Looking for Plagiarism-Free Answers for Your US, UK, Singapore, New Zealand, and Ireland College/University Assignments?
Talk to an Expert| Category | Assignment | Subject | Education |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | University of Strathclyde | Module Title | L8928 Inequalities and Social Policy |
| Word Count | 2500 words |
|---|
Word count: 2500 words.
Assessment 2 is a critical assessment of a policy strategy for tackling one of the module’s three exemplar inequalities, which employs an intersectionality perspective. This requires you to choose a particular policy setting that you are familiar with (either because you lived there, or worked and researched on this context before) and a selected time-period to critically assess one of the following:
-Policy responses to health inequalities
-Policy responses to place-based inequalities
-Policy responses to criminal justice inequalities
Once again, you need to demonstrate that you have a good understanding of intersectionality as an analytic concept but this time you need to show that you can use this to critically assess policy outputs/texts.
To help inform your approach to Assessment 2, here are a couple of examples of policy analyses that employ intersectionality, and show how researchers have used intersectionality to undertake policy analysis.
Fagrell Trygg, N., Gustafsson, P.E., Hurtig, AK. et al. (2022) Reducing or reproducing inequalities in health? An intersectional policy analysis of how health inequalities are represented in a Swedish bill on alcohol, drugs, tobacco and gambling. BMC Public Health 22, 1302.
Lombardo, E., & Rolandsen Agustín, L. (2016). Intersectionality in European Union policymaking: the case of gender-based violence. Politics, 36(4), 364-373.
You will be provided with guidance for Part 2 assessment in Week a and with a Q&A session in Week 11, though (by this point) you should already have begun planning (and reading) for this assessment.
Format of assignments
Assignments should use size 12+ font and line spacing that is either 1.15 or 1.5. Normal borders should be used. Referencing should use a consistent author-date format (e.g. Harvard referencing style – see: https://guides.lib.strath.ac.uk/referencing_guide/harvard
Assignments should be submitted online via the relevant MyPlace module page. You must submit your assignment with the front cover sheet as the first page as one file, which is available from MyPlace: http://classes.myplace.strath.ac.uk/
Please remember that assignments are marked anonymously so you must only put your registration number on your work.
Coursework is deemed to be late when it is submitted after the published deadline without an agreed extension, and in the absence of personal circumstances. Please see the Policy and Procedure on Late Submission of Coursework provides a detailed account of the policy and procedures for the late submission of coursework for further details. Staff will communicate any such instances to students. However, in all instances, the range and timing of penalties will be applied according to a commitment to fairness and supporting all students in their studies alongside agreed procedures. Staff will monitor the late submission of assessments in order to identify any students who may require additional support. For regular coursework, a “sliding scale” penalty system will be applied to minimise occurrences of late submission of coursework. Assignments that are submitted late, but within 24 hours of the submission deadline, or approved extended submission deadline, will be subject to a 10 point deduction on the percentage mark being applied to the original mark. For each subsequent day, or part day, that a coursework is submitted late up until seven calendar days from the deadline, a penalty of 5 percentage point deduction per day or part day will be applied to the original mark. The maximum number of percentage points that can be deducted for late submission is 40.
If you experience unexpected circumstances before the time set on the day of the deadline and it results in a delay to your submission of less than four hours, you can request that the grace period is applied to your coursework submission via the late submissions tool in MyPlace. If the reason provided is acceptable for use of the grace period, this will mean that a penalty is not applied to your mark. Requests for the grace period to be applied must be submitted within 4 hours of the published date and time and no longer – we strongly suggest that you submit your request as soon as you have submitted your coursework. To request that the grace period is applied:
1.Submit your coursework
2.In the assignment page containing information about the status of your submission and the deadline, click on the Late Submissions section to expand it
3.From the ‘Reason for grace period’ dropdown list, select the reason that best describes why you are requesting the grace period
4.Submit your request
The grace period will be automatically applied to your submission. However, if it becomes apparent that the grace period has been misused, a member of staff may revoke it and apply the appropriate late penalty.
NOTE: where the late submissions tool in MyPlace is available, it should be used.
Where a penalty is applied in MyPlace, you can view the grade awarded to your work, the late penalty deducted and the final grade received after the deduction of the penalty. You can do this by expanding the ‘late submissions’ section on the assignment page, once the grades have been released.
| Penalty for late submission | The penalty applied as a percentage |
| Performant grade | The mark you would have received if there was no penalty |
| Pass mark | The mark required to pass the assignment |
| Marks deducted | The number of marks deducted (not the percentage deducted) |
| Effective percentage point penalty | How many percentage points were deducted |
| Grade | The mark returned to you shows you your Performant Grade minus the Marks Deducted |
In the case of coursework to be submitted through MyPlace, issues with MyPlace which prevent students from submitting their coursework before the deadline will not result in late penalties. In this situation, staff will amend the deadline to allow enough time for students to successfully upload and submit their coursework after the issue has been resolved.
If you think you are unlikely to meet a coursework deadline due to medical issues or personal circumstances, please apply for an extension as early as possible.
We would strongly encourage you, when circumstances apply, to engage with the extension procedure and attempt to avoid a situation where you accrue deductions due to work being submitted late without an agreed extension.
Extensions
Before requesting an extension, students should read this section in full. The extension request requirements vary depending on the length of extension requested and the method by which the request is submitted. There is also some guidance on what might constitute grounds for an extension request to be granted. Students requesting an extension to the deadline for a piece of coursework must apply via the extensions tool in MyPlace. Further guidance about using this tool is contained under the heading ‘MyPlace Extension Request’ below. Please pay attention to the examples found under the Section 3 heading ‘Grounds for Extending the Deadline for Coursework Submission’ in the Policy and Procedure on Extensions to Coursework Submission. The policy is intended to be supportive of students, and staff will monitor students’ use of extensions in order to identify students who may require support. The policy provides examples of what might be grounds for granting an extension and what is unlikely to be grounds for the granting of an extension. The list does not try to cover every possible scenario so students should discuss with staff any circumstances that are negatively impacting their studies.
Extension requests should normally be made in advance of a coursework submission deadline. In exceptional cases, students may apply for an extension retrospectively.
Extensions of fewer than seven calendar days
Requests for an extension of less than seven calendar days do not require formal supporting evidence (e.g., a doctor’s letter). However, students are encouraged to communicate to staff any circumstances that are negatively impacting their studies as early as possible, especially where other assessments or aspects of their studies are also impacted. This can be done by submitting a Self-Certificate form on Pegasus.
Extensions of longer than seven days
There is information about the Personal Circumstances Procedure on the website.
Failure to submit evidence of medical or personal circumstances for extension requests of seven days or more could result in the extension request being rejected or revoked and/or any subsequent academic appeal being regarded as inadmissible.
Students should note that certified cases of medical and/or personal circumstances will be considered sympathetically and the rules will be applied in a caring manner. Where there are sensitivities or difficulties in obtaining evidence (for example, a death certificate), a compassionate approach will be taken. The rules are designed to be as clear as possible, to help students plan their work sensibly and ensure parity in the service provided to all students.
Grounds for Extending the Deadline for Coursework Submission
The list below does not try to cover every possible scenario but provides examples of what might be grounds for granting an extension and what is unlikely to be grounds for the granting of an extension. Students should not be discouraged from submitting a request if they do not see their situation described below.
Examples of Medical Circumstances
Medical conditions or illness, including physical and/or mental health problems that negatively impact a student’s preparation for an assessment.
Advice on Personal Circumstances
Full details on processes and procedures relating to Personal Circumstances are available here. Please read these in full so that you are clear on the kinds of information to record on Pegasus and on what happens with this information (including how Exam Boards can consider personal circumstances).
Examples of Personal Circumstances may include
Examples of Insufficient Grounds for an Extension
The following circumstances would not be acceptable grounds for granting an extension:
Instructions for the submission of an extension request via MyPlace are below.
1.Go to the MyPlace site for the class in which you wish to request an extension to the deadline of a piece of coursework
2.Click on the assignment link for the piece of coursework. This will open a page containing information about the assignment, the status of your submission and the deadline
3.Click on the Extensions section and select ‘Request Extension’
4.You will be required to fill in three parts of a form:
5.Submit your extension request
You will receive a MyPlace notice and an email to confirm that your request has been submitted. If you have downloaded the University’s Mobile App and have logged in using your DS username, you will also receive a push notification on your device.
Your request will be considered, resulting in one of the following two outcomes:
1.Your extension request will be granted – either based on the date and time you proposed or based on an alternative date and time specified by the appropriate member of staff
2.Your extension request will not be granted*
The outcome of your extension request will be communicated to you via a MyPlace notice and an email. If you have downloaded the University’s Mobile App and have logged in using your DS username, you will also receive a push notification on your device.
If you submit an extension request and decide that you no longer require it, you can cancel the request up until the point at which it is approved. After it has been approved, you cannot cancel the request but you can, of course, submit the work in time for the original deadline.
*If your extension request is not granted and you would like to access support please contact Catriona Murray (catriona.murray@strath.ac.uk) for details of central University support services, please see the ‘Support’ section below.
As with many other modules, this one has two-parts to the assessment (assignment, exam etc) and you need to ensure you achieve a mark for the module, when assessments are combined, of over 50%, the pass mark. If you don’t achieve this, it is necessary for you to pass such assessments in which you scored under 50%.
These resits, where they apply to semester one work, will be set for you to complete in semester two. Where resits apply to semester two work, they will need to be completed during the summer. Resit assessments will be marked in the normal way (i.e. they will be not be capped at the pass mark), with the mark awarded by the marker returned to the Board of Examiners. The credit-weighted average (CWA), which is used by the Board of Examiners to make any progress or award decisions, is always calculated using the mark(s) for the first attempt.
We do not normally allow more than two attempts at any assessment, although if you have special circumstances and under exceptional circumstances, a further opportunity may be allowed.
Given the large workload, doing resits alongside first assessments for other modules can be difficult, and you should aim to pass first time.
Plagiarism
All submitted work must be the student’s own. Plagiarism of other people’s writing, whether passages are ‘lifted’ directly or with slight rewording and irrespective of whether the work in question is listed in the bibliography, is wholly unacceptable and will be penalised. Particular care should be taken that internet-based sources are paraphrased in the student’s own words rather than cut and pasted and referenced appropriately. Students should seek advice from their supervisor if they are in any doubt about appropriate use of sources. Further advice can be found here. Student work is electronically checked via Turnitin plagiarism detection software, and any work found to be plagiarised will be referred to a hearing to investigate its originality. Offences, if established, is likely to attract substantial penalty. It should be stressed that the sanctions for academic dishonesty extend to all forms of submission, whether written or oral. When plagiarism or any other academic offence is detected the School, in assessing the merit of the work submitted, will take the fact of the dishonesty into account. At the very least, plagiarised material will attract a mark of zero. If it is extensive the whole submission may attract a mark of zero. If the plagiarism is serious, of a substantial, brazen or flagrant sort, the penalty may be a mark of zero for the whole class no matter how well the student performs in other parts of the class. Before making any such decision, the School will give the student an opportunity to explain themselves, or to defend the charge. A meeting will be arranged involving the class co-ordinator, Convenor of the Student Affairs Committee (or representative) and the student together with any representative. The most serious forms of academic dishonesty amount to a disciplinary offence which will be referred to the Senate Discipline Committee. The final decision is then outwith the hands of the School. On a finding that a student has been in breach of discipline, the Senate Discipline Committee might impose one or more of
(a) An admonition
(b) A reprimand
(c) A fine
(d) Disqualification from use of University facilities
(e) Deduction of marks, requirement to resubmit, or to retake class, deferment of award
(f) Suspension from attendance at the University for a stipulated period
(g) Expulsion from the University
The normal appeal process operates in relation to the decisions of the Discipline Committee. The above is based on the University Regulations, Regs. 5.4–5.6, to which reference should be made.
Students should also take care not to re-use the same work across different assignments and modules within the programme (i.e. not to duplicate their own work – sometimes referred to as self-plagiarism). This is because the university does not allow students to gain multiple credits for the same work within programmes. The plagiarism detection software the University uses will automatically identify student duplication of work across modules.
More information, including on avoiding self-plagiarism/duplication can be found on your Programme MyPlace page.
The marking criteria set out below give a guide as to the standards expected at different grade bands. Individual modules may provide supplements to this but need to take these into account to produce marking decisions are consistent, fair and transparent to both staff and students.
|
Mark (%) |
Grade |
Marks available |
Descriptor |
Characteristics |
|
≥90 |
Distinction |
100 92 |
Exceptional demonstration of the learning outcomes |
Exceptional in most or every respect, the work demonstrates all of the characteristics noted for First class in the Outstanding range below and is also well beyond the level expected of a highly competent student at their level of study, and could not be bettered for the level of study. |
|
80-89 |
Distinction |
84 |
Outstanding demonstration of the learning outcomes |
Outstanding in most respects, the work is what might be expected of a highly competent student at their level of study. The work demonstrates most of the following attributes: · A breadth of appropriate and focussed knowledge, and a deep and critical understanding of the subject matter · An outstanding standard of synthesis and evaluation, and a critical and insightful analysis · Complexity of thought, creativity, insight and/or originality · Evidence of comprehensive reading and thought of significant complexity and well beyond, but still relevant to, course/assignment materials · Outstanding use of references and exemplars, well beyond, but still relevant to, course/assignment materials · An outstanding standard of writing and communication and/or presentation, that is clearly and logically structured |
|
70-79 |
Distinction |
78 75 72 |
Excellent demonstration of the learning outcomes |
Excellent in most respects, the work is what might be expected of a very competent student at their level of study. The work demonstrates · Wide, appropriate and focussed knowledge and critical understanding of the subject matter · An excellent standard of synthesis and evaluation and/or shows critical and insightful analysis · Some complexity of thought, insight and/or originality · Evidence of comprehensive reading and thought beyond course/assignment materials · Excellent use of references and exemplars · An excellent standard of writing and communication and/or presentation, that is clearly and logically structured |
|
60-69 |
Merit |
68 65 62 |
Comprehensive demonstration of learning outcomes |
Very good or good in most respects for the level of study in displaying attainment of the learning outcomes, with marks at the higher end of this scale reflecting stronger and more consistent attainment of the learning outcomes. This work demonstrates: · A very good or good level of appropriate knowledge and critical understanding of the subject matter, with only occasional lapses in detail · Very good or good synthesis, analysis, reflection, understanding and/or critical evaluation · Evidence of reading and thought beyond course/assignment materials · Appropriate use of references and exemplars · A good standard of writing and communication and/or presentation, that is clearly and logically structured |
|
50-59 |
Merit |
58 55 52 |
Satisfactory demonstration of learning outcomes |
· The work is satisfactory for the level of study and clearly meets the requirements for demonstrating the relevant learning outcomes. Marks at the higher end of this scale reflect stronger and more consistent attainment of the learning outcomes for this standard of work. This work demonstrates: · Satisfactory knowledge and a reasonable understanding of the essential material · Weaknesses in the synthesis and/or analysis, reflection, understanding and critical evaluation of material, resulting in parts of the work being overly descriptive in nature · General accuracy with occasional mistakes and/or reduced focus on the main issue or lapses in detail · Limited evidence of reading and thought beyond course/assignment materials · A satisfactory standard of writing and communication and/or presentation, where there may be weaknesses in the clarity and/or structure of the work · Appropriate use of references and exemplars, though there may be minor flaws in the referencing technique |
|
40-49 |
Fail |
48 45 42 |
Limited demonstration of learning outcomes |
The work meets the minimum requirements for demonstrating the relevant learning outcomes. Marks at the higher end of this scale reflect stronger and more consistent attainment of the learning outcomes for this standard of work, although ultimately insufficiently at year 5 and PGT level. This work demonstrates: · Basic knowledge and understanding · A weak argument which is not logically structured or which lacks clarity or is based on unsubstantiated statements · No relevant critical analysis · Insufficient evidence of reading and thought beyond course/assignment materials -Poor organisation and/or presentation |
|
30-39 |
Fail |
38 35 32 |
Inadequate demonstration of learning outcomes |
The work fails to meet the minimum requirements for demonstrating the relevant learning outcomes for the level of study. Marks at the higher end of this scale reflect stronger and more consistent attainment of the learning outcomes within this range of marks. This work demonstrates: · An insufficient level of knowledge and understanding · A poorly structured, poorly developed, or incoherent argument, or no argument at all · An awkward writing style or poor expression of concepts · A lack of familiarity with the subject and/or assessment method · Insufficient evidence of reading and thought beyond course/assignment materials -A lack of references and exemplars |
|
20-29 |
Fail |
20 |
Weak demonstration of learning outcomes |
The work is very weak or shows a decided lack of effort. The work demonstrates · Very poor or confused knowledge and understanding, with reference to only a few key words, phrases or key ideas · No argument or one based on irrelevant and erroneous content · Irrelevant content and extensive omissions · Weaknesses of presentation and/or logic and/or evidence · Inadequate evidence of learning -Incomplete or inadequately presented references, if any |
|
1-19 |
Fail |
10 |
Minimal demonstration of the learning outcomes |
The work is extremely weak. The work demonstrates: · No knowledge or understanding of the area in question · Incomplete, muddled, and/or irrelevant material · Irrelevant or little content, extensive omissions · Weaknesses of presentation and/or logic and/or evidence · Deficient evidence of learning · Incomplete or inadequately presented references, if any |
|
0 |
Fail |
0 |
No relevant work submitted for assessment |
|
Achieve Higher Grades of L8928 Inequalities and Social Policy Assessment 2: Critical Policy Review
Order Non Plagiarized AssignmentWorking on Assessment 2: Critical Policy Review for L8928 Inequalities and Social Policy at the University of Strathclyde? Our Assignment Help UK service offers expert academic support to help you understand policy frameworks, evaluate evidence, and present clear critical arguments. We provide well-structured guidance tailored to university standards, helping students improve their academic performance with confidence. You can also access our Free List of Assignment Sample Answers PDF to gain insight into assignment requirements and academic writing techniques. Get reliable support designed to make your studies more manageable and effective.
No hidden fees · Instant response · 100% confidential
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
