“Put simply, reconciliation hasn’t worked in Australia because as a nation, we continue to refuse to face up to our real past.”1
Critically analyse the status of reconciliation for Australian First Nations Peoples today.
In your answer, make reference to:
- The purpose and effect of the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) and the Aborigines Protection Amending Act 1915 (NSW) on Australian First Nations Peoples;
- Access to justice experienced by First Nations Peoples today; and
- The extent to which contemporary international instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples, contributes to symbolic and practical reconciliation for First Nations People.
Style and Research Requirements:
- In your response you must use respectful language as advised in the Appropriate Terminology, Representations and Protocols of Acknowledgment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Folio (Flinders University).
- In responding to the questions above you must show evidence of an ability to plan and apply legal research strategies. You must use a minimum of 12 peer-reviewed or credible academic sources.
- Your response must be structured with an introduction, body and conclusion. You must proofread your assignment and apply written communication conventions
- You must also use the Australian Guide to Legal Citation 4th edition (“AGLC4”), reference correctly and have a bibliography.
| Essay: marking criteria & standards of performance | |||||
| Criteria | High Distinction (85-100%) | Distinction (75-84%) | Credit (65-74%) | Pass (50-64%) | Fail (0-49%) |
| Outlines the purpose of the Aborigines Protection Act 1909 (NSW) and the Aborigines Protection Amending Act 1915 (NSW) (15%) | The purpose of the legislation is outlined clearly and critically with different viewpoints synthesised into a coherent response. 12.75-15 marks | The purpose of the legislation is outlined clearly and some different viewpoints are critiqued. 11.5-12.5 marks | The purpose of the legislation is outlined and some different viewpoints are discussed. 9.75-11.25 marks | The purpose of the legislation is described in basic terms and some different viewpoints are identified. 7.5-9.5 marks | The purpose of the legislation is insufficiently outlined. 0-7 marks |
| Critical evaluation of the impact of legislation on access to justice today (15%) | Offers a concise and critical evaluation of the various impacts of historical policies and legislation on Indigenous Australians, drawing links to more recent legislative initiatives, that demonstrates a sophisiticated understanding of access to justice issues for Indigenous Australians. 12.75-15 marks | Offers a critical evaluation of the impacts of historicial policies and legislation on Indigenous Australians, demonstrating a clear understanding of the link between historical policies and contemporary access to justice issues. 11.5-12.5 marks | Discusses various impacts of historical policies and legislation on Indigenous Australians, demonstrating an understanding of the link between historical policies and contemporary access to justice issues. 9.75-11.25 marks | Identifies some impacts of legislation on Indigenous Australians, and some relevant contemporary access to justice issues are explored. 7.5-9.5 marks | No evaluation of the impacts of historical policies and legislation on contemporary access to justice issues for Indigenous Australians. 0-7 marks |
| Knowledge and analysis of international human rights law and its application to Indigenous Australians (15%) | Informed and synthesised analysis and critique of international human rights law including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (mechanisms and application). 12.75-15 marks | Comprehensive analysis of the application of international human rights law including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and its mechanisms. 11.5-12.5 marks | Detailed knowledge of international human rights law including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and its mechanisms and some attempt at application. 9.75-11.25 marks | Description of international human rights law and mechanisms is present. There is an adequate attempt at application. 7.5-9.5 marks | No international human rights law instruments or mechanisms are evaluated or discussion is inaccurate or confused. 0-7 marks |
| Critical reflection on reconciliation for Indigenous Australian people (15%) | The term “reconciliation” is defined and a specific judgment is taken that analyses the complexities of the issues, synthesises limitations and evaluates alternate points of view. Demonstrates a sophisicated understanding of alternative legal processes involved in the contemporary context of reconciliation in Australia. 12.75-15 marks | The term “reconciliation” is defined and a specific judgement is taken that recognises complexities and acknowledges other points of view. Demonstrates a thorough understanding of legal processes involved in the contemporary context of reconciliation in Australia. 11.5-12.5 marks | A specific judgement is taken that details different sides or possible interpretations of the issue. Demonstrates a broad understanding of legal process aligned with the contemporary context of reconciliation in Australia. 9.75-11.25 marks | A specific judgment is put forward and is acceptable. Demonstrates a basic understanding of legal process involved in reconciliation in Australia. 7.5-9.5 marks | A specific position or argument is not advanced, is not comprehensive, or is inaccurate or confused. Understanding of legal process is piecemeal or abstract. 0-7 marks |
| Evidence of ability to plan and apply legal research strategies (10%) | Demonstrates informed and effectively planned legal research on most relevant contemporary developments in policy and law, citing diverse credible academic sources. 8.5-10 marks | Demonstrates in-depth planning and legal research on contemporary developments in policy and law, citing a significant number of credible academic sources. 7.5-8 marks | Demonstrates good planning and legal research on contemporary developments in policy and law, citing an acceptable number of credible academic sources. 6.5-7 marks | Demonstrates a basic level of planning and legal research on contemporary developments in policy and law. 5-6 marks | Demonstrates inadequate planning and legal research on contemporary developments in policy and law, citing few credible academic sources, or citing sources that are unreliable. 0-4.5 marks |
| Be able to apply written conventions of English (10%) | Uses legal language effectively and with faultless grammar and spelling. Ideas are expressed clearly and concisely, and logically sequenced to produce a coherent, integrated, critical and creative stance that provides an insightful reflection on the field of enquiry. 8.5-10 marks | Uses clear and fluent language with accurate grammar and spelling. Written text is cohesive, uses logical sequencing (introduction, body and conclusion) to clearly and concisely express ideas, in order to create a cohesive and coherent analytical piece of work. 7.5-8 marks | Uses clear language with mostly accurate grammar and spelling. The written text generally adheres to the conventional structure of an essay (introduction, body and conclusion) to clearly express ideas and logically sequence most of them in order to create a cohesive and coherent piece of work. 6.5-7 marks | Uses understandable language, notwithstanding some grammar and/or spelling errors. The written text generally adheres to the conventional structure of an essay (introduction, body, and conclusion) mostly following English writing conventions to express ideas and sequence some of them, creating a comprehensible descriptive piece of work. 5-6 marks | Substantial lack of clarity of language, and/or multiple grammar or spelling errors. The written text uses some parts of the conventional structure of an essay (such as introduction, body or conclusion) and outlines ideas, leading to partial communication of intended meaning. 0-4.5 marks |
| Respectful and appropriate language use to refer to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (10%) | Demonstrates a fluent and comprehensive understanding and uses respectful and appropriate language without error. 8.5-10 marks | Demonstrates understanding and uses respectful and appropriate language mostly without error. 7.5-8 marks | Uses respectful and appropriate language with only minor errors. 6.5-7 marks | Uses respectful and appropriate language with repetitive minor errors. 5-6 marks | Does not use any, or only uses limited respectful and appropriate language. 0-4.5 marks |
| Referencing (10%) | Cites and references comprehensively, demonstrates academic integrity, and complies fully with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing conventions. 8.5-10 marks | Cites and references accurately and complies with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing conventions. Fewer than three minor errors or omissions which do not impact on the acknowledgment and traceability of the source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity. 7.5-8 marks | Cites and references in compliance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing. Up to eight minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining) do not impact the acknowledgment or traceability of source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity. 6.5-7 marks | Cites and references consistently, but lacking compliance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing. Frequent minor errors or omissions in style and formatting choices (e.g. italics, punctuation, underlining) do not impact the acknowledgment or traceability of source material, or the demonstration of academic integrity. 5-6 marks | Citations and references are inconsistent or do not comply with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation (version 4) system of referencing. 0-4.5 marks |
