothetical Assignment Marking Rubric Assessment criteriaOutstanding (HD)Very Good (D)Good (Credit)Satisfactory (Pass)Unsatisfactory (Fail)1. Knowledge of the law Very thoroughly researched, effective use of materials; comprehensive identification and discussion of issuesWell researched, appropriate use of materials; good identification and discussion of issuesCompetently researched, good use of materials; majority of relevant issues identified and discussed.Some relevant materials overlooked; some use of research materials; possibly some misunderstanding of issues or materialsLimited research, relevant materials overlooked or misunderstood; failure to identify and discuss relevant issues2.Understanding of the lawThorough analysis, deals effectively with complexity of issues; persuasively argued throughout, contrary arguments anticipated, good critical evaluation of materialsGood analysis, argument well-developed and supported, some critical evaluation of materialsSome analysis of issues; argument may be under-developed or unpersuasive, synthesis of materials with limited critical evaluationMainly discursive with little analysis of issues; basic argument is unclear or undeveloped or not well supported, some reference to relevant materialInsufficient analysis, argument is lacking or unsound, failure to use relevant materials, may indicate confusion or misunderstanding3. Academic communication skillsClear and logical structure. Minimal errors in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; full and accurate citation of authorities and sources; thoroughly edited.Generally well written. Occasional minor flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; authorities and sources are generally cited correctly; well editedReasonably well written. Some flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; may have some missing, incomplete or incorrect footnote citations; some oversights in editingWriting may be difficult to follow in parts. Flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; a number of missing, incomplete or incorrect footnote citations; editing with little carePoorly written, difficult to follow. Frequent or repeated flaws in expression, grammar, spelling or punctuation; inadequate citation of sources; poor editing Assessment Task 2: Written hypothetical assignment Goal:The goal of the Hypothetical assignment is for you to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the regulation of business structures and use critical thinking to correctly identify the legal issues and apply the relevant legal principles to given hypothetical case scenarios.Product:Written Hypothetical Assignment.Format:This is a 2500 word individual written assignment – this is not a group assignment. It will involve preparing detailed responses to a number of hypothetical fact scenarios. Details of the assignment will be provided by the end of week 2.CriteriaThe assignment will be assessed according to the following criteria: demonstration of knowledge of the law, as evidenced by accurate statement of relevant legal principlesdemonstration of understanding of the law and critical thinking, as evidenced by cogent and coherent analysis of the lawdemonstration of requisite academic communication skills, as evidenced by logical structure of arguments, appropriateness of conclusions, accuracy of citations (legal referencing) and academic referencing and use of accurate and appropriate expressionGeneric skill assessedSkill assessment levelOrganisationGraduateProblem solvingGraduate
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS
