Peace in the Pacific: judging criteria

Australia, Japan and the United States: How did the peace process contribute to the spirit of friendship and cooperation between the three countries after World War II?

Peace in the Pacific entries are judged on the criteria outlined in the table below.

Excellent

Very good

Good

Satisfactory

Historical accuracy

30%

Great depth of factual knowledge. Proficient selection of relevant information from sources regarding: actions, events, people’s values and attitudes and the physical world.

Thorough factual knowledge. Relevant facts selected with some context and background apparent. Use of a number of relevant and accurate details.

Some factual knowledge. Information used is appropriate and relevant.

Limited, factual description: only surface knowledge. Facts reported are not always relevant.

Relevance

30%

Shows strong relevance between the question and response:

  • the bombing of Darwin and the bombing of Pearl Harbor
  • the peace process between Australia, Japan and the United States of America.

Shows some relevance concerning:

  • the bombing of Darwin and the bombing of Pearl Harbor
  • the peace process between the people of Australia and the United States of   America.

Shows basic relevance between:

  • the bombing of Darwin and the bombing of Pearl Harbor
  • the peace process between the people of Australia and the United States of   America.

Shows limited relevance between the bombing of Darwin and the bombing of Pearl Harbor; and the peace process between the people of Australia and the United States of America.

Creativity

20%

A unique and creative approach, combining historical and current knowledge to create a strong, logical and focused response.

Some unique aspects evident. Creative use of historical and current knowledge to create a sound, logical response.

Some aspects of either originality or creativity in the use of historical and current knowledge to create a sound response.

Little evidence of unique or creative elements.

Sources

10%

A range of quality primary and secondary sources used as evidence and accurately and consistently acknowledged in the bibliography.

A range of primary and secondary sources used as evidence and acknowledged in the bibliography.

A range of primary or secondary sources are acknowledged in the bibliography.

Sources are few and limited.

Presentation

10%

Strong and polished example of the chosen mode of presentation, with no errors.

Strong and polished example of the chosen mode of presentation.

Good example of the chosen mode of presentation.

Limited example of the chosen mode of presentation.

Last updated: 24 July 2019

Share:

Was this page useful?

Describe your experience

More feedback options

To provide comments or suggestions about the NT.GOV.AU website, complete our feedback form.

For all other feedback or enquiries, you must contact the relevant government agency.