hello
i need someone to write a short essay about “‘race is a social construction”, I have attached an example.
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Short essay 1000 words
Just from $13/Page
13
Assessment Guidelines
Assessment 1: Short essay
Weighting: 30%
Length: 1000 words (excluding bibliography)
Due date: Wednesday 24 February at 1pm
Return date: Wednesday 17 March at 1pm
Description and guidelines
Your first assignment is to write a short essay titled ‘race is a social
construction’. Your answer should use this question as a starting point for
setting out some of the ways in which sociologists discuss the subject of race.
This assignment will give you the opportunity to draw on material covered on
the first few weeks of this module.
Like all essays, this will test your research skills. Your essay should include
references to books or journal articles. There is no minimum or maximum
number of texts you need to consult, but generally speaking the more, the
better. You should aim to draw on enough sources to show some of the
different approaches to the subject of race. Reference to one or two texts,
even in a very short essay, is unlikely to demonstrate this.
Remember this is a degree level essay. You should not draw on A level or
GCSE texts, and neither should you quote or reference your lectures or your
module handbook.
Carefully consult the sociology ‘red book’ for details on how to present your
essay. This guide also contains information about help you can get with your
writing skills. You will lose marks for poor referencing and presentation.
Notes:
• Essays must be submitted online via Blackboard. For details on how to
submit your essay, see page 16.
• Word count does not include the bibliography. There is a 10% leeway,
but work significantly below or above this limit will be penalized.
Assessment criteria:
In marking the first assessment, tutors will consider:
• The ability to summarise and evaluate relevant theories and concepts.
• The ability to express what is distinctive about a sociological approach
to race.
14
• The ability to draw on relevant secondary sources.
• The ability to draw on relevant examples to illustrate theories and
concepts.
• The clarity with which ideas are expressed and the ability to use good
written English.
• The use of appropriate academic conventions including references and
bibliography.
Assessment 2: Essay
Weighting: 70%
Length: 2000 words (excluding bibliography)
Due date: Wednesday 21 April at 1pm
Return date: Wednesday 12 May at 1pm
Description and guidelines
Your second assessment comprises a slightly longer essay. In this essay you
will engage with three of the key concepts you have studied on this module.
You should pick three of the following
• antiracism
• colonialism
• diaspora
• ethnicity
• ethnocentrism
• hybridity
• imperialism
• intersectionality
• Islamophobia
• nationalism
• new ethnicities
• othering
• racialization
• whiteness
Your essay should make use of your three chosen concepts in the context of
a single, coherent piece of writing. You need to choose which three concepts
interest you, and select a relevant example or examples to explain and
unpack them. Though your essay will be focused on three of these concepts,
there are connections to be made across the entire module, and where
appropriate your essay should aim to make these connections. You should
avoid dealing sequentially with one concept after another, but instead try to
explore their interrelationships by making connections between them.
The best preparation for the essay is to complete all the weekly learning
materials (including the required reading) and to attend all the live sessions.
You will also be expected to have read around the subject more widely. You
should never quote from lecture material or this module handbook. It is always
more impressive if you can draw on different examples from those covered in
class.
‘Theory’ is very important to this module, and you will be assessed on your
ability to engage clearly and accurately with theoretical ideas. These should
be illustrated and explored by drawing on relevant examples.
The Social Character of Race
anonymous marking enabled
Submission dat e :
2
6- Feb- 2019 02:02PM (UT C+0000)
Submission ID: 1012
4
894 4
File name : T HE_SOCIAL_CHARACT ER_OF_RACE.do cx (21.7 2K)
Word count : 17
3
4
Charact e r count : 97 80
1
quot at ion marks
2
3
4
5
QM
FINAL GRADE
78/0
The Social Character of Race
GRADEMARK REPORT
GENERAL COMMENTS
Instructor
T his is a f irst- class respo nse to the essay questio n.
Yo u tackle head- o n the issue o f race as a so cial
co nstructio n, and put to gether a very well structured
argument that explo res the ‘real co nsequences’ o f
racializatio n.
Altho ugh this is a very sho rt piece o f wo rk, yo u
co ver a lo t o f gro und. I really like the way yo u
discuss the maintenance o f white privilege at the
end: it wo uld have been go o d if yo u’d had space to
explo re ho w it is that racism can be rejected o n o ne
level yet repro duced o n ano ther.
Yo u write clearly, and demo nstrate a really go o d
understanding o f key so cio lo gical issues. Well do ne.
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
Comment 1
A very clear and well- written intro ducto ry statement. Great.
quotation marks
Here, and elsewhere, please use single quo tatio n marks f o r quo tes.
PAGE 3
Comment 2
Go o d. Well argued.
PAGE 4
Comment 3
Strictly speaking, all gro ups are racialized. What yo u (and yo ur so urce) are discussing here are
racialized minorities.
PAGE 5
Comment 4
Again, so me go o d, clear discussio n.
PAGE 6
Comment 5
Go o d. I like yo ur attentio n here to an active investment (by white peo ple) in the maintenance o f
their o wn racial privilege.
PAGE 7
RUBRIC: SOCIOLOGY ESSAY RUBRIC
IDEAS (20%)
/
(100)
FIRST
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
FAIL
(35)
MAT ERIAL (20%)
/
(100)
FIRST
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
FAIL
(35)
ANALYSIS (20%)
/
(100)
FIRST
75 / 10 0
7 5 / 100
Engagement with key ideas and co ncepts
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
Demo nstrates excellent critical engagement with and f o cus o n the questio n, drawing
o n relevant ideas and co ncepts.
Demo nstrates go o d critical engagement with and f o cus o n the questio n, drawing o n
relevant ideas and co ncepts.
Demo nstrates reaso nable engagement with and f o cus o n the questio n, drawing o n
so me relevant ideas and co ncepts.
Do es no t suf f iciently engage with o r f o cus o n the questio n o r draw o n relevant ideas
and co ncepts.
Insuf f icient engagement with and f o cus o n the questio n and with relevant ideas and
co ncepts.
7 5 / 100
Use o f so cio lo gical and theo retical material
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
Uses extensive range o f appro priate so cio lo gical/theo retical so urces and emplo ys
these persuasively to develo p and suppo rt the po ints made.
Uses wide range o f appro priate so cio lo gical/theo retical so urces and emplo ys these
persuasively to develo p and suppo rt the po ints made.
Uses so me appro priate so cio lo gical/theo retical so urces and emplo ys these
co mpetently to develo p and suppo rt the po ints made.
Little relevant reading and use o f appro priate so urces. Po ints made are no t
suppo rted with relevant material.
Little to no relevant reading and appro priate so urces. Po ints made are no t suppo rted
with relevant material.
7 5 / 100
Depth o f analysis and critical evaluatio n
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
Demo nstrates insightf ul, nuanced grasp o f material, with ability to identif y and
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
FAIL
(35)
ARGUMENT (10%)
/
(100)
FIRST
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
FAIL
(35)
ST RUCT URE (10%)
/
(100)
FIRST
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
critically evaluate dif f erent theo retical po sitio ns.
Demo nstrates so lid grasp o f material, with ability to identif y and critically evaluate
dif f erent theo retical po sitio ns.
Demo nstrates go o d grasp o f material, with ability to identif y and describe dif f erent
theo retical po sitio ns.
Demo nstrates so me grasp o f material, with so me ability to identif y dif f erent
theo retical po sitio ns.
Insuf f icient grasp o f material; purely descriptive writing with no relevance to academic
debates.
7 5 / 100
Clarity o f argument
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
Argument is persuasive, and presented clearly and lo gically, with appro priate evidence
pro vided.
Argument is persuasive and mo stly presented clearly and lo gically, with appro priate
evidence pro vided
Argument is weak and/o r is unclear, with appro priate evidence no t always pro vided.
Argument is no t suppo rted with suf f icient evidence and/o r is unclear.
Argument is no t discernible.
7 5 / 100
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
Structure is clear; writing demo nstrates excellent f lo w and signpo sting (e.g.
intro ductio n o utlines structure o f essay).
Structure is clear; writing demo nstrates go o d f lo w and signpo sting (e.g. intro ductio n
o utlines structure o f essay).
Structure is reaso nably clear; writing is mo stly co herent and uses so me signpo sting.
Structure is unclear and writing do es no t f lo w o r use signpo sting.
FAIL
(35)
WRIT ING (20%)
/
(100)
FIRST
(75)
2:1
(65)
2:2
(55)
3RD
(45)
FAIL
(35)
Structure is no t discernible and writing do es no t f lo w o r use signpo sting.
7 5 / 100
Writing (grammar, punctuatio n) and ref erencing
Canno t be impro ved upo n.
No o r virtually no erro rs o f grammar o r punctuatio n; sentence structure is excellent,
and ref erencing and biblio graphy are co mpletely accurate. Quo tes and paraphrased
material are well inco rpo rated into the text.
Few erro rs o f grammar o r punctuatio n; sentence structure is very go o d, and
ref erencing and biblio graphy are mo stly accurate. Quo tes and paraphrased material
are mo stly well inco rpo rated into the text.
So me erro rs o f grammar o r punctuatio n; sentence structure is so metimes inco rrect,
and ref erencing and biblio graphy are no t accurate. Quo tes and paraphrased material
are no t always well inco rpo rated into the text.
Co nsistent erro rs o f grammar o r punctuatio n, and ref erencing and biblio graphy are
no t accurate. Quo tes and paraphrased material are no t well inco rpo rated into the
text.
Co nsistent erro rs o f grammar o r punctuatio n, and ref erencing and biblio graphy are
no t accurate. If plagiarised material is in evidence, this will be repo rted to the Student
Regulatio ns T eam.
