Coursework for Introduction to Advanced Macroeconomics, 19-20
Complete a 2,500-word essay (50% weighting) on ONE of the following questions:
- What is Solow’s model of economic growth and why is it termed an exogenous growth model? Do you think the model can be improved by explicitly recognising a role for the accumulation of human capital as well as physical capital?
- To what extent do production externality-based models of endogenous growth constitute an advance on Solow’s exogenous growth model? In your essay ensure that you outline Solow’s model and at least one relevant endogenous growth model.
| Marking Criteria
|
|||||||||||
| Criteria | Level of Achievement Indicators | ||||||||||
| Fail | Pass | ||||||||||
| 0–19% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–79% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 1 | Research
Systematic identification and investigation of a range of academic and cultural sources where use is made of economic, business, and management journals. |
Little or no information presented | Limited amount of information presented with little or no relation to the task. | Information presented does not relate sufficiently to the task; there may be evidence of rudimentary research | Adequate information has been gathered and documented from readily available sources applying standard techniques | Information is accurate, appropriately categorised and from a range of sources | Well informed judgements made of the relative value of connected information from a wide range of sources | Extensive independent research, accuracy, familiarity with the material, and sound judgements | Extensive independent research, accuracy, familiarity with the material, and judgements are of exceptional standard | Extensive independent research and inclusion of highly advanced material which proves challenging for the marker | |
| 0–29% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–100% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 2 | Analysis
Examination and interpretation of sources |
Little or no evidence of examination of source material | Limited examination of sources and absence of analysis related to the task | Constituent elements may be incorrectly identified; analysis may be attempted but not justified; limited use of evidence | Key elements within relevant information are identified, but may lack accurate interpretation; some evidence base present | Accurate interpretation of the relationships between constituent elements; detailed analysis supported by some evidence | Accurate interpretation and evaluation of relationships between elements and concepts; thoroughly developed analysis and planning, supported by evidence | Accurate and perhaps personally based synthesis and evaluation of elements and concepts; well-articulated purposeful analysis and planning, supported by extensive evidence
|
Critical and evaluative analysis underpinned by synthesized evidence | Analytical evaluation exceeds expectations and is in some cases intellectually challenging for the marker | |
| 0–29% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–100% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 3 | Subject Knowledge
Understanding and application of subject knowledge and underlying principles |
Unable to evidence or articulate basic principles and knowledge related to the subject | Little knowledge of the subject and largely absent understanding of concepts | Limited knowledge of the subject and its development | Evidence of understanding key aspects of the subject context, in current debates and / or historical background. References to some relevant key theories and concepts | Accurate understanding of subject context. References to key theories and concepts | Accurate, extensive understanding of subject context. Evidence of appreciation of the relative significance of key theories and concepts | Contributes to the subject debate by assimilating knowledge into beginnings of developed theoretical extensions | Contribution to the subject matter through elements of synthesis and development of existing theoretical frameworks | Develops existing knowledge through original contribution to the subject | |
| 0–29% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–100% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 4 | Experimentation Problem solving, risk taking, experimentation and testing of ideas and materials in the realisation of concepts | Little or no engagement with alternative ideas and processes | Limited ability to identify problems or process alternative ideas | Unable to identify problems; does not understand the purpose of independent exploration of alternatives | Operates within familiar and well established ideas, processes, theories and concepts; some evidence of exploration | Evidence of exploration of processes, theories and concepts; may lead to potential directions for future work | Evidence of conceptual independent analysis to inform further cycles of inquiry and potential future directions | Unfamiliar conceptual territories may be explored | A variety of diverse and unfamiliar conceptual territories are explored | Unfamiliar conceptual territories are explored with confidence and impactful application | |
| 0–29% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–100% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 5 | Technical
Competence Skills to enable the evaluation and execution of ideas appropriate to the assessment; E.g. a PowerPoint presentation requires professionally made slides; or well-thought out specifications for an econometric exercise. |
Execution demonstrates poor judgement and very limited command of techniques | Only sporadic use of techniques with little appropriateness in the context of the task | Uses limited rudimentary processes and models exercising little judgement | Skills are adequate to communicate ideas; accepted models and procedures are usually applied | Skills facilitate communication of ideas; evidence of checking / testing / finishing; models and procedures are used consistently and appropriately | Skills facilitate practice and the communication of ideas; full command of models and procedures is evident | Idea and technique are unified. Discernment and judgement are evident. Technical / modelling skills may have contributed to conceptual advances | Technical modelling skills are demonstrated with ease and appropriately underpin the content | Technical modelling skills have been used in very advanced manners | |
| 0–29% | 20–29% | 30–39% | 40–49% | 50–59% | 60–69% | 70–100% | 80–89% | 90-100% | |||
| 6 | Communication and Presentation
Clarity of purpose; skills in the selected mode; awareness and adoption of appropriate conventions; awareness of the nature of the audience; work approaching expected employer standards or publication standards in academic journals |
Ineffective use of visual / oral / written communication conventions in the production and presentation of ideas |
Large absence of use of conventions and no application of appropriate standards | Partial lack of awareness and observance of conventions and standards; lack of clarity in structure selection and organisation of information; lack of awareness of audience | Conventions and standards are applied; structure is clear; information selection and organisation shows awareness of audience requirements and preferences | Communication media have been selected / used with good judgement; standards and conventions of use have been fully adhered to; decisions show awareness of the audience and the context | The nature and strengths of appropriate communication modes have been exploited; information has been selected, organised and presented showing awareness of audience and context | Message and medium are unified with personal style; the communication is persuasive and compelling; it takes full account of the relevant audience and context | Communication is convincing and supportive of the content; audience is fully understood and addressed | Communication underpins the analysis in coherent and creative ways; content and delivery are unified |
