Grade boundaries.

80%-90% This mark would be given to an outstanding piece of level 1 work. Work shows a well-developed and critical understanding of concepts and theories, with an excellent appreciation of competing arguments. The piece of work shows an ability to evaluate complex concepts and ideas. A fluent, logical, coherent essay, cogently structured and organised with a relationship apparent between the stages of the argument, leading to an analytical conclusion. Detail to be clearly related to the argument. It should represent an in-depth answer to the question, with the answer located within a broader framework/context. It should show a considerable awareness of the relevant literature, with a strong commitment to scholarly work in evidence including no deficiencies in referencing and bibliography. There should be considerable powers of synthesis. 70% -79% Work placed in this band would show signs of excellence. Work shows developed understanding of concepts, and theories, competent selection, interpretation and analysis of evidence and a substantial attempt to relate this to theory. There should be the ability to evaluate arguments using evidence. Some attempt at critical evaluation should be apparent. A clear discussion, well-structured around the theme of the answer, showing a well-developed line of argument. The answer should be either broad or in-depth, reflecting considerable reading and awareness of differences between texts/authors, and criticisms of them. Detailed analysis of relevant material. A clear and concise conclusion/introduction written with fluency. Evidence of commitment to the scholarly approach with no deficiencies in bibliography and referencing. 60% - 69% This would represent a very good mark for a Level 1 piece of work. Work shows a sound understanding of relevant concepts and an ability to interpret and analyse evidence. The writer should be able to compare and/or identify some strengths and weaknesses in available sources, a reasonable number of which have been consulted. Accurate recitation of authors/texts, some evaluation attempted. There is a clear overall structure to the essay and it contains no serious errors (in content or structure). There may be some descriptive passages but these should be relevant, accurate and concise. A clear introduction and conclusion written with some fluency. Minor deficiencies in bibliography and reference may be evident. 50% - 59% This would represent a good piece of work. A generally sound and accurate understanding of concepts and evidence. A basic attempt to organise material. At times the text may lack structure but generally the essay is written in a clear and appropriate manner. Some may tend to focus on description, but the areas covered will be relevant to answering the question. Any limited attempt at evaluation of ideas/concepts/empirical material will be rewarded. There is evidence of some breadth of reading (i.e. three to four sources) and an attempt to reference authors and construct a bibliography in an accurate and academic manner.

40% - 49% This would be a satisfactory piece of work, but would show limited, partly inaccurate understanding and representation of relevant material. Answers in this band may contain some minor mistakes or the odd major mistake. Answers in this band may be inclined to provide simplistic descriptions or may be poorly linked to the literature. Poor structure, presentation or lack of clarity due to poor use of English may drag an otherwise good answer down into this band. A good answer which might have been in one of the bands above but which is inadequately referenced may be put into this band. A mark of 40-43% indicates the need for serious improvement. The pass mark is 40% 35-39% This mark indicates a fail. Little relevant knowledge; poorly organised discussion that fails to adequately address the question; no adequate reasoned conclusion. Some relevant descriptive material but a tendency for repetition, digression or "waffle"; tendency to incoherence with weak structure, absence of logical development of argument; also perhaps evidence of some confusion, major mistakes, or poor written English. Little or no reference to literature. Generally the essay functions at a low level in terms of understanding the question and how to answer it. However there has to be enough of an answer to the question to distinguish this from the band below. Major inadequacies or omissions in referencing and bibliography. This is a bad fail. Little or no relevant knowledge, little or no reference to literature; an incoherent essay, very disorganised, with material irrelevant to question. Shows very limited or non-existent understanding of the question and how to answer it. Inappropriately brief answers may be placed in this band.

20-34%

Marking bands for level 1 examinations 80%-90% This would be an outstanding exam answer for level 1. A well focused answer that exhibits critical engagement with a range of relevant concepts and theories. The answer has an excellent structure and presents a logical argument coherently. An extensive range of appropriate sources and/or data are referred to, and competently compared and evaluated in the script. 70-79% Work placed in this band shows signs of excellence. Again a well focused answer that exhibits engagement with the question and a range of relevant concepts and theories. The answer has a very clear and coherent overall structure and tackles the question in a highly competent and comprehensive manner. A good range of sources and/or data are cited and evaluated in the answer. This would be a very good level 1 exam answer. It would clearly engage and exhibit some ability to interpret concepts, theories and data as appropriate to the question. A well structured exam answer with a clear structure that shows evidence and understanding of relevant cited

60-69%

authors and or data. The answer may include some descriptive elements but these will be relevant to the question. 50-59% This would represent a good exam answer at level 1. A competent answer that reflects adequate knowledge relevant to the question posed. Basic concepts and theories will be described. On occasions descriptions or explanations may not be clearly linked to the question but the answer will display some evidence of relevant knowledge. An attempt to structure the answer is evident but some inadequacies in organisation may be apparent. In order to attain a mark of 55%+ it is expected that candidates include some limited citation of key authors and/or sources of data. A satisfactory answer that may show limited and/or inaccurate understanding and representation of relevant concepts and theories. Typically answers in this band would be poorly structured and limited to simplistic description. They may include some minor mistakes or the odd major mistake. Poor presentation or poor use of written English affecting clarity may be evident. No reference to relevant sources within the answer.

40-49%

The pass mark is 40% 35-39% This would be a fail. The answer would show little knowledge relevant to the question posed. There may be a tendency for repetition digression or waffle. A weak structure with an absence of a developed argument. Evidence of confusion, major mistakes or poor use of written English. No reference to relevant sources within the answer. This is a bad fail. All or a majority of the above deficiencies will be in evidence. Inappropriately brief exam answers may be placed in this band.

20-34%

Level 2
Marking Schemes for Level 2 To be placed in a given class, work need not have all the required characteristics. However, work with some of the characteristics of a given class will not necessarily be located in that class. Work on the margins of a class may drop to the class below if marred by poor presentation or referencing. Marking Bands for Level 2 Assessed Essays 80%-90% Outstanding work that demonstrates independent scholarship. The candidate has used a wide variety sources and presents an imaginative and innovative argument. Signs of originality could be present. The structure is almost flawless. 70-79% Excellent work. A clear command and understanding of the issues can be noted along with independent thinking. The essay contains a wealth of

relevant information, and demonstrates wide reading of appropriate literature. 60-69% Work showing evidence of a good knowledge and understanding of the material, put together in a way which is, for the most part, clearly argued, well-written, and relevant to the task set. Answers are thoroughly competent and accurate even if they may contain repetition of standard summaries of ideas as found in textbooks. Work which is competent and broadly relevant, but somewhat lacking in focus, organisation, or breadth of reference. Lack of structure obstructs the argument presented and the candidate seems to have misunderstood aspects of the essay question. One or more of the main sources may have been overlooked, and there may be over-reliance on one or two items in the literature. Work showing some knowledge of the material, but having serious shortcomings. Insufficient knowledge and/or understanding of the material is evident. The essay may be too short and relies almost exclusively upon a poor summary of standard accounts as found, for example, in textbooks. The candidate may have missed significant aspects of the question but there should be sufficient use of little knowledge to address basic issues. There could be poor presentation, organization of material, poor referencing and style.

50-59%

40-49%

Pass mark is 40 Fail 34-39% This mark indicates a fail. Little relevant knowledge; poorly organised discussion that fails to adequately address the question; no adequate reasoned conclusion. Some relevant descriptive material but a tendency for repetition, digression or "waffle"; tendency to incoherence with weak structure, absence of logical development of argument; also perhaps evidence of some confusion, major mistakes, or poor written English. There is likely to be little reference to literature. Generally the essay functions at a low level in terms of understanding the question and how to answer it. Major inadequacies or omissions in referencing and bibliography. However there has to be enough of an answer to the question to distinguish this from the band below. 20-34% This is a bad FAIL. Little or no relevant knowledge, little or no reference to literature; an incoherent essay, very disorganised, with material irrelevant to question. Shows very limited or non-existent understanding of the question and how to answer it. Inappropriately brief answers may be placed in this band.

Marking Bands for Level 2 Examinations 80%-90% Outstanding work. A rigorous argument is presented. There is detailed and extensive engagement with the relevant material. Signs of originality could be present. The structure is almost flawless.

70-79%

Excellent work showing a clear command and understanding of the issues. Accurate recall of material pertinent to the set questions. Answers demonstrate a thorough preparation of the chosen topic and the ability of the candidate to demonstrate an independent mind. In particular the candidate has managed to avoid standard (e.g. textbook) repetition and instead draws upon material from other sources. There is evidence of a precise recall of material. The answer is clearly structured, and there is also evidence of a logical argument that is clear and concise. The candidate has managed to avoid using irrelevant material by carefully preparing for the subject beforehand. There is some indication of standard repetition, although this is combined with other sources. The candidate demonstrates a capability of answering the question in a clear and coherent manner. However, the candidate also draws too heavily upon standard summaries for the main point. Thus there is a lack of breadth of reference to other sources. The candidate relies in the main upon standard summaries and this is combined with a misunderstanding of aspects of the question. For example, the candidate tries to fit a standard summary of some ideas to the question. As such depth is lacking in his/her argument. Correspondingly it may be evident that the candidate has not properly prepared the set topic, or that he/she is attempting to twist the question to fit his/her knowledge. The candidate may have missed significant aspects of the question but there should be sufficient use of little knowledge to address basic issues. There could be poor presentation, organization of material, poor referencing and style.

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

Pass mark is 40 35-39% Very little breadth of reference even in relation to summarising passages from various sources. Indeed the exam reads too much like a rushed summary of lecture notes. In addition there is extremely inaccurate recall, and/or significant misunderstanding. There is a lack of structure and little understanding of the question. There is inadequate and superficial recall of relevant material. While some key words or phrases may be evident, much of the argument will be incoherent and disorganised.

20-34%

Level 3
Marking Criteria for Assessment Essays and Examinations Level 3 To be placed in a given class, work need not have all the required characteristics. However, work with some of the characteristics of a given class will not necessarily be located in that class. Work on the margins of a class may drop to the class below if marred by poor presentation or referencing.

Marking Bands for Level 3 Assessed Essays 80%-90% Outstanding work that demonstrates independent scholarship. The candidate has used a wide variety sources in often with a degree of originality and presents an imaginative and innovative argument that demonstrates an excellent grasp and deployment of relevant concepts and theories. The structure is almost faultless and recall of arguments nearly reaches a postgraduate level. 70-79% Work shows well-developed understanding of concepts and theories, with an appreciation of competing arguments. Sophisticated selection, interpretation and analysis of evidence and a high level ability to relate this to theory. There should be a well-developed evaluation of various arguments. A fluent, logical, coherent essay, cogently structured and organised with a relationship apparent between the stages of the argument, leading to an analytical conclusion. Detail to be clearly related to the argument. It should represent an in-depth answer to the question, with the answer located within a broader framework/context. It should show a considerable awareness of the relevant literature, with a strong commitment to scholarly work in evidence. There should be considerable powers of synthesis. Work shows developed understanding of concepts, and theories, competent selection, interpretation and analysis of evidence and a reasonable attempt to relate this to theory. There should be the ability to evaluate arguments using evidence. A clear discussion, well-structured around the theme of the answer, showing a well-developed line of argument. The answer should be broad or in-depth, reflecting considerable reading and awareness of differences between texts/authors, and criticisms of them. Detailed material generally connected well with the whole. Work shows a sound understanding of relevant concepts, if generalised or uneven at times; ability to interpret and analyse evidence. The writer should be able to compare/identify some strengths and weaknesses in available sources, a reasonable number of which have been consulted. Accurate recitation of authors/texts, some evaluation attempted. There is a clear overall structure to the essay, if poorly co-ordinated at times. Some descriptive passages but these are accurate and precise. Some attempt to tackle theory but at a rather more basic level than for an upper second. A concise conclusion written with some fluency. Work shows limited, partly inaccurate understanding and representation of relevant material some material of tenuous relevance. Some interpretation of evidence and occasional critical points. Basic attempt to organise material. Limited use of sources; essay is poorly linked to literature; contains some mistakes. Inclined to simplistic descriptions; little on more conceptual areas. Essay may be marred by poor structure or presentation, inadequate bibliography or weak written English. There is some, if limited, understanding of the question and awareness of relevant authors/texts, on the basis of which some sort of conclusion is reached.

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

Pass mark is 40 Fail 34-39%This mark indicates a fail. Little relevant knowledge; poorly organised discussion that fails to adequately address the question; no adequate reasoned conclusion. Some relevant descriptive material but a tendency for repetition, digression or "waffle"; tendency to incoherence with weak structure, absence of logical development of argument; also perhaps evidence of some confusion, major mistakes, or poor written English. There is likely to be little reference to literature. Generally the essay functions at a low level in terms of understanding the question and how to answer it. Major inadequacies or omissions in referencing and bibliography. However there has to be enough of an answer to the question to distinguish this from the band below. 20-34% This is a bad fail. Little or no relevant knowledge, little or no reference to literature; an incoherent essay, very disorganised, with material irrelevant to question. Shows very limited or non-existent understanding of the question and how to answer it. Inappropriately brief answers may be placed in this band.

Marking Bands for Level 3 Examinations 80%-90% Outstanding work that demonstrates independent scholarship. The candidate has used a wide variety sources in a thoroughly original manner. Thus the candidate goes beyond an accurate recall of information to present an imaginative and innovative argument. The structure is almost faultless and recall of arguments nearly reaches a postgraduate level. 70-79% Excellent to outstanding work showing a breadth of knowledge, clear command and understanding of the issues. Evidence of independent thinking and accurate recall of material pertinent to the set questions. Answers, while not necessarily long, are nevertheless well-structured and demonstrate a thorough preparation of the chosen topic. For example, the candidate has drawn upon a wide range of sources and has managed to integrate material learnt from other related modules in an original manner. Work that demonstrates a good understanding and precise recall of material. Overall the answer is clearly structured, and unrelated material is mostly avoided. Essays are intelligently written. The candidate has obviously prepared for the subject and this is shown in the answer given. In addition the candidate has drawn upon a range wide of material as well as the standard textbooks. The answer fits the question. The candidate provides a competent answer which is, in the main, relevant to the question set. However it lacks some focus and breadth of reference to relevant material. This might be seen in inaccurate recall of material and a misunderstanding of some ideas. In addition some parts of the answer may be inadequately related to the question and may seem rushed and badly organised.

60-69%

50-59%

40-49%

While the candidate shows some knowledge of the material, there are nonetheless serious weaknesses. Knowledge and understanding of the question is unsatisfactory, and in parts there is inaccurate recall. In addition the answer provided may be much too short, and there is a lack of depth, unfocused, and poorly organised. It may be evident that the candidate has not properly prepared the set topic, or that he/she is attempting to twist the question to fit his/her knowledge. The candidate may have missed significant aspects of the question but there should be sufficient use of little knowledge to address basic issues.

Pass mark is 40 35-39% Some very basic knowledge is evident, but with very little breadth of reference, extremely inaccurate recall, and/or significant misunderstanding. The answer may be confused and unstructured, and it may be clear that the candidate has stopped short of providing a clear understanding of the question. Work which shows a thorough lack of clarity and understanding. Work is incompetently presented and largely disorganised. Inaccurate recall of information may also be present.

20-34%

Marking criteria for dissertations The marking criteria for dissertations is similar to that for third year essays. However, each marker will also take into account the scope and different approaches to dissertations and will mark for originality and outstanding independent scholarship. 80%-90% Outstanding work that demonstrates independent scholarship. An original research question that is well rooted in relevant debates. Excellent research skills that shows highly advanced selection, interpretation and analysis of evidence and an ability to relate this to complex theory and debates. Faultless structure and based on a wide variety sources in often with a degree of originality and presents an imaginative and innovative argument that demonstrates an excellent grasp and deployment of relevant concepts and theories. Comparable to postgraduate level. 70-79% An excellent and scholarly piece of work that shows a sophisticated selection, interpretation and analysis of evidence and a high level ability to relate this to theory and debates. A well structured, logical and fluent argument that is based on a good range of literature leading to an indepth analytical conclusion. It should represent a critical and in-depth answer to the research question. There should be considerable powers of synthesis and commitment. A dissertation that has a clear research question as well as a structured and clear line of argument and a developed understanding of concepts and theories. Analysis of evidence and data/research shows competent selection, interpretation and a reasonable attempt to relate this to

60-69%

theory. The answer should be broad or in-depth, reflecting considerable reading and awareness of differences between texts/authors, and criticisms of them. Detailed material generally connected well with the whole and a good argued conclusion. 50-59% Dissertation shows a sound understanding of relevant concepts, if generalized, descriptive or uneven at times; ability to interpret and analyse evidence in a systematic way. The writer should be able to compare/identify some strengths and weaknesses in available sources, a reasonable number of which have been consulted and write with some fluency. Accurate recitation of authors/texts, some evaluation attempted but only a basic grasp of theory. There is a clear overall structure to the essay, if poorly co-ordinated at times and a basic conclusion. Dissertation lacks a clear research question, argument and critical analysis and is based on a limited use of sources and shows limited, partly inaccurate understanding and an over simplistic representation of relevant material. Structure is weak and may contain some mistakes on conceptual areas. As well as inadequate bibliography or weak written English.

40-49%

Pass mark is 40 Fail 34-39% This mark indicates a fail. The dissertation shows little relevant knowledge or systematic research; no clear research question and a poorly organised discussion that fails to adequately address the question; no adequate reasoned conclusion. Some relevant descriptive material but a tendency for repetition, digression or "waffle"; tendency to incoherence with weak structure, absence of logical development of argument; also perhaps evidence of some confusion, major mistakes, or poor written English. There is likely to be little reference to literature. 20-34% This is a bad FAIL. Little or no relevant knowledge, little or no reference to literature; an incoherent dissertation, very disorganised, with material irrelevant to question. Shows very limited or non-existent understanding of the question and how to answer it. Inappropriately brief answers may be placed in this band.

Markers are encouraged to use the full range of marks, in particular to ensure that excellent attempts are justly rewarded in comparison with lesser attempts. Absent (i.e. AB) This is where the candidate was absent from the exam, and has not submitted the required course work, or where there is a submitted exam paper, but there is no semblance of an answer the student has written only their name or a few random scribbles, but there is no work worthy of assessment.