Essay Rubric: Assignment 2 – ALR103
Criteria
Excellent
(HD)
Very Good
(D)
Good
(C)
Minimum Standard
(P)
Below Minimum
Standard (N)
Identification
and
understanding
of public
relations
(30 points)
(24 - 30 points)
Discussion and analysis of the
organisation, issue and public
relations tactics are excellent
dem24onstrating advanced
understanding of public
relations and its role.
Target publics relevant to the
issue have been identified
with insight and clarity and
their treatment in the essay
demonstrates excellent
connection to and
understanding of problems
and/or opportunities.
(21 - 23 points)
Discussion and analysis of the
organisation, issue and public
relations tactics are very good
demonstrating understanding
of public relations and its role.
Target publics relevant to the
issue have been identified
effectively and their
treatment in the essay
demonstrates very good
connection to an
understanding of problems
and/or opportunities.
(18 - 20 points)
Discussion and analysis of the
organisation, issue and public
relations tactics are good,
mostly demonstrating
understanding of public
relations and its role.
Most relevant target publics
have been identified but their
treatment may be superficial
and/or does not always
demonstrate understanding of
problems and/or
opportunities relevant to the
issue.
(15 - 17 points)
Discussion and analysis of the
organisation, issue and public
relations tactics demonstrate
some understanding of public
relations and its role but
there are important gaps
given the organisation and
the issue.
Target publics have been
identified but are too generic
and their treatment does not
always demonstrate
understanding of problems
and/or opportunities relevant
to the issue.
(0 - 14 points)
Discussion and analysis
of the organisation and
issue does not link with
public relations
activities, or may focus
on advertising or
activities.
Overall there is
confusion over the
public relations
function.
Treatment of target
publics, problems
and/or opportunities is
superficial or incorrect.
Research and
referencing
(20 points)
(16-20 points)
Essay exceeds minimum
standard of 7prescribed
readings from topics 1-4.
Sources are used in an
advanced and sophisticated
(14-15 points)
Essay exceeds minimum
standard of 7 prescribed
readings from topics 1-4.
Sources are used in an
effective manner to explain
(12-13 points)
Essay exceeds or meets the
minimum standard of 7
prescribed readings from
topics 1-4. Sources are used to
explain and apply public
(10-11 points)
Essay meets the minimum
standard of 7 prescribed
readings from topics 1-4.
Sources are used to explain
and apply public relations
(0 - 9 points)
Use of prescribed
readings from topics 1-4
is superficial and/or
incomplete. Externals
sources may be limited,
manner to explain and apply
public relations concepts and
communications theories.
Evidence of insightful and
strong background research
on the identified
organisation, target publics
and issues: Exceeds a
minimum of 4 secondary
sources which are of a high
quality (date, source integrity
and relevance)
Excellent use of Harvard
referencing.
and apply public relations
concepts and communications
theories.
Evidence of appropriate and
perceptive background
research on the identified
organisation, target publics
and issues: Exceeds a
minimum of 4 secondary
sources which are of very
good quality (date, source
integrity and relevance)
Very good use of Harvard
referencing.
relations concepts and
communications theories.
Evidence of appropriate and
expected background research
on the identified organisation,
target publics and issues:
Meets or exceeds a minimum
of 4 secondary sources which
are of sound quality (date,
source integrity and relevance)
Harvard referencing has
generally been well-applied
but there are errors.
concepts and
communications theories.
Evidence of typical/expected
background research on the
identified organisation, target
publics and issues: Meets a
minimum of 4 secondary
sources which are of
acceptable quality (date,
source integrity and
relevance)
Harvard referencing has been
well-applied but there are
errors.
lack credibility or be
inappropriate for this
assignment.
Very little or no
background research
conducted. The essay
fails to meet a minimum
of 4 secondary sources
which are of acceptable
quality (date, source
integrity and relevance)
Harvard referencing has
not been used and/or
there are too many
errors.
Depth of
analysis
(30 points)
(24 - 30 points)
Public relations and
communication theory has
been expertly applied to
present a clear and logical
analysis of the
history/background and
factors linked to the public
relations issue and tactics
used.
Sources have been used to
provide insightful
(21 - 23 points)
Public relations and
communication theory has
been used effectively to
present a very good, logical
analysis of the
history/background and
factors linked to the public
relations issue and tactics
used.
Sources have been used very
well to identify, analyse and
(18 - 20 points)
Public relations and/or
communication theory have
been used in the analysis of
the history/background and
factors linked to the public
relations issue and tactics
used. At times the essay tends
more to description rather
than analysis.
Sources have been used to
identify, analyse and evaluate
(15 - 17 points)
Public relations and/or
communication theory have
been applied to describe the
history/background and
factors linked to the public
relations issue and tactics
used. There has been little
attempt to engage in analysis.
Sources have been used to
identify public relations
tactics. Omissions are mostly
(0 - 14 points)
Public relations has not
been critically analysed
and there are missing
tactics and
explanations.
The essay fails to
incorporate expected
public relations and
communication theory.
identification and analysis
and evaluation of the public
relations tactics
Excellent use of examples to
illustrate points made.
evaluate public relations
tactics. Omissions are minor.
The use of examples to
illustrate points made is very
good.
public relations tactics.
Omissions are mostly minor.
Mostly good use of examples
to illustrate points made but
there are some omissions.
minor. Evaluation or analysis
of tactics needs development.
Some use of examples to
illustrate points made but
there are omissions.
Little or no attempt has
been made to use
examples to illustrate
points made.
Editing,
expression,
structure and
presentation
(20 Marks)
(16-20 points)
Structure and sequence
integrates complex ideas
presented clearly and
logically. Close alignment with
essay topic.
Written expression, grammar,
spelling and punctuation are
at an exceptionally high
standard with only minor
errors.
(14-15 points)
Ideas are well structured,
presenting a logical and
cogent discussion. There is
very good alignment with the
essay topic.
Written expression, grammar,
spelling and punctuation are
consistently very good.
(12-13 points)
Essay structure is mostly
logical and aligned with the
essay topic.
There are spelling, grammar or
punctuation errors but written
expression is of a good
standard overall.
(10-11 points)
A basic essay structure is
evident but needs better
organisation to enhance
clarity and focus on essay
topic.
There are many spelling,
grammar or punctuation
errors, but written expression
meets the threshold
standard.
(0 - 9 points)
Issues with structure
hinders essay's ability to
present a logical
discussion and analysis
aligned with the essay
topic / or, assignment is
not presented as an
essay.
There are many
spelling, grammar or
punctuation errors.
Written expression
does not meet the
threshold standard and
there may be sentences
or sections which do
not make sense.
Overall Score
HD
80 or more
D
70 or more
C
60 or more
P
50 or more
N
0 or more