This assessment is to be written in an essay format, with fully coherent sentences and paragraphs. 1. Read closely the following chapter of the eText:

Assessment overview

This assessment task requires you to write an essay on a selected chapter of the eText, in addition to at least two other items of scholarly work dealing with the same historical events, developing a detailed argument by selecting evidence, writing with clarity and precision, and correctly citing the references from which you have drawn your evidence.

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on

Just from $13/Page

Order Essay

Assessment details

This assessment is to be written in an essay format, with fully coherent sentences and paragraphs.

Read closely the following chapter of the eText:

‘Chapter 14: The crisis decades’ (Hobsbawm 1995, pp. 403-432)

Find at least two more items of scholarly work dealing with the historical events outlined in the chapter you have chosen.
Summarise in your own words Hobsbawm’s argument and the arguments of the two secondary sources, focusing on their similarities and differences of opinion.
Identify the subjects, processes and contexts involved in the historical events outlined in the chapter you have chosen.

Assessment criteria

Comprehension and interpretation.
Organisation of argument summary.
Identification of subjects and processes.
Written expression.
Referencing.

Your work will be assessed using the following marking guide:

Criteria	No Pass	Pass 50-59%	Credit 60-69%	Distinction 70-79%	High Distinction 80-100%
Comprehension and interpretation (20%)	Lack of comprehension evident, with interpretation of chapter and additional scholarly content indicating limited to no understanding of the text with further reading required.	Comprehension of chapter topics and additional scholarly content evident in most instances. Chapter and additional scholarly argument interpretation is over-simplified missing several key ideas.	Comprehension of the chapter topics and additional scholarly content evident. Interpretation of argument limited by not covering all topics sufficiently, further focus on similarities and differences of opinion needed.	Comprehension of the chapter topics and additional scholarly content evident. Interpretation of argument is solid, with topics covered sufficiently, focus has been paid to similarities and differences of opinion.	Comprehension of chapter topics and additional scholarly content evident. Interpretation of argument is carefully considered with all topics covered and a focus on similarities and differences of opinion. Particular emphasis placed on those central to argument.
Organisation of argument summary (20%)	Lack of argument organisation evident, with insufficient demonstration of comprehension of chapter and scholarly work by not showing a clear and logical progression of argument in essay summary.	Satisfactory attempt at organisation of argument, with some topic descriptions needing further refinement and organisation to indicate a clear and logical progression in essay summary.	Organisation of argument contributes to a clear and logical progression in essay summary, but some topic descriptions are out of place or lack coherent positioning within essay summary and do not aid in similarities and differences being highlighted.	Organisation of argument contributes to a clear and logical progression in essay summary, with description order assisting in understanding topics, processes, and subjects. Some structural changes needed for improving coherence and focus on similarities and differences.	Organisation of argument is sophisticated, highlighting the relationship between various topics, subjects and processes discussed across chapter and scholarly work, and is logically ordered to provide a coherent and comprehensive summary taking into account similarities and differences.
Identification of subjects and processes (20%)	Subjects and processes involved in historical event are not considered in argument summary, indicating a lack of understanding of historical context.	Attempt has been made to identify the subjects and processes involved in historical events, but have not been successfully integrated into the argument summary.	Most subjects and processes involved in historical events have been identified, but some are missing. Those identified have been integrated into the argument summary but require further acknowledgment.	Most subjects and processes involved in historical events have been identified and have been successfully integrated into the argument summary. Some subjects and processes missing, or lacking sufficient acknowledgment.	All relevant subjects and processes are clearly identified and are appropriately situated within the argument summary, indicating a sophisticated understanding of historical context and events.
Written expression (20%)	Numerous spelling and grammatical issues present throughout essay, which negatively impact the clarity of summary and argument.	Some spelling and grammatical issues present throughout essay, with minor negative impact on the clarity of summary and argument.	Some spelling and grammatical issues present throughout essay, which have no impact on the clarity of summary and argument.	Minor or insignificant spelling and grammatical issues present throughout essay, which have no impact on the clarity of summary and argument.	Spelling, grammar and clarity are correct, showing evidence of proofreading, and any remaining errors are inconsequential.
Referencing (20%)	Little to no evidence that referencing was attempted for the chapter used or plagiarism has occurred.	Attempt at Harvard referencing has been made, with numerous inconsistencies in style and details.	Harvard referencing is generally correct with minor inconsistencies throughout, with style and details according to Harvard referencing conventions, both in-text and in the reference list.	Harvard referencing is generally correct, with consistent style and details according to Harvard referencing conventions, both in-text and in the reference list. Minor errors are still present.	Harvard referencing is correct, with consistent style and details according to Harvard referencing conventions, both in-text and in the reference list. Any remaining errors are inconsequential.

References

Hobsbawm, E 1995, The age of extremes: The short twentieth century: 1914-1991, Abacus, London.