Task Description: Literature Review

Word limit: 3000 words

Weighting: 60%

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Task Description: Literature Review
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

Students will complete a literature review that synthesises research on how to effectively personalise learning within a positive and inclusive learning environment. Students will consider the policy context of inclusive education, and will examine literature that explores theoretical developments, student profiling, curriculum programming, and strength-based teaching strategies.

Sections and marks per section:

  1. Introduction of the context, issue and its component parts = 16 marks

(Criteria 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

  • Examination of underlying theoretical framework(s) = 11 marks

(Criteria 6, 7, 8)

  • Examination of legislation and policy relating to the issue = 6 marks

(Criteria 9, 10)

  • Examination of the literature = 12 marks

(Criteria 11, 12, 13)

  • Conclusion and Recommendations = 8 marks

(Criteria 14, 15)

  • Academic communication = 7 marks

(Criteria 16, 17, 18)

Rubrics:

  1. Introduction of the context, issue and its component parts

Criterion 1: Description of professional context (for example: curriculum area [if applicable], environment, learning and teaching needs, etc).

3 – The examination of your professional context details the elements that are pertinent to the issue of focus and research questions.

2 – The relevant elements of the professional context are discussed in relation to the issue of focus and the research questions.

1 – A professional context is described.

0 – The professional context is not clear.

Criterion 2: Group and learner profiles.

2 – The needs and dynamics of a group of learners and individuals within the group are analysed.

1 – A group of learners and individuals within the group are described in relation to their learning and teaching needs and group dynamics.

0 – There is no description of a target group of learners and/or discussion of individual learners and their learning and teaching needs.

Criterion 3: Articulation of the issue that impacts on creating a positive and inclusive learning environment.

3 – An issue that impacts on creating a positive and inclusive learning environment is investigated in view of the context and group of students.

2 – An issue that impacts on creating a positive and inclusive learning environment is discussed and linked with the context and group of students.

1 – An issue that impacts on creating a positive and inclusive learning environment is defined.

0 – An issue that impacts on creating a positive and inclusive learning environment is either not articulated or it is unclear.

Criterion 4: Overarching research question.

4 – The overarching research question is written from an inclusive perspective and succinctly conceptualises the specific issue being researched.

3 – The overarching research question represents the issue that is being researched from an inclusive perspective and provides direction for the investigation.

2 – The overarching research question indicates the issue that is being researched and is written from an inclusive perspective.

1 – The overarching research question is relevant to the issue being researched and written from a deficit perspective.

0 – There is no overarching research question, OR the research question is not related to the issue that has been discussed.

Criterion 5: Component parts of the research question (supporting questions).

4 – Supporting questions clearly and succinctly communicate the scope and parameters of the investigation into the issue.

3 – Supporting questions provide scope for the investigation into the issue.

2 – Sub-questions expand on the ideas in the overarching question.

1 – Sub-questions relating to the overarching question are provided.

0 – There are no supporting questions, OR the sub-questions do not support the overarching question or issues being researched.

  • Examination of underlying theoretical framework(s)

Criterion 6: Articulation of the chosen theoretical framework underpinning inclusive education.

3 – A theoretical framework, that underpins inclusive education is examined.

2 – A theoretical framework that underpins inclusive education is discussed.

1 – A theoretical framework that underpins inclusive education is presented.

0 – No theoretical framework that underpins inclusive education has been discussed.

Criterion 7: Justification for using the theoretical framework.

4 – The theoretical framework that underpins inclusive education is justified in relation to the issue and the educational context.

3 – The theoretical framework is defended in relation to the issue and educational context.

2 – Discussion of the theoretical framework is linked to your issue, and the educational context.

1 – A theoretical framework is described.

0 – No theoretical framework has been discussed, or the discussion does not communicate understanding of the framework.

Criterion 8: Implications of using the framework to address the issue underpinning the research question and for learning and teaching within the educational context.

4 – Implications of using the framework to analyse the issue and educational context are critically evaluated.

3 – Implications of using the framework to analyse the issue and educational context are examined.

2 – Implications of using the framework to analyse the issue and educational context are discussed.

1 – Implications of using the framework are identified.

0 – Implications of using the framework are not discussed.

  • Examination of legislation and policy relating to the issue

Criterion 9: Policy and legislation that are pertinent to the issue.

3 – Policies/legislation that relate to the issue are critically examined.

2 – Policies/legislation that relate to the issue are discussed.

1 – Policies/legislation that relate to the issue are identified.

0 – Policies/legislation have not been identified OR the policies/legislation are not relevant to the issue.

Criterion 10: Linking legislation and policy with the literature and the theoretical framework

3 – The links between legislation/policy, research and literature, and the theoretical framework are critiqued.

2 – The links between legislation/policy, research and literature, and the theoretical framework are examined.

1 – The links between legislation/policy, research and literature, and the theoretical framework are stated.

0 – The links between legislation/policy, research and literature, and the theoretical framework are unclear.

  • Examination of the literature

Criterion 11: Critical review of the research through the theoretical framework.

4 – Research and literature that underpin the issue in inclusive education and their relevance to the professional context are critically evaluated throughout the literature review.

3 – Research and literature that underpin the issue in inclusive education are analysed and linked to the professional context.

2 – Research and literature that underpin the issue in inclusive education are used to support the discussion throughout the literature review.

1 – Research and literature that are relevant to the inclusive education issue have been referenced throughout the literature review.

0 – Research and literature have not been used to provide a clear foundation within the literature review.

Criterion 12: Critical review of empirical research, including methodology, conceptual development, and recommendations.

4 – A range of elements from empirical research have been critically appraised.

3 – A range of elements from empirical research have been examined.

2 – A range of elements from empirical research have been discussed.

1 – A range of elements from empirical research have been described.

0 – The methodology, results and conclusions in empirical research have not been discussed.

Criterion 13: Critical review of research in light of its relevance to your professional context.

4 – The critical appraisal of the research weighs the theory against practice within the professional context.

3 – Examination of the research demonstrates the relationship between theory and practice within the professional context.

2 – The discussion of the research is connected with the professional context.

1 – The discussion of the research links theory and practice.

0 – There are no clear links between the professional context and theory.

  • Conclusion and Recommendations

Criterion 14: Conclusion: How have the research questions been answered?

4 – The research questions are addressed, and conclusions are justified by synthesising and evaluating theory and its relationship to practice in the educational context.

3 – The conclusion addresses the research questions defending connections between theory and practice in the educational context.

2 – The conclusion addresses the research questions by summarising the literature and linking theory and practice.

1 – The conclusion revisits the research questions.

0 – The conclusion does not address the research questions.

Criterion 15: Recommendations for your professional context based on critique of the literature. (recommendations arise from the exploration of the research questions)

4 – The recommendations are built on a critical synthesis of theory and practice and designed to promote inclusion within the educational context.

3 – The recommendations are built on inclusive theory and promote an inclusive mindset within the educational context.

2 – The recommendations aim to promote inclusion within the educational context.

1 – The recommendations aid student learning and inclusion within the educational context.

0 – The conclusion does not make recommendations for practice OR the recommendations promote deficit mindsets.

  • Academic communication

Criterion 16: In-text referencing.

2 – The in-text referencing is formatted consistently according to Deakin referencing guidelines (APA 6 or Harvard are preferable).

1 – Ideas throughout the assessment task have been linked to theory and referenced.

0 – In-text referencing is incomplete or absent.

Criterion 17: Reference list.

2 – The reference list is formatted consistently according to Deakin referencing guidelines (APA 6 or Harvard are preferable).

1 – A reference list is included.

0 – Reference list is either incomplete or absent.

Criterion 18: Communication with intended audience and mode.

3 – The assignment is written for an academic audience (clear communication and following academic protocols are key here).

2 – Academic writing style is developing.

1 – The writing style is appropriate for a peer audience.

0 – Issues or errors with grammar, academic voice, and/or flow of the assignment obscure the meaning and readability of the assignment.

Total Raw Score: 60 marks

Grading:

HD = 80% = 48

D = 70% = 42

C = 60% = 36

P = 50% = 30

N = 0% to 49% = 0 to 20