CONTENTS | NEXT PAGE
|
Marks |
Class |
Description |
General Criteria |
|
90-100 |
First |
Absolutely outstanding |
Factually faultless; very clearly directed; excellent coverage; solid understanding; extensive evidence of supplementary reading; extremely well written. |
|
80-89 |
First |
Outstanding answer |
Factually virtually faultless; clearly directed; comprehensive coverage; logical; solid understanding; considerable evidence of supplementary reading; very well written. |
|
70-79 |
First |
Very good answer |
Factually almost faultless; well directed; evidence of supplementary reading; very good coverage; well written. |
|
60-69 |
Upper |
Comprehensive answer |
Factually sound, clear and logical; good coverage, expression and style good; grammar and spelling precise. |
|
50-59 |
Lower |
Adequate answer |
Information mostly accurate, but some errors or key facts missing; expression and style adequate; grammar and spelling generally precise. |
|
40-49 |
Third |
Incomplete answer |
Information sparse with inaccuracies; broadly relevant to the question but poor coverage of lecture material; expression/style/grammar adequate. |
|
30-39 |
Fail |
Deficient answer |
Poorly directed at the question; omissions or errors but some relevant facts correct; the general drift should be sensible, but understanding poor; expression/style/grammar poor. |
|
15-29 |
Fail |
Very deficient answer |
Largely irrelevant to the question; many omissions and errors; expression/style/grammar very poor. |
|
0-14 |
Fail |
Grossly inadequate |
Little or no relevant factual material; approach may be all wrong; expression/style/grammar dreadful. |
Factual information sources should always include relevant material derived from practical work as well as lectures and textbooks. In addition, credit will be given in all classes for evidence of supplementary reading from other sources, such as the popular scientific press. Sources should be properly cited, as illustrated in any scientific paper.
Compensation applies between criteria. For example, the inclusion of only limited factual material may be compensated positively by very clear direction of that material to the question. Conversely even very good factual presentations will be downgraded by poor grammar and spelling.
|
Marks |
Class |
Description |
General Criteria |
|
90-100 |
First |
Absolutely outstanding |
Excellent understanding of topic; puts practical work fully in context where appropriate; layout, drawings, diagrams, graphs, data analysis could not be improved; extremely well written. |
|
80-89 |
First |
Outstanding report |
Very good understanding of topic; puts practical work well in context where appropriate; very well laid out; drawings, diagrams, graphs, data analysis of high quality, extremely well written. |
|
70-79 |
First |
Very good report |
Good understanding of topic; puts practical work in context where appropriate; very well laid out; drawings, diagrams, graphs, data analysis of high quality, well written. |
|
60-69 |
Upper |
Comprehensive report |
Good understanding of topic; well laid out; good drawings, diagrams, graphs/ data analysis; very few errors; well written. |
|
50-59 |
Lower |
Adequate report |
General understanding of topic, but some errors or key points not understood; layout and data analysis not always appropriate; drawings, diagrams/graphs at least adequate; expression and style adequate; grammar and spelling generally precise. |
|
40-49 |
Third |
Incomplete report |
Shows some understanding but report incomplete, with errors; coverage of topic poor; layout and data analysis poor; some drawings/diagrams/graphs adequate, expression and style only adequate, with spelling/ grammatical errors fairly common. |
|
30-39 |
Fail |
Deficient report |
At least some relevant information and general drift sensible, but report incomplete with poor understanding; many errors; layout poor; drawings/diagrams/graphs barely adequate; expression and style mostly poor; spelling/ grammar poor. |
|
0-29 |
Fail |
Very deficient or inadequate report |
Poor to no understanding of topic; very many errors and omissions; little or no substance; layout very poor or totally inappropriate; drawings, diagrams, graphs poor to totally inadequate; expression style, grammar, spelling poor to dreadful. |
A wide diversity of practical work is assessed against these criteria including reports on laboratory experiments, scientific drawings, field reports and poster/seminar reports. Both individual and group reports are assessed as above. Where a group produces a single report, the course teacher will give additional guidance on how each individual student in that group has his/her contribution assessed.
Compensation applies between criteria. For example a very clear layout in a report will, to some extent, compensate for errors of interpretation. Conversely, untidiness and bad grammar always downgrade a report, however good it may be in other ways.
CONTENTS | NEXT PAGE