Assessment Information/Brief 2022/23
4628515-2540
Assessment Information/Brief 2022/23
To be used for all types of assessment and provided to students at the start of the module.
Information provided should be compatible with the detail contained in the approved module specification although may contain more information for clarity.
Module title Family Law
CRN 55499
Level 6
Assessment title REASSESSMENT: Assessment Two Individual Video Presentation
Weighting within module This assessment is worth 50% of the overall module mark.
Submission deadline date and time Friday 21st July 2023 @ 16:00
Module Leader/Assessment set by
Charlotte Seager
C.E.Seager@salford.ac.uk0161 295 6932
Office Maxwell Building, 3rd Floor Room 324
How to submit
You should submit your assessment via Blackboard under the Reassessment Video Presentation Folder.
**IMPORTANT** Please note Video Presentations are required to be uploaded via Medial. The folder on Blackboard contains video and written instructions regarding how to submit your completed individual video presentation which you must read in full prior to submission and must follow exactly for successful upload.
Your bibliography will be submitted separately under the Bibliography area which is also within the Assessment Two Folder.
Assessment task details and instructions
The student must choose one of the following family law subjects in order to research, prepare and present a fifteen minute video presentation through an appropriate multimedia format.
Family Law Subject Areas
The Formation of Adult Relationships
Divorce, Dissolution of Adult Relationships
Protection from Domestic Violence and Occupation of the Family Home
Property Disputes of Unmarried Cohabitants on Relationship Breakdown
Financial Support for Children
A Childs Parents: Parentage, Parenthood and Parental Responsibility
Childrens Rights
Private Law Disputes and Issues in Children Cases
Children Needing Services, Care and Protection
The student should note that the video presentation is not simply a treatment of the whole subject area and should concentrate on a specific family law topic/issue within the family law subject. For example: Financial Relief and Child Support - then the video presentation might be on an evaluation of the development of the law relating to pre-nuptial and post-nuptial contracts. The student should identify a specific research aim that they propose to answer.
The video presentation should be viewed as an attempt to evaluate a particular legal problem identified over the course of the module with an attempt to offer solutions/reforms for solving this legal problem
The student must show an awareness of the context of the family law subject chosen and then structure the presentation accordingly. Thus, the video presentation should outline and analyse the state of the law in the given family law subject area. This should include policies, legal reform, and industry commentaries where relevant. Further, the video presentation should attempt to identify any deficiencies present and offer commentary on how the issue might be addressed.
Bibliography and OSCOLA
You do NOT need to provide footnotes on your presentation slides.
You MUST provide an OSCOLA compliant Bibliography, Table of Cases and Table of Statutes as a SEPARATE submission. There will be a separate submission area set up via Turnitin for submission of your bibliography. This will also appear under the Assessment two Folder.
Note:
If you are struggling, please ensure you come and speak with Charlie Seager or your seminar tutor as soon as possible. We will not read or comment on coursework drafts BUT if you need any clarification of the materials or if you have any general questions, please ensure you contact us.
Assessed Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:
Knowledge and Understanding
Demonstrate a detailed knowledge and understanding of family law principles
Explain the impact of human rights on the interpretation and application of family law
Demonstrate a critical perspective of key legal developments in family law and be able to submit suggestions for development and reform
To critically examine the role and limitations of the State in regulating family relationships, and key judicial decisions
To examine how family law and the family justice system operate both for adult family relationships and parent/child relationships
Key Subject Specific Skills
Competently use of a range of legal and non-legal research sources in both paper and electronic formats to inform your arguments
Consider family law principles from multiple perspectives: socio legal, social justice, policy, black letter law
Demonstrate the ability to communicate, both in writing and orally, in a professional fashion
Critically analyse current legal regulations and system in the realm of family law and offer proposals for reform.
Module Aims
To explore how the law defines a family and critically analyse how this impactsregulation in this area
To enable students to critically analyse current issues in family law from a socio-legal perspective
Tobe able to explore and evaluatethe current law andmore keenly theproposals for reform in each of thefamilylaw areas the module covers
Word Count / Duration
The Individual Video Presentation should last no longer than 15 minutes.
There is a 10% leeway permitted if needed, thus you may exceed the time limit by 90 seconds without incurring a penalty. For the avoidance of doubt this amounts to no more than 16 minutes and 30 seconds total.
No arbitrary penalty shall be applied for exceeding the stated time length; however, markers will cease considering content for the purpose of grading and feedback once the stated maximum length has been exceeded. Content beyond this point will not contribute to the determination of the awarded mark and will not be commented upon in feedback.
Feedback arrangements
You can expect to receive feedback within 15 working days of submission.
You will receive full written feedback coupled with the overall mark of your assessment. If further feedback or clarity is requested, additional drop-in feedback sessions will be available.
Support arrangements
You can obtain support for this assessment by consulting the assessment support folder, under the assessments tab on Black Board.
In addition, students are encouraged to attend ALL allocated Lectures and seminars and email C.E.Seager@salford.ac.uk with any questions or queries.
askUS
The University offers a range of support services for students through askUS.
Good Academic Conduct and Academic Misconduct
Students are expected to learn and demonstrate skills associated with good academic conduct (academic integrity). Good academic conduct includes the use of clear and correct referencing of source materials. Here is a link to where you can find out more about the skills which students require http://www.salford.ac.uk/skills-for-learning.
Academic Misconduct is an action which may give you an unfair advantage in your academic work. This includes plagiarism, asking someone else to write your assessment for you or taking notes into an exam. The University takes all forms of academic misconduct seriously. You can find out how to avoid academic misconduct here https://www.salford.ac.uk/skills-for-learning.
Assessment Information
If you have any questions about assessment rules, you can find out more here.
Personal Mitigating Circumstances
If personal mitigating circumstances may have affected your ability to complete this assessment, you can find more information about personal mitigating circumstances procedure here.
Personal Tutor/Student Progression Administrator
If you have any concerns about your studies, contact your Personal Tutor or your Student Progression Administrator.
Assessment Criteria
The Individual Video Presentation assessment criteria includes four sections:
Contents (including cognitive processes and knowledge);
Legal Research (including referencing, using evidence, and bibliography);
Presentation Methods (including the reporting of the results and the use of visual aids); and
Delivery of Presentation (including professionalism and communication).
Each section has been allocated a mark of 25 based on the Undergraduate Level Six Grade Descriptors.
You should refer to the Undergraduate Level Six Grade Descriptors (included at the end of this document) regarding knowledge, cognitive processes, professionalism, communication, referencing, using evidence, and the reporting of results.
A copy of the assessment grid detailing the assessment marking criteria can also be found below.
Family Law: Individual Video Presentation Assessment Grid:
Student Name: Student Number: Unsatisfactory
(30-39) Adequate
(40-49) Fair
(50-59) Good
(60-69) Very Good
(70-79) Excellent
(80-89) Outstanding
(90-100) Comments and Mark
Contents (25 Marks)
Cognitive Processes
Knowledge and accurate Content applicable to topic chosen
Application of relevant case law / statute/ legal arguments Legal Research (25 Marks)
Referencing and using evidence.
Critical analysis
Academic commentary
Bibliography including a range of relevant sources Presentation Methods (25 Marks)
Reporting of Results: Data / Statistics / Judgments / headlines / case decisions
Use of visual aids: images/graphs/quotations/video clips etc Delivery of Presentation (25 Marks)
Professionalism / appropriate use of language and register
Communication / articulate and clarity / appropriate pacing
Overall Mark University of Salford
Under Graduate Level 6 Generic Grade DescriptorsExtremely poor Very poor Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Knowledge No relevant knowledge demonstrated.
No appropriate themes identified. Virtually no relevant knowledge demonstrated.
Very poor identification of key themes. Inconsistent or inaccurate knowledge.
Poor identification of key themes Limited evidence of knowledge.
Unsatisfactory identification of key themes. Basic knowledge with occasional inaccuracies
Superficial depth or limited breadth with adequate identification of key themes Mostly accurate knowledge with satisfactory depth and breadth.
Fair identification of key themes. Consistently accurate knowledge with appropriate depth and breadth.
Good identification of key themes Comprehensive knowledge demonstrating very good depth.
Demonstrates ability to transfer knowledge between different contexts appropriately Demonstrates the complexity of knowledge and its relevance in a variety of contexts. Outstanding knowledge. Theory used to formulate new questions, ideas or challenges.
Extremely poor Very poor
Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Cognitive processes (argument, analysis, evaluation, synthesis, reflection)
Cognitive Processes
No demonstration of analysis, evaluation or synthesis.
No evidence of reflection.
Fails to link theory to practice.
Unsatisfactory clinical reasoning/application skills No meaningful analysis or evaluation.
Unable to identify appropriate issues for reflection.
Arguments presented are inappropriate and poorly linked.
Fails to adequately demonstrate links between theory and practice.
Very poor clinical reasoning/application skills. Descriptive.
Occasionally attempts to analyse or evaluate material but lacks critical approach.
Confusion and/ or weakness in academic argument.
Identifies issues for reflection but lacks evidence of reflective processes.
Limited and inappropriate or inaccurate links between theory and practice.
Poor clinical reasoning/application. Mainly descriptive.
Evidence of analysis, inconsistent critical approach, little evaluation or synthesis.
Follows processes of reflection but fails to demonstrate insight.
Inappropriate links between theory and practice.
Inconsistent and/ or inaccurate clinical reasoning/application.
Critical analysis evident, with some evaluation and synthesis, although limited.
Limited evidence of reflection.
Some appropriate academic argument although not well applied and lacking in clarity.
Appropriate yet basic integration of theory and practice.
Adequate clinical reasoning/application. Sound critical analysis and evaluation.
Relevant academic argument.
Demonstrates basic ability to synthesise information in order to formulate appropriate questions and conclusions.
Reflective process is utilised, with some insight demonstrating planning for future practice.
Integration of theory and practice
Integrates relevant information in order to make reasoned clinical decisions. Clear, in depth critical analysis, evaluation and academic argument with synthesis of different ideas and perspectives.
Utilises reflection to develop self and practice.
Aware of the influence of varied perspectives.
Clear and relevant application of theory to
practice
Uses a wide range of sources to inform clinical decision making and prioritizing. Very good analysis and synthesis of material with evidence of critique and independent thought.
Balanced and mature approach to reflection used to enhance practice and performance within a range of contexts.
Aware of and able to integrate various perspectives.
Clear insight into links between theory and practice.
Demonstrates ability to make sound decisions in complex and unpredictable contexts
Excellent critical analysis and synthesis.
Arguments handled skilfully with imaginative interpretation of material.
Willingness to challenge self and practice through reflection.
Aware of and able to critically integrate various perspectives.
Coherent and systematic application of theory to practice. Outstanding critical analysis and synthesis.
Incorporates evidence of original thinking.
Willingness to challenge self and practice through reflection.
Able to evaluate and critically integrate various perspectives.
Excellent awareness of operation within scope of practice
Extremely poor Very poor
Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Professionalism Awareness of self and relationships with others and the team not demonstrated.
Lack of insight into scope of practice demonstrated.
Major limitations in awareness of self and relationships with others and the team.
Very poor knowledge of group values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Very poor awareness of and operation within scope of practice.
Limitations in awareness of self and relationships with others and the team.
Poor knowledge of group values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Some awareness of and operation within scope of practice.
Some limitations in awareness of self and relationships with others and the team.
Limited knowledge of group values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Some awareness and operation within scope of practice.
Adequate awareness of self and relationships with others.
Acceptable knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Some awareness of group values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Awareness of and operation within scope of practice.
Fair awareness to self and relationships with others.
Fair knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Awareness of group values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Satisfactory awareness of and operation within scope of practice.
Good awareness of self and relationships with others.
Good knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Good awareness of group, values, beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Good awareness of and operation within scope of practice.
Very good awareness of self and relationships with others.
Very good knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Very good awareness of group values beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Very good awareness of operation within scope of practice.
. Excellent awareness of self and relationships with others.
Excellent knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Excellent awareness of group values beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Excellent awareness of operation within scope of practice Outstanding awareness of self and relationships with others.
Outstanding knowledge of the team and their contribution to it.
Outstanding awareness of group values beliefs, ethical and political issues.
Outstanding awareness of operation within scope of practice.
Extremely poor Very poor
Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Communication
Little discernable structure, extremely poor progression and clarity.
Extremely poor use of language/ grammar Very poor structure, very poor progression and clarity.
Very poor use of language/
grammar Disorganised in relation to structure, progression. Lacks clarity.
Poor use of language/ grammar Limited in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
Inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Adequate academic style. Adequate in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
Some inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Acceptable academic style. Fair in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
Few inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Good academic style. Well presented in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
Very few inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Very good academic style. Very well presented in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
No inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Demonstrates a scholarly style in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
No inconsistencies in use of language/ grammar Outstanding scholarly style in relation to structure, logical progression and clarity.
No inconsistencies in use of language / grammar
Extremely poor Very poor
Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Motor skills Unsafe.
Unable to perform skills. Unsafe.
Very poor application of skill, major limitation in skill performance.
Ineffective Unsafe.
Poor application of skill, some limitations in skill performance.
Ineffective Unsafe.
Unsatisfactory application of skills.
Inconsistent in skill performance. Safe adequate application of skill.
Effective performance of skill with some limitations. Safe, fair application of skills.
Effective performance, demonstrating dexterity and sensitivity. Safe, good application of skills.
Effective performance with an ability to plan, anticipate and prioritise action.
Effective performance, demonstrating dexterity and sensitivity. Safe, very good application of skills.
Effective and proficient performance demonstrating dexterity and sensitivity. Safe, excellent application of skills.
Effective and proficient performance with flexibility and creativity Safe, outstanding application of skills, perceives the situation as a whole.
Effective and proficient performance, demonstrating flexibility and creativity with dexterity and sensitivity.
Extremely poor Very poor
Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Referencing and using evidence No references.
No attempt to provide evidence of sources used. Lack of ability to source adequate material.
Very poor referencing Poor use of reference material with frequent error.
Inappropriate or out dated sources with numerous referencing errors. Unsatisfactory referencing with frequent error.
Over utilises secondary sources.
Limited ability to support content with relevant sources. Narrow range of sources.
Referencing in presented work is adequate with some inconsistencies or inaccuracies.
Use of primary and secondary sources.
References used are appropriate in terms of currency. Fair range of sources identified with appropriate referencing and few inaccuracies.
Appropriate use of primary
Sources with some secondary referencing apparent. Good range of sources.
Well referenced, very few inaccuracies.
Good use of primary sources. Clear evidence of referencing to a wide range of primary sources which are used effectively in supporting the work. Detailed use of primary sources which are well referenced and are used creatively to develop the work. Synthesis of reference material from a wide range of sources both within and across professions
Extremely poor Very poor Poor Unsatisfactory Adequate Fair Good Very Good Excellent Outstanding
1-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100
Reporting of results
No presentation of results
No data analysis.
Very poor presentation of results
Presentation & data analysis extremely limited. Major omissions and/or totally incorrect presentation and statistical analysis. Poor presentation of results.
Some attempt to present results and/or data analysis but simplistic, wrong, and with major elements missing. Little relevant statistical analysis.
Limited presentation of results.
Insufficient and/or inappropriate presentation of numeric data, and some incorrect statistical analyses, with no associated information. Many omissions, errors or lack of clarity.
Adequate presentation of results.
Some inappropriate presentation of numeric data AND choice of statistical analyses with some associated information missing. Some omissions, errors, or lack of clarity exist.
Reasonable presentation of results.
Some inappropriate presentation of numeric data OR choice of statistical analyses with a few areas of associated information missing. A few errors or lack of clarity. Good presentation or results.
Presentation of numeric data and choice of statistical analyses mostly correct with minor omissions, errors or lack of clarity.
Very good presentation of results.
Presentation of numeric data and choice of statistical analyses correct with minor omissions or lack of clarity.
Excellent presentation of results.
Clearly presented numeric data, with appropriate analyses conducted and with excellent interpretations of the results made. Exceptional presentation of results.
Outstanding and original depiction of analyses and interpretations, including statement of associated information (test used, level of significance, and result, analyses clearly defined)
