Cover page
Unit Details | Name | Children’s Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) |
| Code | HT5007 | |
| Year, Trimester | 2024, T2 |
Assessment Details | Name | Research essay |
| Due Date and Week |
Individual Student Details | Student Number | |
| First Name | ||
| Family Name |
Submission Declaration | Integrity Declaration | I have read and understand academic integrity policies and practices and my assessment does not violate these. |
| Full Name | ||
| Submission Date |
Instructions
Academic Integrity Information | Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessment must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Important academic integrity breaches include plagiarism, collusion, copying, impersonation, contract cheating, data fabrication and falsification. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of course enrolment. |
Format Instructions |
|
| Penalties |
|
Description
Students are required to analyse the contexts, theories, and policies in the first six weeks of the unit, and to situate and critically evaluate these with reference to STEM. The research essay engages students’ analytical and writing skills.
Requirements
This research essay is designed to support students in developing a comprehensive understanding of STEM in early childhood education by critically analysing and synthesising information from two research articles available in the references. The essay should include an introduction, body, and conclusion and present a depth of understanding of STEM concepts in early childhood education and critical engagement with the research articles.
To complete this research essay students should:
Key references include:
This essay is a key chance to:
The research essay should be 1,500 words in length.
Rubric
Not Satisfactory (0-49%) | Pass 50-59% | Credit 60-69% | Distinction 70-79% | High Distinction 80-100% | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Framing and situating of the topic and ideas 25% | Title irrelevant to the topic. No sufficient introductory information to the topic. Little or no discussion of problem background. Problem statement is not concise. Objectives and research question are irrelevant to the topic. Framing is not specific. Incorrect model or theory or ideas used or irrelevant to unit. | Title does not accurately reflect what the project is all about. Vague discussion of introductory information and problem background. Objectives and questions relevant but do not accurately reflect what the paper is meant to achieve. Scope is not realistic. Correct subject-relevant theory not explained or not applied. | Title reflects what the paper is about. Good discussion of cited works. Adequate depth of insight and analysis of existing work and problem to be solved. Objectives and research question accurately reflect what the project is meant to achieve. Scope discussion is thorough and achievable. Correct subject-relevant theory explained and applied. | Thesis and purpose are fairly clear and match the writing task. Thesis and purpose are somewhat original. Good situation of paper within larger topic. Correct subject-relevant theory well- explained and applied correctly. | Concise title Well-written introduction. Excellent articulation of the problem and question to be solved. Scope is achievable, inclusions and exclusions are supported by logic/evidence. Meaningful connections to proposed work are communicated effectively. Excellent grasp on relationship of paper to the larger topic. Correct subject-relevant theory clearly explained and applied comprehensively. |
Argument and content 25% | Offers simplistic, undeveloped, or cryptic support for ideas; inappropriate or off-topic generalizations; faulty assumptions; and/or errors of fact. | Offers some support that may be dubious, too broad or obvious. Details are too general, not interpreted, irrelevant to thesis, or inappropriately repetitive | Offers solid but less original reasoning. Assumptions are not always recognized or made explicit. Contains some appropriate details or examples | Well-formed , logical, and concrete development of ideas. Good discussion of cited works. | Substantial, logical, and concrete development of ideas. Assumptions are made explicit. Details are germane, original, and convincingly interpreted |
Findings and insights 25% | Results are not stated or are incomplete; little or no relevant discussion of their significance or value to the topic. Conclusion is not provided or not relevant. | Results are stated; little or no relevant discussion of their significance or value to the area of research. Conclusion provided but is missing certain components. | Results are described; adequate discussion of their significance or value to the topic. Conclusion provide a decent summary of what the project is all about. | Good discussion of results in light of topic, problem context and theory. Good quality references cited with strict adherence to the prescribed referencing style. | Excellent discussion of results; exceptional insight and understanding of their significance or value to the area of research. Well-written conclusion which wraps-up the project and provides direction for next steps. |
Overall organisation and writing 25% | Includes an unacceptable number of grammatical errors; contains formatting errors; fails to properly cite sources; fragmented and very hard to read. References not provided or very few references provided, poor quality sources cited. | Includes some grammatical and or formatting errors; writing style is sometimes difficult to read; descriptions are hard to understand, verbose, or repetitive; uses too much jargon. References provided, however not fully adopt the prescribed referencing style. | Includes occasional grammatical and formatting errors; writing style is generally easy to follow; description depicts the project well but uses some jargon. A complete list of references. Adhere to the prescribed referencing style. | Free from grammatical and formatting errors; description is clear, concise, and very easy to follow; uses appropriate technical and non-technical descriptions as appropriate. | Well formatted and presented written assessment, free from errors and well expressed. Tone is mature, consistent, suitable for topic and audience. Adheres to required length. High quality references cited with strict adherence to the prescribed referencing style. |
Total 100% |
"Looking for top-quality assignment help? Visit Punjab Assignment Help for expert assistance with assignments across various subjects, ensuring timely delivery and top grades!"
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.
