‘ CRITERIA i, High Distinctiori(HD) Distinction (DN) …… Cte,Oit Demonstrated and Recovery d. fililk 001iliollitoimilo-oliiimit,„: … understanding ” , , kil ril • „., (( approach. mi. , ih R) 111 1 good • ‘ ‘ ,:-+,111o4111iiifi,iloolio, of … knowledge the 1.,,,-,,!,iii, ii Pass (P) Demonstrated fair knowledge and understanding of the Recovery approach Fail (NN) .:_, ____ _.._….,……. . ..: .:,. .:,.: .:.. .:. Demonstrated exceptional knowledge and understanding of the Recovery approach, with inclusion of critical analysis. Demonstrated knowledge the inclusion discussed , , 0 ‘ill „: Recovery 11 iq .1 ii of 0 IN. and clear meaningfully. 0 0 very approach, 0 ,. understanding Hi: good examples pl. ” k ,, o , ‘II -.,:.! with i:,i 1, 1, f• 1 of ., Did not demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the Recovery approach_ No evidence of clear descriptions. —sT0-7—k— __ _ :::-V4,-,-;:i–;;:i;. f4)- F :,!,’7,-;i;.77.7-4,– —1==:7—-;:.: . …,_._ t . , sio, , _ 4,0*, —–,—-p—- —— asrftts of the Recovery approach for mentalimalth care Weighting: 40% Criterion 2: Discussion of issues relating to mental health recovery Weighting: 40% Presented a comprehensive discussion of key points with critical analysis of substance in succinct and cogent manner. Integrated a variety credible literature to discussions and substantiate key points and ideas promoting meaningful mental health recovery. of in support Incorporated some relevant evidence-based504rcg ,, ..’,oiliiii- SUPPort cliScUsSioliSini relation to its application mental health care. 0,,,i. : hS in Evidence of basic descriptions of issues in relation to the Iiiiit.iiiiiir. application of the Recovery approach in promoting mental .— 1″1:’ i Very minimal or no references to appropriate literature to support discussions of relevance, and/or failed to use credible academic sources. , :: health ‘F.:”—–:-.-..,_. recovery. _ ••:••,,,—„, ..,,,,,z3t,,,…„….„-; =.- e, • …—4,– 7- —..-.11-„, • , „….„ …,…….,t,.., ……. Criterion 3: Overall presentationOf aeactemic writing and referencing , . VVeightirl 20,’8 Essay consistent key for spelling- 1 ,..011,,,, pertnent throughout, points fluency ‘ a iillivi is presented ariFcgrarnmatical ,-.114-,-; II I 1 ir academic cogently , I., j ,,i1 ref,.:iE,.c… — i 1 virtually ill, I , – ‘ . lit -1 in style,. integrated -i .g excellent free ,. , ‘ with from . “Ill logical contain – ,i.:- lilt . Essay discussions with .,.: accuracy I 11-¦,711F-,,:::::;.,==:::::.-110,4-’10,-,410#-Iop!,- is structure ,. .I I) „,, presented the id 1 substance coherently ., ! ..: of . ‘ ., that referencing, • with i helps ‘ 1 ) clear of along , , : IC 1, ViiiiiWillirmilo,.•:iilillipi3O11100*Oil Essay is written in a ,, structured manner for readability of key points. Minimal spelling and grammatical errors, and referencing application. u , •i’-,,.,„,,,, easy ip!,-1….4″ • • ‘ ,,i 4.,•-• ‘.:,,,),–..,0 !: …k_ .,:.,,17, good There is evidence provision of aimed at presenting that can be understood. Fair number grammatical .,. detracting Trom.re..0-?;H:. 4 1,,,,010,11111111,400..: Errors notect a pplicat: – :.,f some of errors in refe’e. points spelling „,..1.. the of structure …qi.E.- – •-,,….7 and k ESSBV IS incoherent — with no clear structure to provide meaning. Failed to present information in an academic style ith numerous Spelling, .srarrImatical and/or terfrinOlOgY errar5. o r cc—ect referencing style or r”’ B de nl..imerous referencing
