Social Science

Do you want a similar paper? Click here to get it from our professional writers!

1500 words assignment for Culture, Equity, and Diversity assignment with original information and following the instruction properly and professionally.

Additional information for Culture, Equity and Diversity assignment

 

Assignment – Close Reading and Response
Format: Length: 1500 words (plus or minus 10%)

Word (or similar) digital document.

Your document should be formatted with 1.5 line spacing.

Part A

 Do a close reading of one of the articles provided in which you identify which value positions are being taken by the author and by commentators within the article and justify your interpretation of the text.

 

Part B)

Write a letter to the editor of a newspaper to refute the arguments made in the first article and instead propose a position based on valuing difference and diversity. Here you should also refer to ideas of relationality and inclusivity.

 

Both your close reading and letter to the editor should draw on theories and ideas used throughout the semester and reading from the unit as well as some wider reading.

 

 

Assignment Instructions

Part A

  • Choose one of the articles provided for your close reading.
  • Read through the article and see if you can identify some of the issues being discussed. Make a list of them. What is the article arguing? What is the ‘story’ being told here? Notice the language used –what words come up often? How is language being used to convince the reader?
  • Research the issue to which this article relates, and make sure you have a clear understanding of the issues involved, the different ways that the media and others have approached the article. Find articles that represent other views on the issue. Make sure your understanding is well-grounded and factual, and that you’re making use of your analytical skills when finding other material on this.
  • In your research, identify some of the dominant themes, stories or ways of thinking about the main actors/identities in the article. Do these relate to a fixing, ignoring or excluding discourse? How do alternative narratives that you’ve found work to value difference? Make a note of all of these.
  • Return to your article. Go through the article to find evidence (actual words and sentences) of the dominant discourses and stories about people/places/events/communities that are present in the article. Highlight and colour code them (eg if the sentence is an example of heternormativity, use green. If it is an example of a paternalist fixing narrative, use orange etc).
  • Use these sentences to construct a close reading of the article, in which you identify the dominant discourses/stories and value positions that are being called upon to justify the argument. In your close reading, make an argument that the article is making use of particular value position/s. You should use quotes from the article to demonstrate how they are supporting your claim that the article is (for example) using fixing discourses, and you MUST explain why the sentence you use demonstrates this. Why is this sentence significant? What does it tell us about the values that underpin the article/argument? (It is not enough to simply say that the sentence shows the use of a fixing discourse without explaining how!).
  • Your close reading should make at least 4 points (ie 4 paras) that are well supported with evidence from the article as well as other sources from the unit and outside.

Part B

  • Write a letter to the editor of a newspaper to refute the arguments made in the first article and instead propose a position based on valuing difference and diversity. Here you should also refer to ideas of relationality and inclusivity.
  • Your response should address the precise claims and issues made within the initial argument and refute them based on a position of valuing difference.
  • Your response should reference material from the unit and also material from your wider research for part A. Think here about the use of reputable sources.
  • If applicable or relevant, your response may also outline a service provision model, vision or response to the issue that supports social justice/valuing diversity.

 

You MUST use references in both parts and these should be from theories and ideas used throughout the semester as well as some wider reading. You should use a minimum of 5 references.

739995-1

THE AUSTRALIAN Malcolm Turnbull’s strong words on border control appreciated by all Though Turnbull understandably says he has always supported his party’s tough approach to border security, he has in the past often given hints of equivocation, and was never as confident and self-assured as this week. In speeches to critical international audiences, he made clear the strength and distinctiveness of Australian policy. At President Barack Obama’s leaders’ summit on refugees, Turnbull broadcast a strong message to the world: “Australia’s approach is to be both principled and pragmatic. Our strategy addresses all parts of the problem — employing strong border protection policies, a very tough stance on people-smugglers, while tackling the causes of displacement, with a generous and compassionate resettlement program supporting refugees in our communities. “Strong borders are not just about security. They are crucial to ensuring social harmony and public support for migration domestically … Australia is a prime example. Securing our borders has increased public confidence and enabled Australia to have one of the world’s most generous humanitarian systems.” Turnbull is dead right. Despite all the sanctimonious blather that issues from European politics, virtually every European leader now wants what Canberra has done — re-establish control of borders. Turnbull said European leaders told him uncontrolled immigration posed an “existential threat” to their societies. May, the new British Prime Minister, has said her nation will never surrender control over who comes to Britain as refugees, and in what numbers. She has proposed the strongest policy emphasis should be placed on providing safe haven for people fleeing conflict, poverty or persecution in the first safe country they reach, and on making their countries safe for their return. This is difficult policy but there is no alternative. The most extraordinary statement came from Merkel, the German Chancellor. A few years ago she declared that multiculturalism had failed Germany. Then during last year’s surge of people from North Africa and the Middle East she said that everyone was welcome and somehow Germany would “just cope”. The result was a million irregular Muslim immigrants in Germany in one year, many, probably most, young men suffering no obvious handicap other than an overwhelming desire to live in Germany. As a direct result, Merkel’s party has been driven into a humiliating third place in two successive state elections, being beaten in both by Alternative for Germany, the first mainstream far-Right party to emerge in post-Nazi Germany. This week Merkel threw up her hands in semi-despair, wished she could turn back time to before her fateful statement, and acknowledged that the German state, her government, had “lost control” and that this was unsustainable. Here are a few facts. According to the UN there are more than 65 million displaced people. Australia will shortly increase its humanitarian and refugee intake to almost 19,000 a year. Say we more than doubled that to 40,000 and NewsFlash The Australian app Editorial Code of conduct Standards of Practice Subscription terms Group Subscription Terms Accessibility Privacy Policy Relevant Ads Opt-out Cookie Policy Terms of Use Help Contact Us info Photo Sales News Archive Contact Us About The Australian Advertise with us Our journalists Subscribe The Australian Plus member benefits Sign up to Newsletters Manage Your Newsletters About Us Copyright The Australian. All times AEST (GMT +10:00) Back to top LOG IN SUBSCRIBE Malcolm Turnbull’s strong words on border control appreciated by all http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan/mal… 1 of 4 31/08/2017 3:38 PM ran the program for 1000 years we would get about two-thirds of the way through the problem. As Turnbull pointed out, and as every policymaker in the world knows, resettlement is not going to be the primary solution. And if through some miracle 65 million people were resettled into rich, Western countries, this would certainly produce a pull factor that would produce another 65 million people, or double that, seeking the same outcome. Turnbull announced several measures that are good policy in themselves and make a useful contribution internationally. First, as previously foreshadowed, our annual refugee and humanitarian program will increase to 18,750 from 2018-19 and stay at that high level. Second, we will join a US-led program to resettle refugees from Central America. And third, Canberra will provide an extra $130 million to the $220m it has already allocated to help the countries that border Syria. These are all good measures in themselves and good for Australia. They could all go further but they are reasonable steps. No issue is subject to more muddled thinking, faux moralising, unintended consequences and fact-free pronouncements than irregular people movements. One of the problems is sorting out the wildly differing categories of folks. People leave their countries for many reasons. Some are persecuted because of their identity or beliefs. These are classic refugees. They can go back home if their countries become safe. Some can never return. Many flee conflict. They too can return if their countries become safe. But many leave because of what sociologists sometimes call “positive desperation”, an understandable and overwhelming desire to leave an unsatisfactory, poor country and live in a rich one. There is nothing immoral or unethical about this. But such a desire does not of itself impose on rich countries an ethical obligation to allow everyone who arrives irregularly to stay permanently. Thus the populations on Nauru and Manus Island are not, once they have been processed, detained. On Nauru they get 10-year visas, can go wherever they like, can go to any country that will have them, can go home if they like or make their lives in Nauru. Some could be resettled in Cambodia. One reason they don’t take up such options is because the activists in Australia continue to convince them that eventually they may be able to come and live permanently in Australia. Cambodia and Nauru are very difficult societies to live in. But people resettled there would not suffer political persecution. Those on Manus can, after processing, live anywhere in Papua New Guinea, another very difficult society but not one where resettled people would suffer political persecution. Thus the central responsibility, not to return people to persecution, is met. Of course, the whole question of deciding who is a genuine refugee is extremely fraught. Under the Rudd-Gillard policies, which saw 1200 people drown at sea and 50,000 irregular arrivals at a rate that kept accelerating, people would throw away their identity documents before processing and then offer well-schooled answers to the questions to establish refugee status. The system was massively rorted. Immigration Minister Peter Dutton this week foreshadowed that even with the generous provisions for defining refugee status, perhaps a third of the 30,000 left over in Australia from Labor would not qualify as refugees. Labor’s immigration spokesman Shayne Neumann says even these people should be given permanent residency in Australia. This is one of countless indications that Labor would be incapable of maintaining secure borders. The idea of a regional solution is a complete furphy. Regional co-operation in deterrence and border control can be important, but a regional solution implies more ways to come to Australia or other rich countries, and that would attract a huge, new inflow. In Inquirer last week, my colleague Paul Kelly provided a magnificent evaluation of a new study of Australian exceptionalism, by which its authors mean our distinctive national ability, except for the great reform period for 20 years from the early 1980s, to choose poor economic policy. Malcolm Turnbull’s strong words on border control appreciated by all http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan/mal… 2 of 4 31/08/2017 3:38 PM But immigration provides a reverse kind of Australian exceptionalism. From Federation onwards, governments have been able, with very few exceptions, to achieve big national goals through immigration. The White Australia policy bore the characteristic racism of its time, but it was also a dynamic social policy that was part of a determination to build a predominantly European society with a European living standard and an egalitarian ethos. After World War II, Australia’s leaders recognised the need for a much bigger population, and immigration diversified into eastern and southern Europe. This was enormously successful. In the second half of the 1960s, Harold Holt dismantled the White Australia policy. The first big influx of Asians came about as a result not of left-wing compassion but of Cold War solidarity with our anti-communist allies in South Vietnam. The first party to oppose White Australia was the anti-communist Democratic Labor Party. The other dynamic that drove Malcolm Fraser to eventually accept the Indochinese was the characteristic national desire to stop the boats, after about 2000 arrived in northern Australia. And the other factor was a desire to participate in US policy. The Indochinese are immensely successful immigrants. In 55 years we have gone from White Australia to one of the most racially diverse nations on earth. There are a million people of ethnic Chinese background and our biggest single source of immigrants in recent years has often been India. We typically run one of the biggest per capital legal immigration programs in the world. We have undergone this transformation without significant social disruption. John Howard and Tony Abbott, in two remarkable episodes of national will and agile, innovative policymaking, defeated the international people smuggling industry. Only by doing that has the continuation of exceptional Australian success been possible. Turnbull has shown himself to be the worthy heir to these historic Australian achievements. House of Reps to get extra MP GREG BROWN Under the AEC’s redistribution Victoria and the ACT gain a seat each, taking the lower house to 151, but SA loses an MP. ALP brawls over Vic candidates SAMANTHA HUTCHINSON Federal members weigh into local and federal preselection battles and put pressure on the Premier to expel a candidate. Spring to begin with a sting A record-breaking winter is finally over tomorrow but the Bureau of Meteorology’s spring outlook reveals little relief in sight. End of story? Not a chance THE MOCKER There’s a very good reason why Penny Wong wants the dual citizenship saga enveloping fellow senator Katy Gallagher to go away. A ‘rainbow Trojan horse’ RACHEL BAXENDALE Cory Bernardi voices his concerns on same-sex marriage, while Labor describes Matt Canavan’s comments as bizarre. Abbott’s history warning GREG BROWN Tony Abbott warns a government plan to teach more indigenous history must be accompanied by lessons on British history. FROM THE HOMEPAGE Malcolm Turnbull’s strong words on border control appreciated by all http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan/mal… 3 of 4 31/08/2017 3:38 PM ‘We created a crater to stop IS’ NANCY A. YOUSSEF US-led warplanes have blocked a convoy of Islamic State fighters from reaching territory the group holds in east Syria. MP targeted in massage scam BRAD NORINGTON A NSW Liberal MP says he escaped a “terrifying” attempt to blackmail him after he ordered a massage in his hotel room. A NOTE ABOUT RELEVANT ADVERTISING: We collect information about the content (including ads) you use across this site and use it to make both advertising and content more relevant to you on our network and other sites. This is also known as Online Behavioural Advertising. You can find out more about our policy and your choices, including how to opt-out here Malcolm Turnbull’s strong words on border control appreciated by all http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/greg-sheridan/mal… 4 of 4 31/08/2017 3:38 PM

739995-3

CSV2108 Close Reading Assignment 2 Marking Key

Student’s name:_______________­­­­­­__________         Tutor:__________________              Date:_________                                                                                                                                                                       Mark:________/50

 

  N/Fail C/Pass CR/Credit D/Distinction HD/High Distinction
Content of assignment          
Part A: A clear and concise argument that shows a clear understanding of the value positions/discourses used by and in the newspaper article being examined.

 

No argument or no reference to value positions; incorrect or insubstantial value position used A clear argument, understanding of the value position/s the article uses and some ability to articulate how and why the article can be understood as taking these position/s

 

A clear, argument that demonstrates a good understanding of the value position/s the article takes and the ability to articulate how and why the article can be understood to take these position/s A very tight argument that demonstrates a clear understanding of the value positon/s the article takes; very good analysis of how and why the article can be read as taking these positions. Precise and clear points made that show what narratives/ideas/themes/discourses are being used to support this value position in the article. An excellent argument that includes a deep understanding of the value position/s the article is taking and an excellent analysis that clearly and precisely argues how and why the article takes these positions, and what narratives/ideas/themes/discourses are being used to support this value position in the article.
Part A: Well-chosen examples/ rhetorical evidence (actual words and sentences) from the article are used to demonstrate which value positions the newspaper article is taking, and clear explanations of how these examples support the value position.

 

No examples from the article are used to support argument; examples used are not explained; examples used are not introduced and it is unclear why they are used, poor or inappropriate examples are used.

 

Some examples from the article are used to support the assignment’s argument and an attempt has been made to explain how they support the value position/s in the article. A few examples are be poorly chosen or explanations lacking in detail.

 

Well-chosen examples from the article are used to support the assignment’s argument, are embedded into the argument, and are accompanied by an explanation of how they support/provide evidence of the value position/s used in the article Very good examples from the article are used to support the assignment’s argument; examples are well embedded into the argument, are introduced and are accompanied by a clear and accurate explanation of how they support/provide evidence of the value position/s used in the article. Excellent examples from the article are used to support the assignment’s argument; examples are very well embedded into the argument and demonstrate a deep understanding of the discourses in play in this value position. Examples are well introduced and are accompanied by a clear and nuanced explanation of how they support/provide evidence of the value position/s used in the article.
Part A: Demonstrated understanding of the topic/issue under discussion

 

 

Knowledge of the topic is unclear, biased; assignment is clearly uninformed by reading, no understanding of the issues surrounding the article. Incorrect issue identified as central topic. Assignment demonstrates some understanding of the topic/issue. Assignment demonstrates a solid understanding of the issue/topic

 

Assignment demonstrates a very good understanding of the issue/topic Assignment demonstrates a deep and insightful understanding of the topic.
Part B: A clear argument that demonstrates how this topic/issue could be approached from a valuing position.

 

 

No argument or no reference to the valuing position; incorrect or insubstantial value position used, A clear argument that demonstrates how this topic/issue can be approached from a valuing position

 

A solid argument that demonstrates well  how this topic/issue can be approached from a valuing position

 

A very good argument that demonstrates very well  how this topic/issue can be approached from a valuing position

 

An excellent argument that demonstrates clearly and thougtfully  how this topic/issue can be approached from a valuing position

 

Part B: Clear refutation of the specific arguments put forward in the newspaper article from part A and how and why they don’t support a valuing position

 

Arguments of newspaper article examined in part A are not referenced; no evidence as to why they don’t support a valuing position Letter to the editor references arguments/discourses put forward in newspaper article and refutes them, demonstrates how and why they don’t support a valuing position Letter to the editor references specific arguments/discourses put forward in newspaper article and refutes them well, demonstrates how and why they don’t support a valuing position Letter to the editor references specific arguments/discourses put forward in newspaper article and refutes them using clear evidence, demonstrates clearly how and why they don’t support a valuing position Letter to the editor references specific arguments/discourses put forward in newspaper article and refutes them using clear evidence and understanding of discursive constructions of value positions, demonstrates thoughtfully and with evidence how and why they don’t support a valuing position
Part B: A clear articulation of what it looks like to value difference in relation to this topic/issue

 

Valuing difference is not explained; valuing difference is not explained in relation to the topic at hand Letter clearly sets out how difference can be valued in relation to this issue/topic Letter clearly sets out how difference can be valued and draws on evidence and references to do so Letter clearly sets out how difference can be valued in relation to this issue and makes use of discourses/ways of thinking to argue strongly how this valuing can take place Letter clearly sets out how difference can be valued in relation to this issue/topic and demonstrates a deep understanding of the ways that discourses/ways of thinking about this issue are constructed/shaped.
Writing skills          
Clarity of writing (syntax/

Spelling)

Difficult to follow; Syntax/spelling require work Difficult to follow at times; Syntax/spelling require some work Clearly expressed; No major errors

 

Well written; no major errors; sentences flow, paragraphs usually linked Well written; very few errors;

Sentences flow, paragraphs clearly linked

Structural writing skills Difficult to follow; no clear links between paragraphs; no paragraphing; information not organized or structured Reflection  is structured; paragraphs clearly discernable; topic sentences used; too many ideas per paragraph Reflection well structured, Paragraphs well structured; clear topic sentences used; one idea per paragraph Reflection  well structured; paragraphs clearly crafted and information flows logically Very well-structured reflection; paragraphs well-crafted and information flows logically; sequence of ideas is clear and well planned; essay a pleasure to read.
Referencing/Research          
Evidence of research into topic and additional supporting reading No research into topic or research that does not demonstrate ability to ‘sift’ for reliability Some research into topic, albeit populist and/or unbalanced Evidence of balanced research into topic including reputable/peer reviewed sources Evidence of wide and balanced reading on topic, including reputable/peer reviewed sources Evidence of very wide and very balanced reading on topic, including reputable/peer reviewed sources
In-text referencing No attempt or rarely correct Attempted; some errors Mostly correct Few errors Correct
Reference List No reference list or referencing rarely correct Attempted; some errors Mostly correct Few errors Correct

 

Do you want a similar paper? Click here to get it from our professional writers!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *