originality and, where appropriate, detailed references where evaluation of experimental work. appropriate. Very good High level of factual accuracy, mostly relevant. Thorough coverage and Good presentation and use of illustrative answer Good evidence of understanding and good depth. Some material. Well written good structure – 70 79 – integration of concepts giving sound argument evidence of and coherence. in the answers. Where appropriate, some supplementary reading. evaluation of experimental work. Good answer Factually sound but with some minor errors Good coverage with depth Satisfactory presentation with and/or omissions. Sound understanding of key in some areas. May appropriate use of illustrative material. 60 - 69 ideas and generally relevant. include evidence of Generally, well structured and logical. additional reading. Adequate Largely accurate but with some errors and/or Limited to lecture material. Moderate presentation, expression and answer key facts missing. Relevant but may lack Aware of the scope of the clarity. Little or inappropriate use of 50 - 59 understanding. topic but superficial illustrative material. Mostly logical. treatment of key ideas. Incomplete Sufficient information to indicate the candidate Modest or incomplete Weak expression, clarity and structure - answer has a knowledge and understanding of the coverage of lecture may be in note form. 41 - 49 subject area. Significant omissions and/or material. Lacks depth. errors, poor relevance and/or understanding of concepts. Pass Minimum A weak answer but there is just enough acceptable information to suggest the student has a standard rudimentary knowledge and understanding of (40) the subject area. Fail Deficient May contain some isolated pieces of correct Little appreciation of the Poor expression and/or a low level of answer information but little relevance and/or a serious scope of the subject. structure and clarity. May lack lack of understanding. Many omissions and/or coherence. (20 39 ) errors. – Bad fail Totally No or little accurate factual material or the No significant attempt to Little organisation of text and/or dreadful inadequate answer may be totally irrelevant. write about the subject. expression and clarity.
originality and, where appropriate, detailed evaluation of experimental work. references where appropriate. 70 – 79 Very good answer High level of factual accuracy, mostly relevant. Good evidence of understanding and integration of concepts giving sound argument in the answers. Where appropriate, some evaluation of experimental work. Thorough coverage and good depth. Some evidence of supplementary reading. Good presentation and use of illustrative material. Well written – good structure and coherence. 60 - 69 Good answer Factually sound but with some minor errors and/or omissions. Sound understanding of key ideas and generally relevant. Good coverage with depth in some areas. May include evidence of additional reading. Satisfactory presentation with appropriate use of illustrative material. Generally, well structured and logical. 50 - 59 Adequate answer Largely accurate but with some errors and/or key facts missing. Relevant but may lack understanding. Limited to lecture material. Aware of the scope of the topic but superficial treatment of key ideas. Moderate presentation, expression and clarity. Little or inappropriate use of illustrative material. Mostly logical. 41 - 49 Incomplete answer Sufficient information to indicate the candidate has a knowledge and understanding of the subject area. Significant omissions and/or errors, poor relevance and/or understanding of concepts. Modest or incomplete coverage of lecture material. Lacks depth. Weak expression, clarity and structure - may be in note form. Pass (40) Minimum acceptable standard A weak answer but there is just enough information to suggest the student has a rudimentary knowledge and understanding of the subject area. Fail (20 – 39 ) Deficient answer May contain some isolated pieces of correct information but little relevance and/or a serious lack of understanding. Many omissions and/or errors. Little appreciation of the scope of the subject. Poor expression and/or a low level of structure and clarity. May lack coherence. Bad fail Totally inadequate No or little accurate factual material or the answer may be totally irrelevant. No significant attempt to write about the subject. Little organisation of text and/or dreadful expression and clarity.
Copa-FSN2014-15.docx