Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

ATS2000 From Freud to Friends: Ethnic Identity in Popular Culture

For essential information about this assessment, first read the Subject Information page.

Overview

In the first part of the assessment, you will write a critical essay that will demonstrate analysis of the social and/ or enviranmental impact of an ASX (Australian Stock Exchange) listed company that has a Reconciliation Action Plan registered with Reconciliation Australia

The essay will be 1000words long (+/- 10%) and should include 3 critical arguments analysing the organisation's social and/ or environmental performance. At least one of these arguments must be about the organisation's efforts to wark with and far Indigenous Australians. This is a research assigoment and as such you must base your arguments on an appropriate variety of case specifc and academic sources that are cited in text and referenced in the reference list using APA 7referencing format.

The second part of the assessment will be completed after you receive your feedback on the essay. In the second part of the assessment you will present 1:1 to your tutor about what you have leared from the feedback you are given in response to your essay. These discussions will take place during tutorial time and allow you up to 3 minutes to demonstrate that you have read. understood. and learned from the submission of assignment 1 and the feedback you have been given.

Part 1 task (30%):
1. Identify an A5X listed company, with a Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP), that you wish to analyse and that you can find appropriate detail about, that will allow you to complete the assessment. Useful links:

1. https://:www.asx.com.au/markess/trade-our-cash-market/directory (ASX company directory)

2.https://www.reconcillation.ergau/ (database of reconciliation action plans)

2. Research the organisation by gathering and summarizing a variety of case specific sources from different stakeholder perspectives. identify 3 critical arguments that are useful in analyzing the selected organisation.

3. Identify key concepts and theories that relate to your arguments and identify appropriate academic literature that will help inform your arguments
4.Map out a structure including, introduction, 3 key arguments (1 paragraph each), and conclusion. Include the case specific and academic research that should be incorporated in each section. Remembering that each statement of fact requires a case specific citation, and each conceptual or theoretical argument requires an academic citation

5. Draft your essay according to your planned structure, make sure you address all of the essay task requirements and consider the marking rubric.

6.Review your work 3 times:

1. First review your work for clarity of structure, flow of arguments, and logic of sentences.
2. Second review your work to ensure that it is appropriately referenced, include additional supporting sources where required.
3. Third review your wark for errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Including your citations and reference list.

7. Submit your essay via Canvas in word or PDF format prior to the due date.

Part 2 task (10%):

These discussions will be held during designated tutorial weeks and will be student led for up to 3 minutes.

1.Read the feedback you have been provided on your essay.
2. Make notes about what you would do to improve your assessment if you were to attempt the essay again.
3.Depending on the feedback provided some things to consider are:

1. How you would structure your arguments
2. Clarity of arguments
3. Additional sources that you may research and refer to
4.Any other responses to specifc feedback

4, Create an action plan for future assessments
5. Discuss the action plan with your tutor during your tutorial time when called upan.
6. You will be graded on your ability to understand the feedback. consider future assessments and discuss what you have learned with your tutor
Format

Your written component should be in essay style (not short answer), if unsure see UTS Library resources for further clarification. Your essay may be written in first-person.

The written reflection should be 1000 words, which does NOT include the reference list (+/-10%). You are expected to have a complete reference list (minimum 3 references) using theAPA Referencine Stvle

Use of Al in this Assessment
You are permitted to use GenAl apps for the following purposes in this assessment:

GenAl can be used to suggest ideas. propose outlines, generate drafts, give you feedback on your drafts, polish writing.

You must declare your use of GenAt apps as follows:

Declare usage using APA citation format:UTS Libracyguidance
Save your chat transcript with the app and keep a record that you can provide your Subject Coordinator upon request.

Vivas, interviews or other invigilated tasks may be used by the subject's teaching team to verify student achievement of learning outcomes to ensure they have completed the work on their own and to assess their knowledge of the answers or any work they have submitted. Failure to adequately answer questions during the viva or other invigilated tasks may result in a mark of 0 being awarded for the assessment task. The vivas or interviews shall be recorded for future reference.
Feedback and support

You may ask specifc questions about the assessment in class but your tutor will not review drafts. You are encouraged to use wrlting.sumpart services at UTS such as UTS HELPS

Academic integrity
Academic integrity is about demonstrating honesty, trust. fairness, respect, responsibility and courage in your ，studies. A breach of academic integrity is known as 'academic misconduct' and happens if you engage in behaviours that undermine acaderic integrity, such as qlaglarism and cheating.These are serious forms of misconduct and penalties aroly. If you're thinking about using GenAl in your subjects and assessments, check the rules for whether and how you can use it for this subject via your subject site. tutor, lecturer or subject coordinator. You should also understand how to use.GenAl ethically and reference and acknowledge its use.

Assessment 1: Part 1 (1)

Criteria

Ratings

Introduction

HD- Significantly exceeds expectation
Introduction it exceptionally clear, concise, and well- structured. providing compnehensive context and stating key arguments with strong supporting evidence.

D-Exceeds
expectation introduction concisely describes the onganisation, their context with appropriate supporting.

C.Meets
expectations Introduction concisely describes the organisation, theircontext, and states the key arguments the essay will evidence, and states the key arguments the essay will cover, cover.

P-Below

expectations The introduction is too brief, too long,or does not provide adequate detail about the ,essay but is otherwise clear.

F- Does not meet

expectations The introduction is vague or unclear. Sentences contain errors.

Argument 1

HD-Significantly exceeds expectation

Argument is exceptionallywell- structured, clear. and logical, with no errors and includes a wide range of appropriadte case- specific and academic sounces

D-Exceeds expectation

Angument is well- structured, clear, and logical, with minimal errors and includes muttiple aporopriate case specific and academic sources.

C-Meet expectation
Argumesst is kogical and structured in a clear and well- organized paragraph,contains minimal errors, and ,includes at least 1 ,appropriate case- specihc source and 1 aporopriate atademic source

P-Below expectations

Argumient is somewhat clear but lacks structure, contains errors,and does not offer appropriate supporting references.

Z- Does not meet expectations Argurpent is unchear, peorly structured,contains multiple errors and lacks supporting evidence from case specific and/ or academit sources

Argument 2

HD - Significantly exceeds expectation
Argument is exceptionally well- structured, clear, and logical, with no errors and includes a wide range of appropriate case- specifc and academic sources.

D-Exceeds expectation

Argumnent is well- structuined, clebar, and logical, with minimal errors and includes muttiple appropriate case specific and academic sources.

C-Meets expectations

Angument is logical and structured in a cear and well-organized paragraph, contains minimal errors, and includes at lnast. 1 appropriate case specific source and 1 appropriate academic source.

P-Below expectations

Argument is somewhat cear but lacks structure, contains errors, and does not offer appropriate supporting references

F- Does not meet expectations

Argument is unclear, poorly structured,contains muttiple errors and lacks supporting evidence from case specific and/ or academic source.

Argument on working with and for Indigenous Australians

HD-Significantly exceeds expectation

Argument provides thorough analvsis of the organination's efforts to work ,with and for Indigenous Australizns Argument is exceptionally well- structured, clear, and logical, with no enrors and incfudes a wide range of appropriate, case specilic and academic sources.

D- Exceeds expectation

Argument provides analysis of the organisation's efforts to work with and for Indigenous Australlans. Argument is well- structured, clear, and logical, with minimal errors and includes multiple appropriate case- specific and academic sources.

C-Meets expectations

Aglment addresses the orgnisation's elforts to work with and for Indigerious Auntralians, structured in a clear and well- organized paragraph, contains minial etrors, and includes at least 1 apprcpriate case- specific source and 1 appropriate academic source.

P-Below expectations

Argument somewhat addresses the organisation's efforts but lacks clarity, structure, and does not offer supporting references.

F- Does not meet expectations Argument does not address the organisation's efforts to work with and for Indigenous Australian.

Conclusion

HD-Significantly ,exceeds ,expectation

Conclusion is exceptionally clear, concise, and well- structured, providing a comprehensive summary of key arguments and strong clasing staterments.

D-Exceeds expectation

Conclusion is well- structured, clear, and effectively summarizes key arguments with strong closing statements.

C.Meets expectations

Conclusion effectivelly summarizes key arguments and provides a clear closing statement.

P-Below expectations

Canclusion somewhat summarizes key arguments but tacks clarity and structure.