diff_months: 5

Community Work and Social Policy 12013

Flat 50% Off Order New Solution
Added on: 2025-05-23 07:33:09
Order Code: LD523447
Question Task Id: 0

Assessment 2: Case study report

Overview

This assessment enables you to identify a broad social issue/advocacy area and/or an overarching community of interest of your choosing and to explore a community project, organisation or social change campaign under this broad area in a level of depth.

You will be allocated into small groups early in Week 2. You will conduct preliminary work with your group and then write an individual report. Details can be found below in the Instructions.

Additionally, you will continue working with this group and the topic you choose to complete Assessment 3.

Details

Task type

Method

Individual weighting

Due date

Length

Report

Individual writing (Following group work)

40%

Sunday, Week 4, 11:59 PM (Canberra time)

1500 words +/- 10%

Outcomes

Unit learning outcomes alignment

Graduate learning outcomes alignment

ULO 1: Evaluate complex theories and practices about diversity, difference, culture, language, race, gender, ability and power and their application to social work practice in different contexts

ULO3: Demonstrate skills in community work within a range of settings, including digital skills.

GA 2.2 Adopt an informed and balanced approach across professional and international boundaries

GA 1.4 Work collaboratively as part of a team, negotiate and resolve conflict

GA 3.3 Adapt to complexity, ambiguity and change by being flexible and keen to engage with new ideas

Background (why am I doing this?)

Being able to identify and analyse community work and advocacy strategies is an important skill for social workers. This assessment asks you to analyse the key community work theories and practices underlying the work of an organisation/campaign/project and to write a succinct report on key community work activities.

Instructions (what do I have to do?)

Step 1: Within your small group, decide upon either a key social issue/area of advocacy interest (e.g. disaster recovery, climate change, interpersonal violence, other) OR an overarching community of their choice (i.e. culturally and/or linguistically diverse communities; gender and/or sexually diverse communities, disabled communities, other). We encourage you to be creative with your choice and pursue a genuine area of interest for group members. Feel welcome to check in with your tutor for advice before finalising your groups focus. Your choice will carry through from Assessment 2 to Assessment 3.

Step 2: Undertake desktop and/or community-focused research to identify community organisations and/or projects and/or campaigns, that fall under the broad social issue and/or overarching community your group has decided on. Though you are working on the same social issue or community,each group member should choose a different organisation/project/campaign for their Assessment 2 report.

Step 3: Once each student has selected their particular organisation/project/campaign, undertake individual research. You can utilise a variety of research methods to investigate the practices used by your chosen organisation/project/campaign, including (but not limited to):

  • secondary sources such as scholarly literature and reports
  • participation in practices/activities/processes of the organisation/project/campaign, accompanied by an account of your experiences
  • analysis of documentation, websites, materials and/or artefacts produced by the organisation/project/campaign
  • observation of events/actions or organisational practices and processes, accompanied by notes of your observations
  • group discussions, correspondence and/or interviews with relevant member(s) of the organisation/project/campaign

Step 4: Write your report. Follow the formatting advice below.

Writing your response (how do I do this?)

Your report should be structured into sections with headings and sub-headings. Within each section, you are expected to write primarily in full paragraphs (around 8-10 sentences per paragraph) and to cite and reference your research sources. You can utilise bullet point lists and/or include visual representations such as photographs, tables or charts within your report.

Suggested report format (You can utilise sub-headings in addition to these main headings):

  • Table of contents(Not included in word count length)
  • Introduction Briefly introduce and describe the organisation/project/campaign and the community it represents/serves and/or the social issue it addresses, utilising the key concept of intersectionality.
  • Sources/research methods Briefly outline the sources and methods of research utilised to gather information about the organisation/project/campaign.
  • Analysis/discussion
  • Outline and analyse the key advocacy and/or community work strategies utilised by the organisation/project/campaign.
  • Analyse the community work theories and practices underlying the organisation/project/campaign.
    • Conclusion Briefly summarise the key strategies, activities and theories you analysed within the report.
    • References Include a reference list. Appendices are not required but may be included if relevant. Appendices are not included in word count length.

Requirements

  • Referencing style: APA 7th edition The report must contain at least five peer-reviewed scholarly references.
  • Only documents can be uploaded.
  • Submit must be via this page.

If you would like to check your draft submission for accidental plagiarism, select the button below to access the draft submissions box.

Turnitin - Draft Text-matching checker

Click on the tab below to read the assessment declaration before you submit.

Assessment declaration

By submitting this piece of assessment electronically, you declare that:

I will comply with all the Universitys instructions in relation to the examination, including those in respect of permitted materials.

I certify that I have read the Unit Outline requirements and am aware of the assessment criteria.

This assessment is my original work and no part has been copied/ reproduced from any other persons work or from any other source, except where acknowledgement has been made.

This work has not been submitted previously for assessment and received a grade OR concurrently for assessment, either in whole or part, for this subject (unless part of integrated assessment design/approved by the Unit Coordinator), any other unit or any other course.

If this assessment requires submission of a media item, I certify that I have tested the media file.

I understand that if I fail to comply with these instructions, I will be in breach of the University of Canberra Student Conduct Rules 2018. I understand that a finding of academic misconduct may have serious consequences for me if I later apply for admission to legal practise under the Legal Profession Act 2006 (ACT).

Rubric

Title:

12013_A2 Rubric

12013_A2 Rubric

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

Edit criterion description

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIdentification and discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community, including analysis of intersectionality (15%)

Range

threshold:pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

15to >12.75Pts

High distinction

Outstanding identification and discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community. Very high level of critical analysis and incorporation of intersectionality.

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.75to >11.25Pts

Distinction

Very good identification and discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community. High level of critical analysis and incorporation of intersectionality.

Edit ratingDelete rating

11.25to >9.75Pts

Credit

Good identification and discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community. Very good level of critical analysis and incorporation of intersectionality.

Edit ratingDelete rating

9.75to >7.5Pts

Pass

Reasonable identification and/or discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community. A reasonable to limited level of analysis and/or incorporation of intersectionality.

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5to >0Pts

Fail

Poor to limited identification and/or discussion of the social issue and/or overarching community. Poor or limited analysis and/or incorporation of intersectionality.

pts

15pts

--

Edit criterion description

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDescription of sources / research methods (10%)

Range

threshold:pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10to >8.5Pts

High distinction

Outstanding description and overview of sources and research methods utilised. Sources and methods are described in a high level of detail, are highly creative and are clearly linked to the case organisation/ focus/campaign.

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.5to >7.5Pts

Distinction

Very good description and overview of sources and research methods utilised. Sources and methods are described in a very good level of detail, are very creative and are clearly linked to the case organisation/ focus/campaign.

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5to >6.5Pts

Credit

Good description and overview of sources and research methods utilised. Sources and methods are described in some detail, are somewhat creative and are clearly linked to the case organisation/ focus/campaign.

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.5to >5.0Pts

Pass

Reasonable description and overview of sources and research methods utilised. Sources and methods are described in adequate detail and are linked to the case organisation /focus/campaign.

Edit ratingDelete rating

5to >0Pts

Fail

Poor or limited description and overview of sources and research methods utilised. Sources and methods are described in poor or limited detail and are not clearly linked to the case organisation/ focus/campaign.

pts

10pts

--

Edit criterion description

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCritical analysis of advocacy / community work strategies and integration of key community work theories in analysis (40%)

Range

threshold:pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

40to >34.0Pts

High distinction

Outstanding critical analysis and excellent integration of key theories. Very well-developed understanding and application of highly relevant theories to identified strategies.

Edit ratingDelete rating

34to >30.0Pts

Distinction

Very good critical analysis and integration of key theories. Very well-developed understanding and application of relevant theories to identified strategies.

Edit ratingDelete rating

30to >26.0Pts

Credit

Good analysis and integration of key theories. Well-developed understanding and application of relevant theories to identified strategies.

Edit ratingDelete rating

26to >20.0Pts

Pass

Adequate analysis and integration of key theories. Adequate understanding and / or application of somewhat relevant theories to identified strategies.

Edit ratingDelete rating

20to >0Pts

Fail

Poor or limited analysis and/or integration of key theories. There may be little or no attempt at applying theory to identified strategies, and theories may be minimally relevant or inappropriate.

pts

40pts

--

Edit criterion description

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeStructure and quality of case study report (20%)

Range

threshold:pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

20to >17.0Pts

High distinction

Outstanding report in terms of clarity and structure. Report has clear and appropriate sub-headings. Excellent spelling and grammar and professional presentation of a publishable standard.

Edit ratingDelete rating

17to >15.0Pts

High distinction

Very good report in terms of clarity and structure. Report has clear and appropriate sub-headings. Very good spelling and grammar and professional presentation of a high standard.

Edit ratingDelete rating

15to >13.0Pts

Credit

terms of clarity and structure. Report has appropriate sub-headings. Reasonable to good spelling and grammar with some errors, and professional presentation of a good standard.

Edit ratingDelete rating

13to >10.0Pts

Pass

Adequate report in terms of clarity and structure. Report has mostly appropriate sub-headings. Adequate spelling and grammar with some errors.

Edit ratingDelete rating

10to >0Pts

Fail

Poor report in terms of clarity and structure. Report may have few or no sub-headings, or sub-headings may be unclear or inappropriate. Inadequate spelling and grammar with several errors.

pts

20pts

--

Edit criterion description

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReferencing and sources (15%)

Range

threshold:pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

15to >12.75Pts

High distinction

Outstanding, advanced and correct use of APA7 referencing style, including a reference list with no content or formatting errors. A very wide range of high-quality sources are utilised that are highly appropriate.

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.75to >11.25Pts

Distinction

Very good and mostly correct use of APA7 referencing style, including a reference list with no or very few or formatting errors. A wide range of appropriate, high-quality sources are utilised.

Edit ratingDelete rating

11.25to >9.75Pts

Credit

Good and somewhat correct use of APA7 referencing style, including a reference list with some formatting errors. A good range of appropriate, mostly high-quality sources are utilised.

Edit ratingDelete rating

9.75to >7.5Pts

Pass

Adequate use of APA7 referencing style, including a reference list with some to several formatting errors. A passable range of mostly appropriate sources of adequate quality are utilised.

  • Uploaded By : Nivesh
  • Posted on : May 23rd, 2025
  • Downloads : 0
  • Views : 121

Order New Solution

Can't find what you're looking for?

Whatsapp Tap to ChatGet instant assistance

Choose a Plan

Premium

80 USD
  • All in Gold, plus:
  • 30-minute live one-to-one session with an expert
    • Understanding Marking Rubric
    • Understanding task requirements
    • Structuring & Formatting
    • Referencing & Citing
Most
Popular

Gold

30 50 USD
  • Get the Full Used Solution
    (Solution is already submitted and 100% plagiarised.
    Can only be used for reference purposes)
Save 33%

Silver

20 USD
  • Journals
  • Peer-Reviewed Articles
  • Books
  • Various other Data Sources – ProQuest, Informit, Scopus, Academic Search Complete, EBSCO, Exerpta Medica Database, and more