Assessment criteria: ASSESSMENT 3: Court Report Sunday 21st of May (Week 8) by 11:59pm 40% 2000 words (+/-10%), references not included. Please ensure you use 12-point font, 1.5 line spacing and include an assignment cover sheet. This task prepares students for written policy advocacy and development work through clearly articulating an informed position on a selected policy issue, reflecting principles of social justice. Assessment criteria provided in Attachment B This 2000-word court report requires students to advocate for a woman and her child/children to stay together in the context of escaping intimate partner violence. Students will need to demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of intimate partner violence relevant to the situation presented; demonstrate an awareness of concepts around safety planning, conveyed in a reflective component within the assessment; and produce a report which demonstrates the woman’s strengths and capacity to care for her children. Students will choose one of two case studies provided on LEO: one is set in the context of the Children’s Court, the other is in the Family Law context. Please note that you are advised to use the court report template that aligns with your chosen case study – these templates are also provided for you on LEO. A court report does not usually require you to do in-text referencing. However, this report must be fully referenced using APA Referencing Style. Due date: Sunday 21st of May (Week 12) by 11:59pm 30% Length and/or format: 2000 (+/- 10%); Report format. Please ensure you use 12-point font, 1.5 line spacing and include an assignment cover sheet. Purpose: The purpose of this assessment is for students to demonstrate professionalism and attention to detail in their understanding of the complexities of the social issue and their skill in drafting a legal report to advocate for a client. It is aimed at demonstrating NOTE: PLEASE FOLLOW THE CRITERIA ATTACHMENT C: Assessment 3 Marking Criteria Assessment 3: Court Report Court reportMarks (Total: 30)/ 7.5Criteria 1: Demonstrated understanding of the nature and complexity (theory/theories) of Intimate Partner Violence in the context of female survivors’ lives (7.5 marks)(6.5 -7.5) The theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are exceptionally well described and supported by evidence. (6) The theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are very well described and supported by evidence. (5) The theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are clearly explained.(4) The theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are adequately explained. (2-3) The description of the theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are unclear and limited. (1) The description of the theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is/are poor. (0) No description of the theory/theories of Intimate Partner Violence/ 7.5Criteria 2: Demonstrated ability to advocate for and draw on the strengths of the woman and her parenting (7.5 marks)(6.5 – 7.5) The strengths of the woman and her parenting are exceptionally well-articulated and there is strong advocacy to keep the children safe and with their mother. (6) The strengths of the woman and her parenting are very well-articulated and there is very good advocacy to keep the children safe and with their mother. (5) The strengths of the woman and her parenting are clearly articulated and there is good support to keep the children safe and with their mother. (3-4) The strengths of the woman and her parenting are adequately explained and there is reasonable advocacy to keep the children safe and with their mother. (1-2) The strengths of the woman and her parenting capacity are unclear and there is little advocacy to keep the children safe and with their mother. (0) There is no discussion of the strengths of woman and her parenting capacity and no advocacy to keep the children safe and with their mother.Criteria 3: Demonstrated ability to critically and meaningfully reflect on the safety of the woman and her child/children in planning for the court report (7.5 marks) 26 Court reportMarks (Total: 30)(6.5 – 7.5) Attendance to safety and safety planning is very well-articulated and appropriate with relevance to the woman and her child/children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence. (6) Attendance to safety and safety planning is well articulated with relevance to the woman and her child/children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence. (5) Attendance to safety and safety planning is clearly articulated with relevance to the woman and her child/children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence. (3-4) Attendance to safety and safety planning is adequately explained with relevance to the woman and her child/children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence. (1-2) Attendance to safety and safety planning is inadequate with relevance to the woman and her child/children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence. (0) There is no attendance to safety or safety planning evident and no understanding of the woman and her children’s safety in the context of intimate partner violence./ 7.5/ 7.5Criteria 4: Quality of presentation, including clarity of written communication, appropriate style and language for purpose, respectful language, organisation of the material, arguments evidenced with research literature and accuracy of APA referencing style (7.5 marks)(6 -7.5) Outstanding presentation, including clarity of written communication, style and respectful language, organisation of the material and accuracy of APA referencing style. (5 -6) High quality presentation, including clarity of written communication, style and respectful language, organisation of the material and accuracy of APA referencing style (4 – 4.5) Good quality presentation, including clarity of written communication, style and respectful language, organisation of the material and accuracy of APA referencing style (3 – 3.5) Satisfactory quality of presentation, including clarity of written communication, style and respectful language, organisation of the material and accuracy of APA referencing style (2 – 2.5) Inadequate presentation in terms of clarity of written communication, style and some disrespectful language, organisation of the material or accuracy of APA referencing style. (1) Very poor presentation in terms of clarity of written communication, disrespectful language and styles, organisation of the material or accuracy of APA referencing style
