Assessment criteria | My Assignment Tutor

Student: Unit code: Assessor:Unit title:Date:Assignment feedback form: Essay/reportAssignment No.:Grade/Mark:Assessment criteria High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail 1. Depth & breadth of knowledge demonstrated All relevant concepts etc clearly explained. Evidence of wide reading & independent research. Main concepts etc covered and explained. Range of resources used with discrimination. A few relevant concepts etc overlooked or insufficiently described. Limited range of quality resources. Some important concepts overlooked and insufficiently described. Resources of lesser quality and relevance. Majority of key concepts not addressed or misunderstood. Little/no evidence of use of resources. Z. Quality of thinking in evidence 2.1 Integration of relevant ideas to support answer Well integrated arguments fully support conclusions. Clearly stated argument to support conclusions. Conclusions generally supported. Some aspects of the answer lacking a sound evidence base. Answer lacking a sound evidence base. 2.2. Application of theory to solve problems/issues All relevant theory applied with precision. Major relevant theory applied well. Theory applied proficiently. Some important theory not applied (appropriately). Most important theory not applied (appropriately). 2.3 Depth of analysis &/or evaluation Critically & comprehensively analyses/evaluates evidence, experiences, practice. Critically analyses/evaluates evidence, experience, practice. Analyses/evaluates core evidence, experience, practice. Shallow evaluation of evidence, experience, practice. Little attempt at analysis/evaluation. 3. Quality of communication 3.1 Logical structure & organisation Extremely clear and coherent flow of ideas organised to facilitate full understanding. Clear and coherent flow of ideas organised to facilitate understanding. Generally clear, logical and organised to facilitate understanding. Some aspects unclear, illogical and poorly organised. Generally illogical, unclear and lacking in meaningful organisation. 3.2 Clarity & succinctness of writing Crystal clear, precise, appropriate and technically error-free. Clear, succinct and free of significant technical errors. Generally clear, appropriate with few technical errors. Occasionally unclear &/or inappropriate with a number of technical errors. Generally unclear, inappropriate and technically deficient. 4. Referencing standards and formatting 4.1 Referencing Faultless use of recognised referencing system. Consistently well-referenced using recognised system. Sources generally acknowledged well with few errors. Lapses in referencing and/or inconsistent style. Absent or deficient referencing. 4.2 Formatting Presented to highest standard. Presented to high standard. Well presented. Barely acceptable. Poorly presented.Assessor comments


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.