PG Assessment Criteria

PG Assessment Criteria
When grading all modes of assessment the marker will refer to the following generic criteria. More specific criteria may be provided for particular modules.

Category Mark Check List Description
High
Distinction
80 + High level of reflective learning
Advanced knowledge of subject area
Critically reflects on established literature and theory
Evidence of extensive or intensive and appropriate data
collection and analysis
Well researched, written and argued in a compelling manner
Extensive research-level references
New insights emerging from reading research or student’s
own experiences
The work demonstrates a mastery of the subject that goes
well beyond basic reading to critically explore alternative
perspectives
The argument presented is well developed, complete and
coherent, and is written in a compelling manner
Perhaps most importantly, an 80+ piece of work is
characterised by a spark of creativity, or by new ideas and
insights that emerge from the student’s reading and
experience
Distinction 70 – 79 High level of reflective learning
Excellent knowledge of subject area
Extensive and appropriate use of literature
Evidence of extensive or intensive and appropriate data
collection and analysis
Well argued
Arrives at innovative understanding
The work demonstrates excellent understanding of the
subject that has been gained through a thorough critical
analysis of themes and issues
It draws effectively on the relevant literature and concepts to
build a comprehensive and cohesive argument
Work graded at 70 and above is characterised by persuasive
reasoning backed up by appropriate illustrative examples
Merit 60 – 69 High level of reflective learning
Good knowledge of subject area
Uses a range of texts not just text books and including
refereed journals
Evidence of appropriate data collection and analysis
Logically structured and argued
Demonstrates learning from the project
The work demonstrates proficient understanding of the
subject gained from working with key sources
Major themes and debates in the extant literature are
recognised and are at least referred to if not taken up
completely throughout the project
Category Mark Check List Description
Pass 50 – 59 Achieves reflective learning
Shows understanding of most of the issues relating to the
subject
Uses texts and some journals
Evidence of appropriate data collection and analysis but
these are at the most basic level
The arguments developed in the project, the language used
and the writing style are competent but are somewhat
incomplete in places
The work demonstrates a basic competence in the subject
It draws on some relevant literature, but provides only a
limited critical analysis of this material
Examples are used, but without a critical, analytical context
The arguments presented have some gaps
Work of this grade is characterised by sufficient coverage of
the subject, but unsophisticated understanding and analysis
Marginal Fail 40 – 49 There is a credible, if poor, attempt at all components of the
project
Achieves reflective learning but does not grasp any wider
perspective of the subject
Has read some texts but not really understood the concepts
Investigation and analysis falls short of pass standard, but
could be raised to this standard if the student applies
sufficient time and effort to revise their work
The arguments developed in the project, the language used
and the writing style are not competent or incomplete
The work demonstrates only a limited degree of competence
in the subject
It has some sense of academic debate and/or rational
argument
There is a tendency towards reportage rather than any form
of interpretation
Work of this grade is characterised by just acceptable
comprehension in all elements, but the work could be
improved to achieve a pass grade if the student puts in
sufficient effort
Fail 0 – 39 Fails to achieve reflective learning
A major problem in one or more significant areas: literature,
methodology, language, etc.
Lack of sufficient reading
Fails to extend beyond concepts and readings already taught
and examined elsewhere
Poorly designed and superficial analysis
Argument is incoherent and/or inconsistent
The work demonstrates a lack of understanding of the
subject
There are significant gaps in the interpretation of literature
and relevant concepts, and the reasoning presented is
flawed, inconsistent, contradictory, or incoherent
Unacceptable work is characterised by incompleteness and
inadequate comprehension

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *