Annex C - Assessment Criteria - Postgraduate Certificate, Postgraduate Diploma, MSc degree, 50 hour and 240 hour Individual Modules
The assessment criteria for the 35 hour individual modules is given in Annex D.
| Mark descriptor | Long Answer Questions | Research Project Reports | Mark (%) | MSc, Postgraduate Diploma, Postgraduate Certificate (and 240 hour and 50 hour individual modules) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No answer |
Selection and coverage of material Nothing presented or completely incorrect information or containing nothing at all of relevance. Understanding None evident. No evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation None or extremely poor. |
Selection and coverage of material Nothing presented or completely incorrect information or containing nothing at all of relevance. Understanding None evident. Structure, clarity and presentation None or extremely poor. |
0 | Fail |
| Extremely poor answer |
Selection and coverage of material Hardly any information or in formation that is almost entirely incorrect or irrelevant. Understanding No or almost no understanding evident. No, or almost no, evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation None or very poor. |
Selection and coverage of material Hardly any information or in formation that is almost entirely incorrect or irrelevant. Understanding No or almost no understanding evident. Structure, clarity and presentation None or very poor. |
10 | Fail |
| Very poor answer |
Selection and coverage of material Very limited amount of information that is correct and relevant. Understanding If any, extremely limited evidence of understanding. No, or almost no, evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Very poor. |
Selection and coverage of material Very limited amount of information that is correct and relevant. Understanding If any, extremely limited evidence of understanding. Structure, clarity and presentation Very poor. |
20 | Fail |
| Poor answer |
Selection and coverage of material Little information that is correct and relevant. Understanding If any, very limited evidence of understanding. There may be evidence of very limited wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Poor. |
Selection and coverage of material Incomplete or inaccurate account of task with inadequate description of aims and methods of practical work and containing significant, and/or a large number of, errors. Understanding If any, very limited evidence of understanding with many unexplained observations or assertions likely. Little or no evidence of original/innovative thinking. Very limited reference to published work from authoritative sources. Structure, clarity and presentation Poor. |
30 | Fail |
| Clearly deficient answer | As for 45 but with a greater number, and/or more significant omissions/inaccuracies/errors, flaws in understanding, presentation and/or communication of information. There may be less evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. | As for 45 but with a greater number, and/or more significant omissions/inaccuracies/errors, flaws in understanding, presentation and/or communication of information. | 42 | Fail |
| Deficient answer |
Selection and coverage of material Superficial coverage of topic that is descriptive and flawed by many important omission and/or significant errors. Understanding Some evidence of understanding but not of original thought or critical analysis. Evidence of limited wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Some disorganisation in structure, lack of organisation, and deficiencies in clarity of expression. |
Selection and coverage of material Superficial coverage with incomplete record of aims and methods of practical work and flawed by errors and/or emissions. Little comment on most observations. Understanding Likely to be inaccuracies in data analysis and/or interpretation and unexplained observations or assertions. Little or no evidence of original/innovative thought. Very limited reference to published work from authoritative sources. Structure, clarity and presentation Adequate, although may not be entirely systematic. |
45 | Fail |
| Marginally deficient answer |
As for 45 but with fewer, and/or less significant, omissions/inaccuracies /errors, flaws in understanding, presentation and/or communication of information. There may be more evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. |
As for 45 but with fewer, and/or less significant, omissions/inaccuracies /errors, flaws in understanding, interpretation, presentation and/or communication of information. | 48 | Fail |
| Adequate answer |
As for 55 but with more numerous, and/or more significant omissions/inaccuracies/errors, flaws in understanding, presentation and/or communication of information. There may be less evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. |
As for 55 but with more numerous, and/or more significant omissions/inaccuracies/errors, flaws in understanding, interpretation, presentation and/or communication of information. | 52 | Pass |
| Sound answer |
Selection and coverage of material Basic coverage of main aspects of topic but with some significant omissions/in accuracies/errors. Understanding Statement supported by facts but limited evidence of critical ability or powers of argument. Evidence of sufficient wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation In general, organised and logical presentation with adequate clarity of expression. |
Selection and coverage of material Systematic account of task with adequate record of aims and methods of piratical work and no significant errors, omissions or inaccuracies. Appropriate speculation is unlikely or, if present, is likely to be unsubstantiated. Understanding Limited evidence of original/innovative thought. Sufficient reference to published work form authoritative sources. Data are largely accurate but there may be some unexplained observations or assertions. Structure, clarity and presentation Reasonably well organised and logically presented with adequate clarity of expression. |
55 | Pass |
| Very sound answer | As for 55 but with fewer, and/or less significant omission/inaccuracies/errors and more evidence of critical ability and/or powers of argument and clarity of expression. There may be more evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. | As for 55 but with fewer, and/or less significant omission/inaccuracies/errors and more evidence of critical ability and/or powers of argument and clarity of expression. | 58 | Pass |
| Quite good answer |
As for 65 but with more, and/or more significant, omissions/inaccuracies/errors and less evidence of critical ability. There may be less evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. |
As for 65 but with less evidence of critical judgement and more, or more important, omissions/inaccuracies/errors. There is likely to be less evidence of wider reading through reference to published work from authoritative sources. |
62 | Pass |
| Good answer |
Selection and coverage of material Good coverage of relevant material and clear evidence of critical judgement in selection of information. Few or no significant omissions or errors. Thorough grasp of concepts and evidence of synthesis of information and critical ability. Evidence of sufficient or some more extensive, wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Logical and organised structure with clarity of expression. |
Selection and coverage of material Systematic and accurate account of task with full record of aims and methods of practical work and no significant errors or omissions. Some spectulat5ion, where appropriate, but may not be fully supported. Understanding Thorough grasp of concepts with reasonable comment on all observations with few unexplained findings or assertions. Some evidence of original/innovative thinking. Appropriate reference to published work from authoritative sources. Data manipulated and analysed correctly. Structure, clarity and presentation Logical and well-organised account with clarity of expression. |
65 | Merit |
| Very good answer | As for 65 but with fewer, and/or less significant, omissions/inaccuracies/errors. More evidence of critical judgement likely. There may be more evidence of wider reading of an appropriate nature. |
As for 65 but with more evidence of critical judgement and fewer and/or less significant omissions/inaccuracies/errors. There is likely to be more evidence of wider reading through reference to published work from authoritative sources. |
68 | Merit |
| Extremely good answer |
Selection and coverage of material Question answered fully and accurately. Few errors and/or omissions and none of significance. Understanding Thorough grasp of concepts with evidence of powers of critical analysis, argument and original thinking. Evidence of extensive wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Logical and organised structure with clarity of expression. |
Selection and coverage of material Full and accurate account of task, aims and methods of practical work with few errors and/or omissions and none of significance. Where appropriate, sensible speculation, supported by evidence. Understanding Thorough grasp of concepts with some critical and/or comparative comment on all observations. Clear evidence of original/innovative thinking. Published work from authoritative sources used extensively and appropriately. Data manipulated and analysed correctly. Structure, clarity and presentation Very well organised. |
75 | Distinction |
| Excellent answer |
As for 75 but demonstrating an authoritative grasp of concepts with sustained powers of argument, and frequent insights. Virtually no errors or omissions and none of significance. |
As for 75 but demonstrating an authoritative grasp of concepts with sustained powers of argument, frequent insights and much evidence of original/innovative thinking. Virtually no errors or omissions and none of significance. | 85 | Distinction |
| Outstanding answer |
As for 85 but with strong evidence of independent thinking throughout and no omissions or factual errors. |
As for 85 but with strong evidence of original/innovative thinking throughout and no omissions or factual errors. Would be of publishable standard with only minor modifications. |
95 | Distinction |
| Exceptional answer |
Selection and coverage of material Exceptional depth of coverage with no identifiable errors or omissions. Understanding Exceptional powers of analysis, argument, synthesis and insight. Considerable evidence of extensive wider reading of an appropriate nature. Structure, clarity and presentation Flawless. |
Selection and coverage of material Exceptional depth of coverage with no identifiable errors or omissions. Understanding Exceptional powers of analysis, argument, synthesis and insight. Structure, clarity and presentation Flawless. Of publishable standard with only amendments in style/formatting required. |
100 | Distinction |
