Assessment of Postgraduate Dissertation | My Assignment Tutor

    Assessment of Postgraduate Dissertation UMSDFN-45-M General information Name of student: Student number: Dissertation title: Name of first reader (supervisor): Name of second reader: Date of completion of this report:                 Please tick the appropriate box: ¨ This report has been prepared by the first reader ¨ This report has been prepared by the second reader Note: this form is designed to be used by both first and second readers. All forms submitted will be provided to students. Engagement with the supervision process Has the student engaged adequately with the supervision process? Please tick the appropriate box: ¨ Yes ¨ No Adequate engagement is defined as having at least two meetings with the supervisor, having submitted at least one draft of work for comment and having made some changes to a draft in response to feedback. Meetings may be face to face or by phone, skype etc. Assessment of the dissertation Overall mark descriptors (85-100%)Outstanding pass: a dissertation characterised overall by complete coherence, showing a particular rigour and clarity in reasoning and writing, with well supported conclusions, and providing original insights.  (70-84%)Distinctive pass: a dissertation characterised by overall coherence, showing rigour and clarity in in reasoning and writing, with well supported conclusions.  (60-69%)Meritorious pass: a dissertation that remains focused on the task, showing overall a good understanding of research processes.  (50-59%)Pass: a dissertation that demonstrates achievement against all learning outcomes but with important limitations. Overall, it shows an adequate understanding of research processes.  (45-49%)Marginal fail: a dissertation where some aspects are flawed. There may be  some indication of an appreciation of the subject matter, but not all learning outcomes for the module are demonstrated convincingly.  (0-44%)Fail: a dissertation characterised by significant flaws, where few of the learning outcomes for the module are demonstrated convincingly.   Notes on how to use this marking scheme:   This marking scheme is designed to be an aid in the assessment of the dissertation’s strengths and weaknesses. It is not conceived as a mechanistic scheme of marking where marks are awarded for each element and then added up to an aggregate score.The different elements assessed are not equally weighted. Thus, for example, a fundamental flaw in research design cannot be compensated by impeccable referencing. That each of these elements are listed in separate boxes should not suggest that they are equally important.For each element assessed, a number of guiding questions are suggested, not as a substitute to expert judgment, but as an aid to decision.   Specific elements assessed  FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Justification¨¨¨¨¨¨Is the study justified on academic and/or professional grounds Is the study timely?       Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Aims and Objectives / Research question(s)¨¨¨¨¨¨Are the aims/questions and objectives communicated well?Are the aims/questions and objectives stimulating, relevant and appropriately challenging?Are the objectives realistic?       Comments:      FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Literature review¨¨¨¨¨¨Has it got a clear sense of purpose?Does it demonstrate understanding of literature at the forefront of knowledge in the field? Is the iterature discussed in the review relevant to the study?Is it adequately structured?Does the student present their own commentary on the literature?         Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Conceptual framework¨¨¨¨¨¨Is it explicit and well justified?Does the conceptual framework relate clearly to the literature discussed in the review?       Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Research design¨¨¨¨¨¨Does the student who an understanding of research methods theory?Is the methodological reasoning explicit? Are the choices made appropriate given the purposes?Are the choices made derived from a discussion of the literature, or do they appear random?       Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Methods for data collection¨¨¨¨¨¨Are the methods chosen well described? Are they appropriate given the purposes?Are the choices made derived from a discussion of the literature?       Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Data analysis and synthesis¨¨¨¨¨¨Are the procedures for data analysis explicit and detailed enough?Are they appropriate? Are they conducted appropriately?Does the student show some judgement in terms of what findings to report/emphasise?       Comments:            FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Discussion of data in relation to literature review and conceptual framework  ¨¨¨¨¨¨Are the data presented related to the conceptual framework?Are the results discussed in relation to the literature?       Comments:          FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Conclusions and recommendations for practice  ¨¨¨¨¨¨If conclusions and recommendations for practice are made, are they persuasive and supported by evidence?       Comments:            FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Conclusions and recommendations for theory development  ¨¨¨¨¨¨Does the conclusion provide meaningful reflections on the research project and its value?Does the conclusion provide meaningful reflections on the choices made in regard to methodology and method? Does the conclusion identify meaningful areas for further inquiry?       Comments:        FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Presentation¨¨¨¨¨¨How readable is the text?Is the use of English adequate? (grammar, spelling, punctuation)Is the layout of the document clear?Does the document contain adequate signposting?Is there an adequate use of tables, diagrams, figures, etc. Is the dissertation within the word count limit?       Comments:        FailMarginal failPassMeritorious passDistinctive passOutstanding pass (0-44%)(45-49%)(50-59%)(60-69%)(70-84%)(85-100%)  Referencing¨¨¨¨¨¨Is the referencing appropriate? (i.e. knowing when a reference is necessary or not)Is it accurate and devoid of mistakes?Is the information complete?Is the format consistent?       Comments:       Overall and/or additional comments

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *