Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Guidelines for marking assessed essays at level 1 are given to Teaching Assistants and
are published in the level 1 handbook for students.
In line with all other University Departments, Level 1 assessed essays and examination
scripts in this School are marked according to Level 1 teaching objectives rather than
Level 2/3 (degree) objectives.
This means that markers are looking for the
comprehension of taught materials and an understanding of basics as a preparation for
progression into Level 2. Students are not therefore penalised if they do not display to
the same extent the kind of critical evaluative powers that would be expected at Levels
2/3. The marking scale (40+pass, 80+excellent) remains the same as the table of
numbers, but marks awarded for assessment should not be regarded as indicating a
degree classification.
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.
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
20-34%
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.
60-69%
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 authors and or data. The
answer may include some descriptive elements but these will be relevant to
the question.
50-59%
40-49%
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.
20-34%
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.
60-69%
50-59%
40-49%
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.
Pass mark is 40
35-39%
20-34%
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%
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.
60-69%
50-59%
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.
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
60-69%
50-59%
40-49%
Pass mark is 40
Fail
20-34%
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 sociological or social policy 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%
60-69%
50-59%
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%
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.
Marking Criteria for Poster Presentations
80%-90% Outstanding work that demonstrates independent scholarship. The content of
the poster including the relevance, accuracy and depth of the material
demonstrate that the candidate has used a wide variety sources often with a
degree of originality and presents an imaginative and innovative poster that
demonstrates an excellent grasp and deployment of relevant concepts and
theories. The clarity of the visual poster will be exceptional. The depth and
accuracy of answers to questioning on the presentation will be outstanding.
70-79%
60-69%
50-59%
40-49%
Pass mark is 40
Fail
20-34%