There is a clear structure, which assists the reader to follow the argument. Sentences and paragraphs and concise and meaningful. New concepts and evidence is introduced appropriately, allowing the reader to follow the development of the paper. Appropriate signposting is used to guide the reader, with an introduction and conclusion that clearly communicate the main issues being addressed.
Research
The analysis is well researched. Primary data is identified and used appropriately - including collecting observation data or using ABS data where appropriate. A range of sources are used, reflecting the diversity within the literature.
Integration
Researched material is well integrated into the overall argument. There are a range of different perspectives acknowledged, and the author structures the material to help compare and evaluate these differing perspectives. Evidence is effectively incorporated into the argument, being used appropriately to evaluate alternative interpretations.
Key Concept
The author clearly explains the main concepts in their work (such as commodity chains, unpaid work, stimulus, etc). They clearly explain the arguments and evidence used by the main sources they cite.
Critical Thinking
The author clearly evaluates alternative perspectives and builds a convincing case. Evidence is used to assess the merits of different perspectives. The author demonstrates creativity in exploring how ideas might be applied. There is a clear framework for assessing claims, allowing the author to develop a convincing and coherent explanation.
Expression
The work is clearly written, making it easy for the reader to follow the argument. Sentences and paragraphs are both concise and well structured. It is clear how concepts are being used and how they relate to the broader argument. Language is not overly complex or academic, but is able to convey complex ideas.
Referencing
There is a clear referencing system that makes it easy for the reader to identify where evidence and ideas have been sourced. References are clear, so that what text corresponds to which source is easily discernable. References are specific, so that quotes, figures and specific ideas are sourced by pages or sections of a source. All material that is directly quoted is clearly marked as such. References are complete.
Task: Cutting carbon emissions
Research: Your task here is to compare the Garnaut Report – the report used by the Federal Government as the basis for its carbon price – to alternative approaches, like that advocated by Tim Jackson. You should begin by outlining the nature of the problem – why are economists and governments concerned about climate change and carbon emissions? Then explain the findings of the Garnaut Report, and how these relate to the Federal Government’s climate policy.
You can find the Garnaut Report here:http://www.garnautreview.org.au/update-2011/garnaut-review-2011.html(Chapter 5 is the most useful).
You need to outline what the Garnaut Report says. How does it understand the problem? What solutions does it present? And why does it think its solutions are likely to be an effective way of addressing the problem? You don't need to go into lots of detail, the most important thing is to show you understand the main points of the Report, and to relate these to the themes of the course, especially the ideas we discuss in week 10.
Finally, you should discuss alternative views. A useful starting point here is Tim Jackson's piece critiquing economic growth that is a required reading in week 10. Why is Tim Jackson critical of approaches to climate change that attempt to maximise economic growth in the long term? What alternatives does he propose? Here you can draw on the broader literature to assess the alternatives. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each approach, and why might one be more effective? You will need to go beyond these two readings to build your analysis and your argument. You might look to the experience in other countries, or you could look to other other theorists to help you evaluate these competing perspectives.