Assessment 3: Advocacy Report (35%)
Due Date: Week 9
Word count: 1800-2000 words
Imagine you are working for a non-government organisation in a front-line case work position. For several months, you and your fellow workers have had discussions about extending your practice to policy advocacy. You approach a manager who agrees to provide a 6-week full time project (out of philanthropic funds). They ask you to develop an advocacy approach for the agency that would contribute to policy change to one policy area. Your fellow workers agree to give you the task of researching and preparing a report for the agency.
Selecting a policy area that you have analysed in this subject, write a report for the imagined agency including the following.
- An overview of relevant theories of policy change that could guide your work.
- A brief scan of responsible government departments, non-government organisations, research organisations and peak bodies working in that policy area and the policy changes they are working on.
- An aspect of the policy that you think is worth changing and a justification for that change.
- A beginning plan for policy change:
- With whom in the sector would you work, what kind of campaign, actions or strategies do you think would suit your agency and this policy change?
Which groups, individuals, public officials or organisations would you target for your policy advocacy plan
The report will be between 1800-2000 words and be formatted with headings and an executive summary, and will have references to literature using APA7 style.
Literature will include all the required readings from weeks 7, 8 and 9 for your theory and, government and non- government reports and peer reviewed articles to provide evidence for your policy change.
Assessment 3: Advocacy Report (35%) Marking Criteria
| Criterion | Mark | Fail | Pass | Credit | Distinction | HD |
| Demonstrated comprehension of the rational and political processes involved in social policy design | 20 | Student does not demonstrate understanding of concepts or student plagiarises most material therefore does not demonstrate | Limited understanding Students has limited understanding of the rational and political processes involved in social policy design | Mixed comprehension of the rational and political processes involved in social policy design | Very good comprehension of the rational and political processes involved in social policy design | Excellent comprehension of the rational and political processes involved in social policy design |
| understanding | ||||||
| Demonstrate an | 20 | Student does not | Limited understanding | Mixed understanding | Very good | Excellent understanding |
| understanding of policy | demonstrate | of policy practice for | practice for community | understanding and | and application of policy | |
| practice for community | understanding of policy | community service | service work including | application of policy | practice for community | |
| service work including | practice for community | work including | analysis and advocacy | practice for | service work including | |
| analysis and advocacy | service work including | analysis and advocacy | community service | analysis and advocacy | ||
| analysis and advocacy or | work including | |||||
| plagiarises too much | analysis and advocacy | |||||
| Depth and quality of analysis | 20 | Does not demonstrate analysis skills or plagiarises too much | Limited ability. Student either stays with the text or with the theory but doesn’t link between them well | Mixed analysis skills, demonstrates some ability to move between texts | Very good ability to show connections between the policy, the literature and the learning | Excellent ability to synthesise literature, learning material and policy documents |
| materials | ||||||
| Demonstrated use of | 20 | Does not use the | Uses less than the required | Uses the required number | Very good use of the | Excellent use of the |
| literature | required number and | number and occasionally | and type but the utilisation | required number and type | required number and | |
| type or plagiarises | uses them in the argument | is mixed | of literature and can use | type of literature and is | ||
| the literature to support an | able to use literature to | |||||
| argument | support own voice. | |||||
| Writing, structure, expression, accurate APA 7 references | 20 | Incorrect APA or below expected language structure and expression | Good expression and minor errors in APA | Very good expression and minor errors in APA | Very good expression and always uses correct APA | Excellent structure expression and always correct APA |
| 100 | Converted to 35% |
