Component B –
Individual written piece – 75% of the module mark
Develop your own
conservation manifesto that takes into consideration key sustainability
aspirations.
Manifesto -‘a
written statement of
the beliefs, aims,
and policies of
an organization’
(Cambridge
Dictionary)
When developing
your manifesto, you need to rigorously try and tease out some personal
responses to the conservation and sustainable issues that are of importance to
you. You also need to identify which are the most important aspects of
significance to conserve and how this should be done, citing precedent projects
that achieve or fall short of those objectives. By considering both
conservation and sustainability you are asked to navigate two current and
difficult issues the conservation of existing stock and the challenges around
climate change.
How to develop the Manifesto
The piece of work
you are asked to develop needs to explore conservation issues and ideas within
a sustainable context in an analytical way.
There are many
different types of manifesto and many ways of approaching the task. However, a
number of common features are expected from this piece of work:
–
a very clear structure and rationale
–
use of grounded existing work;
–
present your position in a systematic
and thought-out way.
–
analyse the material/information
gathered;
–
and, then draw conclusions
It
is important that your manifesto is grounded in existing work or literature in
order to provide the background and context for your own position. This will
help you identify and refine your aims / policies.
The Final Submission
Assessment for
this piece of coursework is based on the final written manifesto. The manifesto
should be a maximum of 1,500 (+/- 10%) words in length, excluding appendices
and references. Assessment criteria include the following:
1.
clarity and definition of the aims and
scope of the manifesto;
2.
breadth and/or depth, accuracy and
appropriateness of the academic content underpinning your manifesto;
3.
structure, layout, rigour and accuracy
of expression of the overall manifesto;
4.
consistency of citation and listing of
sources, in UWE Harvard format: quality of organisation, expression and
presentation
The criteria are
not strictly weighted, but each will be considered when determining the final
mark, using the framework set out on the next page.
The deadline for
your final submission is in My UWE. You must submit your work via
blackboard/myuwe. More information about online submissions procedures can be
found online on myuwe/blackboard.
Marking Grid
|
% MARK |
Aims/polices set in the manifesto |
Grounding in existing work |
Analysis of material obtained |
Conclusions and recommendations |
Organisation, style and referencing |
|
85-100 |
Very well-conceived, well defined and demanding aims |
Excellent up-to-date range of existing work carefully examined |
Consistently high standard of critical analysis; thorough |
Clear, perceptive, |
Very well organised; consistently very high standard of |
|
75-84 |
Well-conceived and well-defined aims |
Very good and up-to-date range of existing work examined |
Very thoughtful analysis in places; very good understanding of issues; some application of theory |
Soundly constructed conclusions and recommendations, solidly |
Well organised; high standard of writing; good referencing. |
|
65-74 |
Clear and coherent statement of appropriate aims |
Good range of existing work considered |
Considerable degree of analysis; good understanding of issues |
Sound and well supported conclusions and recommendations, |
Effectively organised; generally, well written; good |
|
55-64 |
Clear statement of appropriate aims |
Reasonable range of existing work considered |
Reasonable degree of analysis; reasonable understanding of |
Some reasonably well-formed conclusions and recommendations, |
Coherent structure; generally, clearly expressed; competent |
|
40-54 |
Aims are stated; not very well conceived |
Adequate range of existing work considered |
Some analysis; showing some understanding of issues |
Some conclusions and recommendations stated; but generally |
Satisfactory structure; some significant lapses of expression; |
|
35-39 |
Little attempt to specify aims |
Limited range of existing work referred to; poorly considered |
Superficial analysis; limited understanding of issues |
Little attempt to draw conclusions and recommendations; |
Poor structure; often poor standard of expression and some |
|
20-34 |
Poorly conceived, unfocused |
Very limited range of existing work; very poorly considered |
Very little analysis of material; poor grasp of issues |
Virtually no attempt to draw conclusions and recommendations |
Very poor structure; generally poor standard of expression and |
|
0- 19 |
Absence of aims |
No reference to existing work |
No sign of analysis or understanding of issues |
No attempt to draw conclusions and recommendations |
Incoherent structure and expression; Very poor referencing. |