Marking Criteria
Unsatisfactory Fail (32/35)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
Poor Fail (35/38)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
Third Very Weak (42/45)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
Third Weak (45/48)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
2:2 Adequate (52/55)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
2:2 Competent (55/59)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
2:1 Good (62/65)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
2:1 Very Good (65/68)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
First Excellent (72/75/78)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
First Exceptional (82/85/88)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
First Outstanding (95/100)
Largely descriptive in approach, generally sound, adequate or routine knowledge of subject, may be elements missing, limited evidence of independent thought
Unsatisfactory, lacking evidence of preparation, evaluation or reflective skills. Largely irrelevant to the essay question.
Material is largely relevant, but muddled, poorly argued, inadequate deployment of critical method, lacking focus, lacking depth of understanding, some important elements missing, a significant error, seriously deficient analytical skills
Unique, outstanding & insightful work which shows evidence of substantial scholarship & originality, & thorough awareness of the context of the essay & its content. It is difficult to see how it could be improved in any way.
Competent, reasonable understanding of the material, presentation is satisfactory with some examples & referencing used correctly. Structure & arguments are present but are relatively weak
Shows a firm grasp of most of the material, argues effectively & is able to make some evaluation of the material, uses examples appropriately
Sound & well thought out, organised, secure knowledge of subject, appropriate use of critical references, broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, well expressed, good analytical skills
Real insight, originality, logical & articulate, demonstrates a comprehensive coverage of subject matter, engagement with scholarship & research, very good analytical ability, no major flaws
Originality, a thorough comprehension of the essay's requirements, exceptional ability, insightful, fully realises learning outcomes for assessment & develops them far beyond normal expectations, evidence of critical evaluation of wider reading
Some evidence for comprehension but many basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, demonstrates almost no ability to meet the requirements of the essay, little to no evidence of reading, poorly written & structured, may be very brief
Some relevant material, few or no relevant examples, little reading, unsubstantiated remarks, naive thought, lack of awareness of the context of the answer, regurgitation of basic course material
{"name":"Marking Criteria", "url":"https://www.quiz-maker.com/QPREVIEW","txt":"Unsatisfactory Fail (32\/35), Poor Fail (35\/38)","img":"https://www.quiz-maker.com/3012/images/ogquiz.png"}