Annex C Assessment criteria
First Class: 80%+
Outstanding answer in all or almost all areas with substantial evidence of original and independent thought exceptional for an undergraduate. Ambitious in scope; well presented; sensitivity to the complexity of the issues and material discussed; sophisticated handling of critical issues; sources thoroughly cited. Awarded only in exceptional circumstances.
First Class: 70-79%
Excellent answer in all or most areas with evidence of independent thought. In areas where excellence is not achieved, a high degree of competence is shown. Very well constructed and original argument; sensitivity to the complexity of the issues and material discussed; a high degree of ability to engage with published scholarship and use of it to support arguments; ambitious in scope; accurately cited.
Upper Second Class: 60-69%
Very competent answer in all or most areas, or showing moderate competence in some areas but excellence in others. Work that shows good knowledge and understanding of the material studied, is analytical, well structured and relevant, and shows some evidence of independent thought. Sound grasp of critical issues; high standard of argument; less ambitious in scope than First Class; sources accurately cited.
Lower Second Class: 50-59%
Answer competent in all or most areas, or uneven answer showing strength in some areas but weakness in others. Competent knowledge or understanding of the material studied, but characterised by one or more of the following: lack of critical analysis; lack of independent thought; arguments not always well structured or relevant; some gaps in planning and use of evidence. Lacks the comprehensiveness, accuracy and/or cohesiveness expected from an Upper Second. Evidence of good understanding of the subject; awareness of critical debates but may be too descriptive or generalised; would benefit from sharper focus and more reflection; sources adequately cited.
Third Class: 40-49%
Weak answer in all or most areas, tending to be descriptive with uncritical coverage of debates and issues, but with some basic relevant information and understanding. Evidence of reading and attempt to address question or topic. Skills of planning, structuring and presentation relatively weak; barely adequate understanding of concepts, and use of reading and sources; some attempt to cite sources.
Answer showing minimal achievement in all areas, but containing some basic relevant information. Reliant on a minimal range of reading and displaying poor attention to detail. May be repetitious, consisting of a string of weak assertions/opinions which may not relate to each other. Assertions without supporting evidence; minimal reflection, poor planning and presentation; sources inadequately cited.
Inadequate answer in all areas, displaying very little knowledge or understanding. Insufficient evidence that the candidate has adequately benefited from the course under assessment. Poorly organised and confused argument; little or no evidence of analysis, planning or presentation skills; poor use of English/Spanish; sources not cited.
Inadequate answer in which there is no evidence of understanding or knowledge of the material studied; inability to construct an argument; lack of planning or presentation skills; poor use of English/Spanish; sources not cited.
Assessment criteria for coursework
Assessment criteria for coursework (other than for language courses) is assessed by the following criteria:
- Originality of ideas, aims and approach
- Relevance of the answer to the question set
- Accuracy of information
- The appropriate range of facts and ideas expressed
- Awareness of secondary literature
- Quality of analysis, argumentation, and critical evaluation
- Argumentation and understanding of literary and critical issues
- Structure and organisation of argument
- Quality of expression and presentation