Research and critically examine appropriate material to inform practice-based film and tv work.

Module

Name

Portfolio Production III

Code

CINE1122

Hand in Date

11/01/21

Assessment Task

CW1 Production Research Essay

Assessment Weighting

20%

LO2:

Knowledge and

Understanding

LO1:

Research

LO4:

Critical Judgement

LO1:

Structure, Presentation

and Referencing

Have you understood the topic of the brief? Is your role on the film, and aims within that role, clear?

Are you able to communicate your understanding of the wider subject area that your essay is addressing?

Have you cited any critical sources in your essay? Are they from the taught module or your own research? Have you engaged with and discussed these sources in your writing?

Is there a coherent argument in your piece? Are you able to articulate thinking beyond those sources that you have referenced?

Have you structured your essay appropriately, including an introduction and conclusion, for example? Is the writing to a high standard with minimal errors? Have you referenced your sources?

Exceptional (80-100)

Clear, detailed and insightful knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment and wider subject area, including relevant theoretical/critical approaches; the assimilation and integration of material not directly covered in the module. In-depth knowledge and awareness of requirements of chosen role on graduate film.

Multiple critical sources cited and discussed. A number of these move beyond the materials provided by the taught module.

Discussion of research sources leads to new, innovative conclusions.

A coherent and unique line of argument throughout the assignment backed up with excellent analysis; an ability to go beyond the arguments presented in the critical literature; evidence of independent and/or original thinking.

Publishable.

An appropriate and elegant structure that ensures exceptional organisation of material and detail. Impeccable referencing and bibliography presented according to the Harvard referencing system.

Excellent presentation of work, subtle errors in spelling and/or grammar. Publishable.

Excellent (70 -79)

Clear and detailed knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment and wider subject area, including relevant theoretical/critical approaches; includes some material not directly covered in the module. Clear knowledge

Multiple critical sources cited and discussed. A few of these move beyond the materials provided by the taught module.

Discussion of research sources leads to new conclusions.

A coherent line of argument throughout the assignment backed up with excellent analysis; an ability to go beyond the arguments presented in the critical literature;

An appropriate and elegant structure that ensures excellent organisation of material and detail. Impeccable referencing and bibliography presented according to the Harvard referencing system.

Excellent presentation of work, subtle errors in

and awareness of requirements of chosen role on graduate film.

evidence of independent and/or original thinking.

spelling and/or grammar. Publishable with minor amendments.

Very Good (60 – 69)

Clear knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment and wider subject area, including relevant theoretical/critical approaches. Clear awareness of requirements of chosen role on graduate film.

Critical sources cited and discussed, though all are from the taught module. Some discussion of research sources.

A coherent line of argument throughout the assignment backed up with good analysis; good understanding and synthesis of the arguments presented in the critical literature.

An appropriate structure that ensures good organisation of material and detail. Very good referencing and bibliography presented according to the Harvard referencing system.

Good presentation of work, with some errors in spelling and/or grammar.

Good (50-59)

Some knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment and

wider subject area, including relevant theoretical/critical approaches. Some awareness of requirements of chosen role on graduate film.

Critical sources cited but not fully discussed. Research is gestured towards but not engaged with.

An identifiable line of argument throughout the assignment backed up with satisfactory analysis; some problems understanding and synthesising the arguments presented in the critical literature.

A functional structure that ensures satisfactory organisation of material and detail. Referencing and bibliography presented according to the Harvard referencing system. Satisfactory presentation of work, with errors in spelling and/or grammar.

Satisfactory (40-49)

Weak knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment. Lacking in knowledge of theoretical/critical approaches. Little awareness of requirements of chosen role on graduate film.

Some sources present but not discussed.

Research is lacking overall.

Weak argument throughout the assignment not well integrated with weak analysis; problems understanding and synthesising the arguments presented in the critical literature.

A weak and incoherent structure that does not ensure satisfactory organisation of material and detail.

Referencing and bibliography presented according to the Harvard referencing system but with errors. Presentation of work could be improved - multiple errors in spelling and/or

grammar.

Fail (30-39)

Poor knowledge/understanding of the topic of the assignment. Little knowledge of theoretical/critical approaches. Little

awareness of

Very little evidence of engagement with research or critical sources.

Poor argument throughout the assignment not well integrated with weak analysis; Problems understanding and synthesising the arguments presented

A poor and incoherent structure that does not ensure satisfactory organisation of material and detail.

Inconsistent/incomplete referencing and

bibliography. Poor