SOCY 214: Social Inequality and Contemporary Society

Assessment Task 1: Case-Based Analysis of Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination (1,000–1,200 words)

Assessment Overview

Students complete a case-based written analysis that examines how prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination operate within a real-world social context. The task assesses the ability to apply social psychological and sociological theory to lived experience, evaluate structural influences, and communicate evidence-based arguments in a clear academic style. The assessment reflects formats commonly used in undergraduate social psychology and sociology units across the UK, Australia, Canada, and the United States.

Assessment Weighting and Submission Details

• Weighting: 35% of final grade
• Length: 1,000–1,200 words (excluding references)
• Format: Written academic paper, Harvard or APA 7th referencing accepted
• Submission: Online submission via institutional LMS with originality checking enabled

Assessment Context

Prejudice and discrimination remain central learning outcomes in accredited social science programs. The task supports development of theory application, critical reasoning, and ethical awareness. The structure aligns with assessment practices used in large-enrolment sociology and social psychology modules, including applied essays, case analyses, and short research-informed papers.

Task Description

Select a contemporary case that demonstrates prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination. The case may involve education, policing, employment, healthcare, media representation, immigration, gender identity, disability, or race. A news report, policy document, court case, or documented community incident may be used as the focal example.

Your analysis must address the following components

1. Case Description
   • Describe the context and key features of the selected case.
   • Identify the groups involved and the social setting in which the issue occurred.
2. Application of Theory
   • Apply at least two relevant theories or concepts such as social identity theory, implicit bias, in-group and out-group processes, stereotyping, or structural discrimination.
   • Explain how these theories help interpret behaviour and social outcomes in the case.
3. Critical Analysis
   • Evaluate the broader social and institutional factors that contributed to the situation.
   • Discuss how power, inequality, and social norms shaped the experience of those affected.
4. Implications and Response
   • Discuss potential strategies for reducing prejudice or discrimination in similar contexts.
   • Support recommendations with research evidence.

Presentation Requirements

• Formal academic tone and clear paragraph structure required.
• Minimum of four academic sources required, including peer-reviewed journal articles.
• News sources may be used for the case only and do not replace academic sources.
• Accurate in-text citation and reference list formatting required.

Marking Criteria and Rubric

Application of Theory (30%)

• High Distinction: Theory applied accurately and insightfully with strong integration into the case.
• Distinction: Theory applied clearly with minor gaps in depth.
• Credit: Relevant theory included but connections to the case remain underdeveloped.
• Pass: Limited or descriptive use of theory.
• Fail: Theory absent or incorrectly used.

Critical Analysis (30%)

• High Distinction: Strong evaluation of social structures, power, and inequality with clear independent reasoning.
• Distinction: Clear critical discussion with some depth.
• Credit: Some analytical content but relies heavily on description.
• Pass: Minimal critical engagement.
• Fail: Largely descriptive with no critical insight.

Use of Evidence (20%)

• High Distinction: Sources used effectively and integrated into argument.
• Distinction: Relevant sources used with good connection to claims.
• Credit: Sources included but weak integration.
• Pass: Limited academic sources used.
• Fail: Little or no academic evidence.

Structure and Academic Writing (20%)

• High Distinction: Clear structure, precise expression, and accurate referencing.
• Distinction: Logical organisation with minor writing issues.
• Credit: Organisation evident but clarity uneven.
• Pass: Frequent expression or referencing problems.
• Fail: Writing and structure impede meaning.

Sample Answer Excerpt

Implicit bias research shows that discriminatory outcomes often persist even when individuals express egalitarian beliefs. Greenwald and Banaji argue that unconscious associations influence judgement in subtle but measurable ways, particularly within institutional decision-making (Greenwald and Banaji, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000070). Media portrayals that repeatedly link crime with specific ethnic groups reinforce these associations and shape public attitudes. Policy responses that address representation and accountability therefore remain central to reducing systemic harm.

References (Harvard Format, 2018–2026)

• Greenwald, A.G. and Banaji, M.R. (2017) ‘The implicit revolution: Reconceiving the relation between conscious and unconscious’, Psychological Review, 124(4), pp. 533–548. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000070
• Devine, P.G., Forscher, P.S., Austin, A.J. and Cox, W.T.L. (2018) ‘Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: A prejudice habit-breaking intervention’, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(6), pp. 1267–1278. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.06.003
• Craig, M.A. and Richeson, J.A. (2020) ‘Information about the US racial demographic shift triggers concerns about anti-White discrimination among the prospective White majority’, PLOS ONE, 15(9), e0238774. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238774
• Williams, D.R., Lawrence, J.A. and Davis, B.A. (2019) ‘Racism and health: Evidence and needed research’, Annual Review of Public Health, 40, pp. 105–125. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-043750