|
80+ |
- Work that,
with minor technical corrections, could be submitted for publication
- Written
with faultless elegance and sophistication
- Originality
of ideas, aims and approach shows readiness for postgraduate study
- Characterised
by sophisticated critical handling of complex issues
|
| 70-79 |
- Extremely
well written, without technical errors
- Has an ambitious scope that is
partly fulfilled by work submitted
- Characterised by distinctiveness of
ideas, aims and approach
- Engages
rigorously with cutting-edge scholarship
- Displays both breadth and depth of
knowledge
|
| 60-69 |
- Displays initiative and independence
of mind
- Sound critical grasp of issues,
including engagement with alternative interpretations
- Effective
deployment of primary sources
- Effective
use of journal articles
- Argument supported by detailed
evidence from independent study
- Argument is clear and well structured
|
| 50-59 |
- Some
critical awareness of issues and debates
- Writing is clear and effective
- Argument and information are
relevant to the question
- Information is accurate
- Correctly presented, with sources
cited accurately
- Tendency to description, narrative
or generalisation
|
| 40-49 |
- Uncritical
coverage of issues and debates
- Largely descriptive, narrative or
generalised
- Adequate comprehension of basic
events, terms and concepts
- Adequate presentation, with some
attempt to cite sources
- Notable errors or irrelevance
|
| 35-39 |
- Minimal
understanding of basic events, terms and concepts
- Significant errors or considerable
irrelevance
- Argument is poorly constructed
- Sources
not cited
|
| 20-34 |
- Barely
discernible argument
- Substantial omissions or errors, or
largely irrelevant
- Writing is barely comprehensible
|
| 0-19 |
- No
discernible argument
- Displays no knowledge or
understanding of the subject
- Writing is
incomprehensible
|