Marking Criteria Fail 0-39 3rd 2:2 2:1 1st 40-49 50-59 60-69 70 + Introduction, context and Unacceptable and needs Acceptable but needs Largely clear but does not include Clear and covers all Excellent coverage of all statement of aims and objectives more focus on the more focus on the all of the areas of the marking appropriate areas appropriate areas ,definition of terms (15) introduction / statement introduction criteria. of aims and objectives / /statement of aims and (Introduction / statement of aims context setting/defining objectives /context and objectives / context setting / terms setting/ defining terms defining term) Demonstrates knowledge of a Unacceptable and needs Acceptable but limited Largely clear but doesn’t Clear and demonstrates Excellent coverage of all range of literature and theoretical to demonstrate wider range of literature, demonstrate knowledge of a wide good range of sources, appropriate areas sources and evaluates their range of literature and use theoretical sources range of literature and theoretical some evaluation and application through analytical of sources and evaluate and/ or application / sources focusing largely on core discussion of different discussion of different perspectives their application / analytic may be missing text and minimal evaluation perspectives (40) discussion of different analytical discussion of perspectives different perspectives Structure, coherence and strength Unacceptable and needs Acceptable but Largely clear but room for Clear and persuasive Strong and persuasive of argument (15) to improve structure and structure, coherence improvement with regard to argument argument presented coherence could be improved and structure Conclusions- follow on from Unacceptable and needs Acceptable but overall Largely clear conclusions but Clear conclusions which Excellent conclusion which previous work, provides a to ensure the conclusion lacked depth of lacking in many of the areas in the cover the majority of the covers all areas of the marking summary of key literature and does follows on from previous coverage of the marking criteria (previous work / marking criteria criteria not introduce new information (15) work / provides a marking criteria. Needs realistic / provides a summary / summary / does not to follow on from new information) introduce new information previous work/ provides a summary / no introduce new information Appropriately referenced sources, Unacceptable standard of Occasionally sources Some of the sources are The majority of sources All sources are appropriately in line with the Harvard method referencing which may are appropriately appropriately referenced in line are appropriately referenced in line with Harvard (15) include over reliance on referenced but largely with Harvard Method referenced in line with Method internet sources inappropriate Harvard Method referencing which may include over reliance on internet sources
Marking Criteria Fail 0-39 3rd 40-49 2:2 50-59 2:1 60-69 1st 70 + Introduction, context and statement of aims and objectives ,definition of terms (15) Unacceptable and needs more focus on the introduction / statement of aims and objectives / context setting/defining terms Acceptable but needs more focus on the introduction /statement of aims and objectives /context setting/ defining terms Largely clear but does not include all of the areas of the marking criteria. (Introduction / statement of aims and objectives / context setting / defining term) Clear and covers all appropriate areas Excellent coverage of all appropriate areas Demonstrates knowledge of a range of literature and theoretical sources and evaluates their application through analytical discussion of different perspectives (40) Unacceptable and needs to demonstrate wider range of literature and use of sources and evaluate their application / analytic discussion of different perspectives Acceptable but limited range of literature, theoretical sources and/ or application / may be missing analytical discussion of different perspectives Largely clear but doesn’t demonstrate knowledge of a wide range of literature and theoretical sources focusing largely on core text and minimal evaluation Clear and demonstrates good range of sources, some evaluation and discussion of different perspectives Excellent coverage of all appropriate areas Structure, coherence and strength of argument (15) Unacceptable and needs to improve structure and coherence Acceptable but structure, coherence could be improved and Largely clear but room for improvement with regard to structure Clear and persuasive argument Strong and persuasive argument presented Conclusions- follow on from previous work, provides a summary of key literature and does not introduce new information (15) Unacceptable and needs to ensure the conclusion follows on from previous work / provides a summary / does not introduce new information Acceptable but overall lacked depth of coverage of the marking criteria. Needs to follow on from previous work/ provides a summary / no introduce new information Largely clear conclusions but lacking in many of the areas in the marking criteria (previous work / realistic / provides a summary / new information) Clear conclusions which cover the majority of the marking criteria Excellent conclusion which covers all areas of the marking criteria Appropriately referenced sources, in line with the Harvard method (15) Unacceptable standard of referencing which may include over reliance on internet sources Occasionally sources are appropriately referenced but largely inappropriate referencing which may include over reliance on internet sources Some of the sources are appropriately referenced in line with Harvard Method The majority of sources are appropriately referenced in line with Harvard Method All sources are appropriately referenced in line with Harvard Method
Formative_Feedback_Sheet.docx