ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUALITATIVE-BASED WORK 3 Classification % Range Content Knowledge and Understanding/Application of Theory Evidence of Reading Referencing and Bibliography Presentation, Grammar and Spelling I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Excellent description and discussion of main issues and material with evidence of evaluation Detailed knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading appropriate supplementary sources Accurate referencing and bibliography Excellent presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Detailed description of main issues and material with some discussion Knowledge and understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading some supplementary sources Appropriate referencing and bibliography Good presentation competently structured, correct grammar and spelling II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Accurate description of main issues and material only Adequate knowledge of key principles and concepts Evidence of directed reading only Adequate referencing and bibliography Reasonable presentation, competently structured and acceptable grammar and spelling II (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Description of main issues and material only Elementary knowledge of key principles and concepts Limited evidence of directed reading Limited referencing Adequate presentation and structure, acceptable grammar and spelling III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Limited description of main issues and material only Limited and/or inconsistent knowledge of key principles and concepts Evidence of minimal reading only Limited referencing Weak presentation and structure, grammar and spelling Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Omission of some relevant material Little evidence of knowledge of key principles and concepts Little or no evidence of reading Little or no referencing Poor presentation, grammar and spelling Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Insufficient and largely irrelevant material No evidence of knowledge of key principles and concepts No evidence of reading No referencing Unacceptable presentation, grammar and spelling, very poor structure
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUALITATIVE-BASED WORK 4 Classification % Range Content Application of Theory Knowledge and Understanding Evidence of Reading Referencing and Bibliography Presentation, Grammar and Spelling I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Excellent description and discussion of main issues and material with evidence of critical evaluation Evidence of detailed, relevant application of theory, where applicable Excellent knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading a wide of appropriate supplementary sources Excellent referencing and bibliography Excellent presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Detailed description of main issues and material with evidence of evaluation Evidence of relevant application of theory, where applicable Knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading appropriate supplementary sources Accurate referencing and bibliography Good presentation logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Description of main issues and material with occasional evidence of discussion Occasional relevant application of theory Knowledge and sound understanding of the key principles and concepts Evidence of directed reading and some supplementary sources Appropriate referencing and bibliography Orderly presentation, competently structured and acceptable grammar and spelling II (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Description of main issues and material only Limited evidence of relevant application of theory Basic knowledge of the key principles and concepts only Evidence of directed reading Adequate referencing and bibliography Adequate presentation and structure, acceptable grammar and spelling III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Limited description of main issues and material only Very limited evidence of relevant application of theory Adequate knowledge of key principles and concepts only Limited evidence of reading Limited referencing and bibliography Weak presentation and structure, acceptable grammar and spelling Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Omission of some relevant material Little or no evidence of relevant application of theory Limited and or inconsistent knowledge and understanding of key principles and concepts Evidence of minimal reading only Inadequate referencing and bibliography Poor presentation, structure, grammar and spelling Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Insufficient and largely irrelevant material No evidence of relevant application of theory Little or no evidence of knowledge and understanding of the key principles and concepts Little or no evidence of reading Little or no referencing and bibliography Unacceptable presentation, grammar and structure ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUALITATIVE-BASED WORK
Level 5 Classification % Range Content Application of Theory Knowledge and Understanding Evidence of Reading Referencing and Bibliography Presentation, Grammar and Spelling I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Extensive critical evaluation and synthesis of issues and material which includes original and reflective thinking Evidence of detailed, relevant application of theory, and/or empirical results, where applicable Excellent knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading a wide range of supplementary sources Excellent referencing and bibliography Exceptional presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Some critical evaluation and synthesis of issues and material which includes some originality Clear evidence of relevant application of theory and/or empirical results, where applicable Comprehensive knowledge and of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading a range of supplementary sources Comprehensive referencing and bibliography Excellent, well directed presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Evaluation and synthesis of main issues and material Appropriate application of theory and/or empirical results, where applicable Knowledge and sound understanding of principles and concepts Adequate evidence of reading supplementary sources Appropriate referencing and bibliography Good presentation logically structured, correct grammar and spelling II (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Accurate description of main issues and material with some evaluation Occasional relevant application of theory and/or empirical results Knowledge and understanding of key principles and concepts only Evidence of directed reading and some supplementary sources Adequate referencing and bibliography Orderly presentation, competently structured and acceptable grammar and spelling III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Description of main issues and material only Limited evidence of relevant application of theory and/or empirical results knowledge and understanding of key principles and concepts only Evidence of directed reading only Limited referencing and bibliography Weak presentation and structure, acceptable grammar and spelling Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Omission of some relevant material Very limited evidence of application of theory and/or empirical results Limited and/or superficial knowledge and understanding of key principles and concepts Evidence of minimal reading only Inadequate referencing and bibliography Poor presentation, structure, grammar and spelling Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Insufficient and largely irrelevant material No evidence of application of theory and/or empirical results Little or no knowledge and understanding of key principles and concepts Little or no evidence of reading Little or no referencing and bibliography Unacceptable presentation, structure, grammar and spelling
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUALITATIVE-BASED WORK Level 6 Classification % Content Application of Theory Knowledge and Understanding Evidence of Reading Referencing and Bibliography Presentation, Grammar and Spelling I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Critical insightful evaluation and synthesis of issues and material which includes an original and reflective approach Extensive evidence of relevant and perceptive application of theory, and/or empirical results, where applicable Exceptional knowledge and in-depth understanding of principles and concepts Extensive evidence of integrating appropriate supplementary sources Outstanding referencing and bibliography Outstanding, presentation, logically and coherently structured, correct grammar and spelling I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Critical evaluation and synthesis of issues and material which includes original and reflective thinking Clear evidence of relevant application of theory, and/or empirical results, where applicable Excellent knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of extensive reading of supplementary sources Excellent referencing and bibliography Excellent, presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and spelling II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Critical evaluation and synthesis of issues and material Evidence of relevant application of theory and/or empirical results, where applicable Comprehensive knowledge and depth of understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading a range of supplementary sources Comprehensive referencing and bibliography Good quality presentation, well structured, using correct grammar and spelling II (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Accurate description of main issues and material, with some critical evaluation Occasional relevant application of theory, and/or empirical results applicable Appropriate knowledge and understanding of principles and concepts Evidence of reading directed reading and some supplementary sources Adequate referencing and bibliography Orderly presentation and structure with acceptable grammar and spelling III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Limited evaluation and description of main issues and material Limited evidence of relevant application of theory and/or empirical results Basic knowledge of key principles and concepts only Evidence of basic reading only Limited referencing and bibliography Acceptable presentation and structure, grammar and spelling Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Omission of some relevant material No evidence of relevant application of theory and/or empirical results Limited and/or superficial knowledge of key principles and concepts Minimal evidence of reading Inadequate referencing and bibliography Poor presentation and structure, grammar and spelling Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Insufficient and largely irrelevant material No evidence of application of theory and/or empirical results Insufficient evidence of key principles and concepts Little or no evidence of reading Little or no referencing and bibliography Inadequate presentation, structure, grammar and spelling
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – WORK Level 7 Classification % Range Content Application of Theory Knowledge and Understanding Evidence of Reading Referencing and Bibliography Presentation, Grammar and Spelling Distinction 70 – 100 Critical insightful evaluation and synthesis of complex high of originality and reflection. Demonstrates the ability to pursue research at Doctoral level Extensive evidence of advanced applications and/or empirical results, applicable, informed extensively by current research and practice in the area Exceptional knowledge and conceptual understanding of complex and/or specialised principles and concepts and the development and advancement of ideas and practice Extensive evidence of integrating supplementary sources Outstanding referencing and bibliography Outstanding, well-directed presentation, logically and coherently structured, using correct grammar, spelling and citation Commendation 60 – 69 Critical evaluation and synthesis of complex issues and material includes an original and reflective approach evidence of relevant applications and/or empirical results, where applicable, informed by current research and practice in the area Wide knowledge and depth of understanding of complex and/or specialised principles and concepts and the development of ideas and practice Evidence of extensive reading of supplementary sources Comprehensive referencing and bibliography Excellent presentation, logically structured, using correct grammar and citation Pass 50 – 59 Some critical evaluation and synthesis of key issues and material Evidence of relevant applications and/or empirical results, where applicable with some links to current research in the area Appropriate knowledge and depth of understanding of key principles and concepts with some understanding of their development in practice Evidence of reading supplementary sources Adequate referencing and bibliography Orderly presentation, clear structure and acceptable grammar and spelling Fail (marginal) 45 – 49 Some evaluation and synthesis of issues and material Occasional relevant applications and/or empirical results, where applicable Basic knowledge and depth of understanding of key principles and concepts only Limited evidence of reading Limited referencing and bibliography Adequate presentation and structure, grammar, spelling and citation Fail 31 – 44 Limited evaluation and synthesis of issues and material Limited applications and/or empirical results, where applicable Limited and/or superficial knowledge of key principles and concepts Minimal evidence of reading Inadequate referencing and bibliography Poor presentation and structure, grammar, spelling and citation Fail 0 – 30 Little or no evaluation and synthesis of issues and material Little or no evidence of relevant application and/or empirical results Virtually devoid of any evidence of knowledge and understanding Little or no evidence of reading Inadequate referencing and bibliography Inadequate presentation, structure, grammar, spelling and citation
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUANTITATIVE-BASED WORK Level 5 Classification % Range Knowledge and Understanding Problem Solving Calculations Analysis and Interpretation Presentation of Work I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Comprehensive knowledge and clear understanding of major and complex theories, principles and concepts Competent in both the identification and modelling of more complex problems Applies appropriate techniques, and demonstrates innovation and creativity in formulating substantially correct solutions Clear evidence of analysis and interpretation of new or abstract data and in conclusions derived Excellent, well directed presentation, logically structured I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Substantial knowledge and clear understanding of major theories, principles and concepts Able to identify more complex problems and competent in the modelling of standard problems Clear demonstration of the steps taken, few errors in calculations, using recognised methods to formulate solutions Evidence of analysis and interpretation of new and seen data in conclusions derived Well directed presentation, logically structured II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Evidence of knowledge and understanding of a range of theories, principles and concepts Competent in the use of appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Able to demonstrate the taken, errors in calculations, not always using recognised methods to formulate solution Reasonable evidence of analysis and interpretation in evaluating outcomes and deriving conclusions Clearly presented, logically structured I (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts evident Able to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Errors in steps taken in calculations, recognised methods not used or used incorrectly Some evidence of analytical and interpretative skills in evaluating outcomes and deriving conclusions Neat presentation and structure III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts limited or inconsistent Limited ability to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Steps taken in calculations are incomplete or largely incorrect, recognised methods not used or used incorrectly Very limited use or incorrect use of analytical and interpretative skills Weak presentation and structure Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts very limited Very limited ability to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems taken in calculations are incomplete and incorrect recognised methods not used or used incorrectly Little or no analysis and interpretation Poor presentation and inadequate structure Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Lack of knowledge and understanding of key theories principles and concepts Not able to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Steps taken in calculations are incomplete and incorrect recognised methods not used or used incorrectly No analysis or interpretation Unacceptable presentation and structure
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUANTITATIVE-BASED WORK Level 6 Classification % Range Knowledge and Understanding Problem Solving Calculations Analysis and Interpretation Presentation of Work I [Outstanding Work] 80 – 100 Comprehensive of knowledge and clear understanding of major and complex theories, principles and concepts Very competent in both the identification and modelling of more complex problems Techniques are appropriately and effectively used demonstrating innovation and creativity in formulating substantially correct solutions Evidence of excellent analysis and interpretation of new or abstract data and in conclusions derived Excellent, well directed presentation, logically structured I [Excellent Work] 70 – 79 Comprehensive knowledge and clear understanding of major and complex theories, principles and concepts Competent in both the identification and modelling of more complex problems Applies appropriate techniques, and demonstrates innovation and creativity in formulating mainly correct solutions evidence of analysis and interpretation of new or abstract data and in conclusions derived Well directed presentation, logically structured II (i) [Good Quality Work] 60 – 69 Substantial knowledge and clear understanding of major theories, principles and concepts Able to identify more complex problems and competent in the modelling of standard problems Clear demonstration of the steps taken few errors in calculations using recognised methods to formulate solution Evidence of analysis and interpretation of new and seen data in conclusions derived Clearly presented, logically structured II (ii) [Acceptable Work] 50 - 59 Evidence of knowledge and clear understanding of a range of theories, principles and concepts Competent in the use of appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Able to demonstrate the steps taken, errors in calculations, may not always using recognised methods to formulate solution Reasonable evidence of analysis and interpretation in evaluating outcomes and making judgements Neat presentation and structure III [Adequate Work] 40 – 49 Knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts limited or inconsistent Able to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems taken in calculations lack clarity, calculations have numerous errors, recognised methods not used or used incorrectly Limited use of analytical and interpretative skills Weak presentation and structure Fail (marginal) [Limited Work] 35 – 39 Very limited knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts Limited ability to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Steps taken in calculations are incomplete or largely incorrect, recognised methods not used or used incorrectly Little or no analysis and interpretation Poor presentation and structure Fail [Unacceptable Work] 0 – 34 Little or no evidence of knowledge and/or understanding of key theories, principles and concepts Very limited ability to use appropriate techniques to identify and model standard problems Steps taken in calculations are incomplete and incorrect, recognised methods not used or used incorrectly No analysis or interpretation Unacceptable presentation, and structure
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA – QUANTITATIVE-BASED WORK Level 7 Classification % Knowledge and Understanding Problem Solving Calculations Analysis and Interpretation Presentation of Work Distinction 70 – 100 Systematic understanding of specialised and/or applied areas of theoretical or research based knowledge Independent and professional in the approach taken to complex problem solving Can use a range of techniques appropriately and demonstrates innovation and creativity in complex and unpredictable situations Very high level of competence in analysing and interpreting complex or incomplete data and in communicating the outcome Excellent well directed presentation, logically structured Commendation 60 – 69 understanding of specialised or applied areas of theoretical or research based knowledge Largely independent and professional in the approach taken to complex problem solving Uses techniques effectively and demonstrates innovation and creativity in complex situations Competent in analysing and interpreting complex or incomplete data and in communicating the outcome Clearly presented, logically structured Pass 50 - 59 Demonstrates understanding of specialised or applied areas of theoretical or research based knowledge Reasonably competent in solving of complex problems Uses techniques effectively and demonstrates some innovation or creativity in complex situations Reasonably competent in analysing and interpreting complex or incomplete data and in communicating the outcome Neat presentation and structure Fail (marginal) 45 – 49 Limited understanding of specialised or applied areas of theoretical or research based knowledge Solve complex problems only with some guidance or direction Some errors in techniques used, work lacks innovation or creativity, reliance on routine procedures Limited ability to analyse and/or interpret complex or incomplete data and in communicating the outcome Weak presentation and structure Fail 31 - 44 Very limited understanding of specialised or applied areas of theoretical or research based knowledge Limited ability to solve complex problems Many errors in techniques used, no innovation or creativity shown, reliance on routine procedures Little or no analysis and interpretation of complex data, poor presentation of results Poor presentation and structure Fail 0 – 30 Has not grasped the theoretical or research base of the subject Very limited ability to solve complex problems Inability to use techniques, routine procedures have errors No analysis or interpretation of complex data, poor or very poor presentation of results Unacceptable presentation, and structure