Introduction
-Position and exceptions, if any, are clearly stated. Organization of the argument is completely and clearly outlined and implemented. 4-5 marks -Position is clearly stated. Organization of argument is clear in parts or only partially described and mostly implemented. 2-3 marks
-Position is vague. Organization of argument is missing, vague, or not consistently maintained. 0-1 marks
MAIN POINTS
Body Paragraphs Refutation
Five (5) or more main points are well developed with supporting details. A critical global perspective is clearly acknowledged and discussed consistently. 11-15 marks
Five (5) or more main points are present but may lack detail and development in one or two. A critique of corporate economic development is assumed but not clearly discussed. 8-10 marks
Five (5) or more main points, but all lack development. Understanding of the contradictions of capitalist development is weak or missing /or vague, and/or
Less than five (5) main points, with poor development of ideas.
A critical global perspective to economic development is missing or vague 1-7 marks
Research/Use of Class Readings
Readings selected are highly relevant to the argument, are presented accurately and completely. Capitalist Contradictions are accurately described and all relevant components are included; relationship between economic development and problems faced by indigenous and rural peoples are clearly articulated. 8– 10 marks
Research is relevant to the argument and is mostly accurate and complete – there are some unclear components or some minor errors in the understanding of capitalist development or implications. The understanding is relevant and accurately described, some components may not be present. 5 -7 marks
Readings/Research selected are not relevant to the argument or vague and incomplete – components are missing or inaccurate or unclear. The contradictions in global capitalist development are not clearly articulated and/or have incorrect or incomplete components. Relationship between economic development and poverty is unclear or inaccurate, major errors in the logic are present. 0-4 marks
Conclusions
-Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to the research/readings and position are clear and relevant. The underlying logic is explicit. 4-5 marks -Conclusion is clearly stated and connections to research and position are mostly clear, some aspects may not be connected or minor errors in logic are present. 2-3 marks
