Summary:
Question
The GDPR has become the gold standard in data privacy worldwide. Evaluate the impact of the GDPR on organisations and argue a case for or against its international implementation.
Details
- Word limit is 2,500 (± 10%) (includes titles and references but NOT bibliography)
- Sage Harvard referencing
- Refer to unit guide for formatting guidelines (12 point font with 1.5 line spacing)
- Late penalties apply for submissions after the deadline (see unit guide for specifics)
- You will not be able toresubmitafter the deadline
- You will not be able to see your similarity percentage
RUBRIC: ED'S ESSAY RUBRIC INTRODUCTION (10%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) ARGUMENT (15%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) 0 / 85 0 / 85 Clear, concise, well structured introduction. Uses Three elements of an introduction: Contextualising the problem; Statement of the problem; Response to the problem Combines all three elements of an introduction coherently. Provides a stepwise plan for the paper and displays a well thought out approach, indicating specific examples to be used. Combines all three elements of an introduction coherently. Provides a stepwise plan for the paper. Has all three elements of an introduction but lacks clarity and/or brevity. Is missing one of the elements of an introduction and is lacking clarity and/or brevity. Is missing two or more of the elements of an introduction. 0 / 85 Clearly stated argument progressed throughout the paper Clear and well-integrated sense of argument that flows through the entire paper. Argument directly referred to in the main body. Central argument is a clear driving force in the paper. All of the examples and arguments used directly relate to the main argument in the paper. Clear statement of argument in the introduction and conclusion, and indirectly mentioned within the main body of the paper. The argument drives the use of examples and ideas, though there is potential for improvement in the delivery and/or linkage back to the core of the paper. Some type of statement of argument in the introduction and conclusion, but reference to the argument in the main body is vague. Relates the examples used to the central argument, and there is a sense of a case being built. However, there are some instances where the links between them are unclear. Indicates that there might be some positions taken in the paper, but this is not made explicit and does not come through in the main body. Makes an attempt to build up a convincing case, but fails to adequately link the examples and ideas used to the central point of the paper's argument. Does not appear to contain any clear argument, either in the introduction/conclusion or in the main body. Does not link the example(s) used to the argument (if there is one) and there is no sense of the paper working towards making the reader understand the position of the author. EVIDENCE (10%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) ANSWERED Q (15%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) LITERATURE (15%) 0 / 85 Academic evidence and reason in support of the argument (use of examples and quotations) Integrates appropriate evidence and argument in a sophisticated manner. The support chosen is entirely in alignment with the core argument of the paper and successfully engages with alternative viewpoints. Cleverly uses appropriate examples and quotes. The examples used are interesting, engaging, and well chosen to best support the argument. Integrates appropriate evidence and argument. The support chosen is in alignment with the core argument of the paper and successfully engages with alternative viewpoints. Uses appropriate examples and quotes. The examples used are interesting, engaging, and well chosen to support the argument. Integrates evidence and supportive arguments. The support chosen is generally in alignment with the core argument of the paper and acknowledges alternative viewpoints. Uses appropriate examples and quotes, though they may not be used to best effect. The examples used are engaging and reasonably well chosen to best support the argument. Uses some appropriate evidence and argument in the paper. The support chosen is broadly in alignment with the core argument of the paper, though there may be some misinterpretation of evidence and contradictory statements. Alternative viewpoints are not particularly well addressed. Uses quotes, though they may not all be relevant or used to best effect. The examples used are chosen to support the argument, though they may not always do so effectively. Does not use appropriate evidence or argument. The support chosen is generally taken out of context or misrepresented, and opposing viewpoints are not adequately dealt with. Either does not use examples and/or quotes, or they are chosen poorly and they do not assist the argument being made (if one exists in the paper). 0 / 85 Is entirely focused on the core concerns of the question, and demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the relevant issues. Establishes a solid case that addresses almost all of the specific concerns of the question. Develops a sound case that addresses most of the concerns of the paper and stays mostly on topic. Demonstrates a case that is related to the topic, though it wanders off topic and.or addresses areas that are of little or no concern to the question at hand. Does not address the core concerns of the question, and uses examples that are poorly or not at all related. 0 / 85 Engaging the literature relevant to the topic using appropriate academic sources and displaying a depth of HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) GRAMMAR (5%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) REFERENCING (5%) HD (85) research Demonstrates a sophisticated engagement with the current literature , correctly identifying both the arguments that support the position taken, and successfully addressing concerns raised by different or opposing views. All sources are current and valid. At least one references per 100 words, diverse sources directly relevant to the topic, including refereed academic journals, books and reports. Demonstrates a solid engagement with the literature and acknowledges the concerns raised by alternative positions in the literature. Some sources are less directly relevant to the topic. One reference for every 130-100 words, diverse sources, directly relevant to the topic, including refereed academic journals, books and reports. Demonstrates a "for and against" approach to the literature, with some attempt to integrate and address the difference between these positions. Sources are in general less directly relevant to topic. One reference for every 170-130 words, diverse sources directly relevant to the topic, including refereed academic journals, books and reports. Demonstrates some support academic literature, but does not account for the different positions of authors within the ongoing debate within the discipline. Sources are generally poorly selected. One references for every 190-170 words, directly relevant to the topic, including refereed academic journals, books and reports. The paper does not demonstrate engagement with the relevant literature. Sources are of marginal quality. Less than one independant (not including text book, study guide or course readings) reference for every 200 words. 0 / 85 Clear, grammatically correct written expression Very few (if any) grammatical errors. The meaning of each sentence is always clear and easily understood. Few grammatical errors. Mostly the meaning of what is written is clear. Some grammatical errors. Generally the meaning of what is written is clear. Many grammatical errors. At times the meaning of what is written is affected by these errors. Numerous grammatical errors are present, and this affects the ability to understand the meaning of what is said. 0 / 85 referencing using required referencing system Demonstrates a sophisticated use of referencing material, arguments and factual information, including synthesis from a number of sources. Fully compliant with current D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) WRITING STYLE (5%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) STRUCTURE (10%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) Harvard/Oxford. Few (if any errors). References all of the appropriate ideas and facts within the paper, and provides some synthesis from a number of sources. Compliant with Harvard/Oxford, with some errors. Most ideas of facts are attributed, although there may be some gaps in referencing and/or reliance on direct quotation to convey conceptual information. Broadly compliant with Harvard/Oxford. Inconsistent use of page numbers and/or referencing of online documents. Some ideas or facts are attributed, and there are gaps in referencing and/or over reliance on direct quotation to convey conceptual information. Non-Harvard/Oxford used and/or many errors are present. Few (if any) referenced ideas, facts or opinions. No consistent referencing standard applied. 0 / 85 Academic writing style Clear, precise and elegant. Demonstrates a command over the paper format through the use of language that is simple and effective. Clear and precise, though occasionally the presentation of ideas may be overly complicated or overworked. Satisfactory, though use of language unclear at times and/or relies on rhetorical devices. Broadly satisfactory, but the format and style of the paper are poorly executed. This poor execution at times affects the flow of what is presented. Bears little resemblance to the expected paper format, such as the use of headings or dot points. 0 / 85 Overall structure and cohesion with clear and appropriate paragraphing Demonstrates a clear and elegant progression between the substantive points made. The supportive points and examples are grouped logically, and there are clear "signposts" that explain the links inside and between the substantive points being made. All paragraphs are appropriately structured so that they each contain a single topic and all of the related topic and all of the related ideas, which are appropriately placed and logically ordered. Displays a clear relationship between the substantive points to be made and has internal consistency, though "signposts" within or between these points are not always clear. Paragraphs are mostly appropriately structured so that each contains a topic and most of the related ideas are appropriately located and logically ordered. Generally has a clear relationship between the substantive points, though makes some structural errors in ordering the information, and/or may lack clear links between the P (50) F (0) PROOFREADING (5%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) CONCLUSION (5%) HD (85) D (75) C (65) P (50) F (0) WORD LENGTH (0%) section. Paragraphs are generally divided so that they contain a single topic. Most of the related ideas are appropriately located and ordered. Some paragraphs are fragmentary or overly long. Has a general structure and some relationship between substantive points, though this is not particularly logical, nor well presented. Paragraphs show some arrangement into related ideas, though a sense of a unifying topic is missing or unclear at times. Paragraphs tend to be fragmented or overly long. Contains no discernible structure, and lacks a delineated approach to the material presented. Paragraphs show little arrangement into related ideas and there is little sense of an unifying topic or structured flow. Paragraphs are generally fragmentary or overly long. 0 / 85 Is virtually error free. Some minor errors. May contain errors. Contains errors and inconsistencies. Contains numerous proofing errors. 0 / 85 Clear, concise, well structured conclusion Provides a well-balanced conclusion with a synthesis of key finding/arguments. Provides a direction for further research required. Points out any limitation of methodology/theory/data. Conclusions restates key findings/arguments. May provide some direction for further research required. May point to some limitations of methodology/theory/data. Conclusion relates to the topic, but lacks clarity and/or precision in