Essay 2
due 7th January 2026
7. How have media portrayals of ethnic minorities changed over time in
mainstream media? Discuss with examples.
watch lecture and make notes
do readings
50% of credit
1500 words
alphabetical order bibliogarpahy
• Pages should be formatted at 1.5 or double spaced and numbered in
sequence.
• The final section should contain a clearly marked bibliography with sources
presented in alphabetical order.
• Your bibliography should contain at least four sources that are to be
discussed and evaluated critically in your essay.
• Quotes and materials others than your own should be fully referenced using
the Harvard System of Quotations correctly throughout your writing.
• The work should be proofread and spell-checked before being submitted.
As a rule, the introduction to your essay(s) should contain the social scientific
relevance of your chosen topic, a presentation of your argument and the intended
way(s) of constructing it. Be as thorough and specific as possible in the way you
make your points in response to each question and use as many examples as
possible from the recommend reading.
The middle part of your essay should contain the argument/evidence in an organised
and logical manner - it may for instance, have six or seven paragraphs that look at
different aspects. Make sure you analyse the points you make rather than simply
reproduce materials found in the reading. You will need to place your work in its
context in a meaningful way. In addition, your answer should be theoretically
adequate and clear.
The conclusion should contain a critical and personal evaluation of both your
discussion and topic in general: you may wish here to comment on less obvious, but
nevertheless important, aspects of your subject matter and/or its future theoretical
and/or social and cultural development and relevance.
Please remember that the writing style is important: use clear and straightforward
language, and eliminate irrelevant information. The writing needs to flow clearly,
relating one paragraph to the next, and providing transitions between different
sections.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Knowledge and coverage of the material (do you have a good
understanding of all the issues? have you covered all the relevant material?
have you researched the topic in adequate depth?)
Structure and argument (is your work clearly structured? Is it analytical? Is
your argument well supported? Does it avoid unnecessary repetition?)
Critical technique (does your work show an awareness of scholars’ debate
and disagreement on a topic? does your work show an awareness of the
problems and biases of particular source materials?)
Originality (how original is your work in terms of content and structure? how
far do you express your own views?)
Style and presentation (Is the work clearly written and referenced? Does it
conform to the recommended style guidelines? Has it been checked it for
spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors?)
Mark Assessment Criteria – Level 1
86-100
(1st)
Outstanding. Very detailed knowledge and understanding of the material, concepts
and theories at this level. Logical, articulate analysis a consistent feature.
Judiciously selected evidence, drawn from relevant research. Convincing
conclusions. Very wide range of relevant literature used critically to inform
argument, balance discussion and/or inform problem-solving. Consistently
accurate and assured use of academic conventions. Can collect and interpret
appropriate data/ information and undertake research tasks with autonomy and
exceptional success.
70-85
(1st)
Excellent. Detailed knowledge and understanding of the main concepts/ theories at
this level. Very good analysis throughout. Arguments well- articulated, and
logically developed with a range of evidence. Strong conclusions. Critical
engagement with appropriate reading. Knowledge of research-informed literature
embedded in the work. Consistently accurate use of academic conventions. Can
collect and interpret appropriate data/ information and undertake research tasks
with a degree of success.
60-69
(2:1)
Good, (65-69 very good) consistent knowledge and understanding of the
material, main concepts and key theories at this level. Good analytical ability.
Arguments generally logical, coherently expressed, well organised and
supported. Sound conclusions. Knowledge of the field of literature appropriately
used to support views. Research-informed literature integrated into the work.
Good use of academic conventions. Can collect and interpret appropriate data/
information and successfully undertake straightforward research tasks with
limited external guidance.
50-59
(2:2)
Competent. Sound, routine knowledge and understanding of the material, main
concepts and key theories. Some flaws may be evident. An emerging awareness
of different stances and ability to use evidence to support a coherent argument.
Broadly valid conclusions. Knowledge of literature beyond core text(s). Literature
used accurately but descriptively. Academic skills generally sound. Can collect
and interpret appropriate data/ information and undertake straightforward
research tasks with external guidance.
40-49
(3rd)
Poor. Broadly accurate knowledge and understanding of the material. Some
elements missing and flaws evident. Sense of argument emerging though not
completely coherent. Some evidence to support views, but not always consistent.
Some relevant conclusions. Some evidence of reading, with superficial linking to
given text(s). Some academic conventions evident and largely consistent, but
with some weaknesses. Some evidence of ability to collect appropriate data/
information and undertake straightforward research tasks with external guidance.
26-39
(Fail)
Inadequate. Gaps in knowledge and superficial understanding. Some
inaccuracies. For the most part descriptive. Views/ findings sometimes illogical or
contradictory. Generalisations/ statements made with scant evidence.
Conclusions lack relevance and/or validity. Evidence of little reading appropriate
for the level of study, and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Academic conventions used weakly. Limited evidence of skills in the range identified for the
assessment at this level.
0-25
(Fail)
Very inadequate. Major gaps in knowledge and understanding. Significant
inaccuracies. Brief and irrelevant. Descriptive. Only personal views offered.
Unsubstantiated generalisations. Little or no attempt to draw conclusions. No
evidence of reading. Views are unsupported and non- authoritative. Academic
conventions largely ignored. Little or no evidence of the required skills in any of
the skills areas.
Mark Assessment Criteria – Level 1
86-100
(1st)
Outstanding. Very detailed knowledge and understanding of substantive material
and data concerning media, of concepts relevant to the study of media and
theories pertinent to the analysis of media in the context of society at Level 1.
Logical, articulate analysis of relevant media phenomenon a consistent feature.
Judiciously selected evidence on media, drawn from relevant research, and/or
novel evidence drawn from empirical engagement with media sources.
Convincing conclusions. Very wide range of relevant social scientific literature on
the media used critically to inform argument, balance discussion and/or inform
problem-solving. Consistently accurate and assured use of academic
conventions. Can collect and interpret appropriate data/information about media
and undertake media research tasks with autonomy and exceptional success.
70-85
(1st)
Excellent. Detailed knowledge and understanding of the main relevant to the study
of media and theories pertinent to the analysis of media in the context of society at
Level 1. Very good analysis of relevant media phenomenon throughout.
Arguments pertinent to media-related question well-articulated, and logically
developed with a range of evidence on media,. Strong conclusions. Critical
engagement with appropriate reading on media and society. Knowledge of
research-informed literature about relevant media topic embedded in the work.
Consistently accurate use of academic conventions. Can collect and interpret
appropriate data/information about media and undertake media research tasks
with a degree of success.
60-69
(2:1)
Good, (65-69 very good) consistent knowledge and understanding of the
material, main concepts and key theories concerning media at this level. Good
analytical ability regarding substantive media topic demonstrated. Arguments
about relevant media topic generally logical, coherently expressed, well-
organised and supported. Sound conclusions. Knowledge of the field of literature
concerning social scientific study of media appropriately used to support views.
Research-informed literature on media integrated into the work. Good use of
academic conventions. Can collect and interpret appropriate data/information
about media and successfully undertake straightforward research tasks with
limited external guidance.
50-59 Competent. Sound, routine knowledge and understanding of the material, main
concepts and key theories concerning media. Some flaws may be evident. An
24(2:2) 40-49
(3rd)
26-39
(Fail)
0-25
(Fail)
emerging awareness of different stances regarding the social scientific analysis
of data on media and ability to use evidence about media events or phenomena
to support a coherent argument. Broadly valid conclusions. Knowledge of
literature on media beyond core text(s) evidenced. Literature used accurately but
descriptively. Academic skills generally sound. Can collect and interpret
appropriate data/information on media and undertake straightforward research
tasks with external guidance.
Poor. Broadly accurate knowledge and understanding of the material on social
scientific approaches to media. Some elements missing and flaws evident. Sense
of argument about relevant media question emerging though not completely
coherent. Some evidence on media phenomena or events to support views, but
not always consistent. Some relevant conclusions. Some evidence of media-
relevant reading, with superficial linking to given text(s). Some academic
conventions evident and largely consistent, but with some weaknesses. Some
evidence of ability to collect appropriate data/information on media and undertake
straightforward research tasks with external guidance.
Inadequate. Gaps in knowledge and superficial understanding. Some
inaccuracies regarding concepts, theories and evidence as founds in social
scientific approaches to media. For the most part descriptive. Views/ findings
sometimes illogical or contradictory. Generalisations/ statements made with scant
media-related evidence. Conclusions lack relevance and/or validity. Evidence of
little reading appropriate for media topic for the level of study, and/or
indiscriminate use of sources. Academic conventions used weakly. Limited
evidence of skills in the range identified for the assessment at this level.
Very inadequate. Major gaps in knowledge and understanding. Significant
inaccuracies regarding concepts, theories and evidence as founds in social
scientific approaches to media. Brief and irrelevant. Descriptive. Only personal
views offered. Unsubstantiated generalisations. Little or no attempt to draw
conclusions. No evidence of reading. Views are unsupported and non-
authoritative. Academic conventions largely ignored. Little or no evidence of the
required skills in any of the skills areas.
checklist
all of the above
fancy vocab
against mark scheme
word count
additional reading
first para above bout formaTTING
bibliograohy alphabetical
Watch lecture on the essay - make notes
DO READINGS
essay plan
get going
check if specifics are right
submit