SRAP5001 Policy Analysis
Last Modified: 15 February 2024
Assessment Brief
Summary of Information
Course and Term: SRAP5001 Policy Analysis – T1 2024
Title: Assessment 1 Individual Report
Weighting: 35 %
Assessment type: Short answer questions
Total word count: 1500 words ( +/- 10% )
Group work: No
Due date: 10 March 2024, 11:59pm
Assessment Description:
In this short written assessment task, you will analyse one case study from the ANZSOG Case Library provided on Moodle, and
use the case study to answer the questions below, on page 3 of this Assessment Brief.
You will be asked to select your case study in Week 2, as this will be the basis of your group presentation in Week 6.
How to complete the assessment:
This task is designed to demonstrate your understanding of the theoretical materials covered in Weeks 1 to 4, and to apply
these concepts and debates to a real policy area. You should think critically and analytically about the course readings and
seminar materials as you apply them to the case study.
You are not expected to conduct any further research on the case study itself. You will have enough information in the case
study materials provided to be able to answer the questions.
You must include references and a bibliography. Please use the SOSS Referencing Guide provided on Moodle.
Course Learning Outcomes addressed in this task:
• CLO1 : Apply relevant theoretical concepts to explain how policy is made
• CLO2 : Analyse the role of different actors and institutions in influencing policy in a specific policy context
• CLO4 : Communicate research findings accurately and clearly using a range of techniques (written, spoken, visual)
Submission requirements:
Electronic Submission:
What to submit: Please submit your essay as a Word document. Do not submit a PDF. Make sure you clearly indicate
which question you are answering, by including the section and question numbers, and leaving space between each
answer.
Where to submit: Submit via Turnitin, in the Assessments Hub on Moodle
Due date: Sunday 10 March 2024 11:59 PM
Please note:
• The standard UNSW penalty for late submission applies to this task – 5% per calendar day up to a cap of 5 days
(120 hours) after the deadline.
• Please familiarise yourself with the information on Academic Honesty and Plagiarism in the Course Outline.
Short Extensions:
A short extension of up to 3 days is allowed for this task. You must apply for this before the due date and time through the
Short Extension portal on the Special Consideration website, here https://specialconsideration.unsw.edu.au/
2
Acceptable use of Generative AI:
Simple editing assistance
For this assessment task, you may use standard editing and referencing software, but not generative AI. You are permitted to
use the full capabilities of the standard software to answer the question (e.g. Microsoft Office suite, spelling and grammar
checking such as Grammarly, etc.). You must not use any functions that generate, paraphrase or translate passages of text,
whether based on your own work or not.
Please note that your submission will be passed through an AI-generated text detection tool. If your marker has concerns that
your answer contains passages of AI-generated text, you may be asked to explain your work. If you are unable to satisfactorily
demonstrate your understanding of your submission you may be referred to UNSW Conduct & Integrity Office for investigation
for academic misconduct and possible penalties.
How you will receive feedback for this task:
Students will receive written feedback and a numerical grade within two weeks of submission through the Turnitin Feedback
Studio in Moodle.
Assessment Criteria:
Criteria Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor
Knowledge and
Understanding
Demonstrates
comprehensive
understanding of key
concepts, theories,
relevant literature,
and the case study.
Integrates
knowledge
effectively to
address complex
issues.
Shows a solid grasp
of key concepts,
theories, relevant
literature, and the
case study. Applies
them appropriately
to analyze policy
problems.
Demonstrates basic
understanding of key
concepts, theories,
relevant literature,
and the case study
but lacks depth or
integration. Some
inaccuracies or
omissions may be
present.
Shows limited
understanding of key
concepts, theories,
relevant literature, or
the case study. Fails
to provide adequate
analysis.
Fails to demonstrate
understanding of key
concepts, theories,
relevant literature, or
the case study.
Analysis is
significantly flawed
or absent.
Analysis Provides insightful
analysis that
demonstrates critical
thinking and
originality. Presents
coherent arguments
supported by
evidence. Identifies
implications and
evaluates alternative
perspectives.
Conducts thorough
analysis with logical
reasoning and
evidence-based
arguments. Identifies
main issues and
provides reasoned
conclusions.
Conducts basic
analysis but lacks
depth or originality.
Arguments may lack
coherence or be
inconsistently
supported by
evidence.
Analysis is
superficial or lacks
logical coherence.
Arguments may be
unsupported or
based on limited
evidence.
Analysis is absent or
severely lacking. No
coherent arguments
or evidence
provided.
Style and
Expression
Writing is clear,
concise, and
engaging. Ideas are
effectively organized
and presented in a
logical manner.
Language is precise
and appropriate for
the audience.
Writing is clear and
mostly concise.
Ideas are generally
well-organized, but
some sections may
lack coherence or
clarity. Language is
generally
appropriate.
Writing is somewhat
unclear or verbose at
times. Organization
may be weak,
hindering
understanding.
Language may be
overly simplistic or
overly complex for
the audience.
Writing is unclear or
confusing, making it
difficult to follow the
argument.
Organization is poor,
hindering
understanding.
Language is
inappropriate for the
audience.
Writing is extremely
unclear or
incoherent.
Organization is
severely lacking.
Language is
inappropriate or
unintelligible.
Referencing Accurately and
consistently cites
relevant sources
using an appropriate
citation style.
Demonstrates a
thorough
understanding of
academic integrity.
Mostly accurate and
consistent in citing
relevant sources,
with minor errors or
inconsistencies.
Generally adheres to
academic integrity
standards.
Contains some
errors or
inconsistencies in
referencing. May not
consistently follow
academic integrity
standards.
Contains significant
errors or
inconsistencies in
referencing. Does
not consistently
adhere to academic
integrity standards.
Referencing is
absent or severely
inadequate. Fails to
meet academic
integrity standards.
3
Questions
Your individual written report will consist of 3 separate, clearly marked, sections.
Section 1
First, present a brief (approx. 250 words) outline of the policy issue you have analysed in your case study.
Section 2
Next, address both of the following questions (approx. 300 words for each question):
a. Identify the actors and institutions which are most important in this policy subsystem, and explain why you think they
are close to the centre of the subsystem.
b. Does government have a role in managing or resolving this issue? If so, why?
Section 3
Finally, choose and respond to one of these questions (approx. 650 words):
a. How do you see Althaus, Bridgman and Davis’ (2013) concept of the policy cycle applying to this case study? Is this a
useful analytical tool to explain the decision-making in this case?
b. Reflecting on Colebatch’s (2009) explanation of authoritative choice, structured interaction and social construction,
discuss how using two or more of these accounts helps to better understand what is going on in this policy case
study.
c. Select two of the broad theoretical approaches outlined by Fenna (2004), and use them to explain your chosen case
study. How do the different theories help to understand what has happened in the case?
Remember, the purpose of the written work is for you to reflect on your understanding of policy theory and consider how it can
be applied to provide a deeper interpretation of the case study. The focus is on demonstrating an understanding of the theory
by being able to apply it to interpret practice.
Referencing: You should use in-text citations in this report, and provide a reference list at the end. Use the referencing style
provided in the SOSS Referencing Guide (on Moodle).