Art History and Visual Culture

For general queries with study, please contact the AHVC Administrative Assistants Allison Brett. Her contact details are as follows:

Email: ahvc@exeter.ac.uk

Phone: +44 (0)1392 725301

Department of AHVC, Queens Reception

Queen's Building,

The Queen's Drive,

Streatham Campus,

Exeter EX4 4QH

_________________________________________________________________________________

Assessment Criteria

 

FIRST CLASS (note that 80+ banding is rarely used)

90+

Outstanding in all respects. A sophisticated and rigorous argument which engages critically with all aspects of the question. Original thinking and independent analysis backed up by judiciously chosen examples. Shows strong evidence of wide-ranging preparatory reading and broad background knowledge. Demonstrates exceptional ability to analyse visual material and text. Shows a critical awareness of the principles and practices of the discipline. Excellence of presentation, style, expression. Adheres rigorously to bibliographical conventions and formats footnotes correctly.

80-89%

Many features of outstanding quality; excellent overall. A rigorous argument which engages critically with all aspects of the question. Independent analysis backed up by well-chosen examples. Shows strong evidence of wide-ranging preparatory reading and broad background knowledge. Confident ability to analyse visual material and text independently and in some depth. Engages with scholarly debate on the topic. Excellence of presentation, style, and expression, and an extensive critical vocabulary. Applies bibliographical conventions and formats footnotes correctly. Work which would be judged as excellent or very good at the next highest level of study.

Low first 70-79%

Excellent or very good in most respects. A well-structured argument which engages critically with all aspects of the question. Analysis backed up by well-chosen examples. Shows strong evidence of wide-ranging preparatory reading and broad background knowledge. Able to analyse text in the language of study independently. Awareness of scholarly debate on the topic. Evidence of ability to handle complex concepts. Excellence of presentation, style, expression, including a wide critical vocabulary. Applies bibliographical conventions and formats footnotes consistently.

2:1 60-69%

Competent discussion of the question, clearly organized argument, showing evidence of a good overall knowledge of the topic and considerable preparatory reading. Evidence of background reading (as a minimum, evidence that any prescribed text(s) have been read); evidence of competence in analysing visual materials (as a minimum, evidence that any prescribed materials have been viewed). Generally a good standard of presentation and expression, with a sound critical vocabulary; a reasonably consistent use of bibliographical convention and footnotes. Work at the higher end of the range engages with most if not all aspects of the question and draws on reparatory reading for some independent analysis. At the lower end of the range, work may keep to a more routine set of ideas, and may not address all aspects of the question

2:2 50-59%

Satisfactory overall, with a reasonable standard of presentation and expression, and a basic critical vocabulary. Shows evidence of a fair knowledge of the topic, as well as some preparatory reading. The work may, however, show an overreliance on secondary sources. Where examples are presented, the analysis is fairly basic and/or there is some misunderstanding. The student may use quotation as a substitute for argument. Sources may not always be indicated in footnotes, and the format of footnotes and bibliography may not be consistent. Work at the higher end of the range attempts to address the question, though some aspects may not be touched on and not all material may be strictly relevant. At the lower end of the range there is a tendency towards narrative/description with little, if any analysis; work is likely to contain material which is irrelevant, and to show fewer signs of an attempt at structured argument.

3rd 40-49%

Takes a very basic approach to the question, using broadly appropriate material but lacking focus. Little evidence of preparatory reading. Little or no evidence of an ability to analyse visual materials. The argument is largely unstructured, and some points are irrelevant to the question. Knowledge of the topic is limited or very limited, and, particularly at the lower end of the range, there may be evidence of basic misunderstanding or misinterpretation. Poor standard of presentation and expression. There is no evidence that the candidate possesses a critical vocabulary appropriate to the discipline. If bibliography and footnotes are supplied, they are likely to show inconsistencies in formatting, and in the information provided.

Fail 26-39%

Inadequate, with very limited evidence of relevant knowledge or preparatory reading, and little attempt to answer the question. No sense of an underlying argument, unstructured, and contains basic misunderstandings or misinterpretation. Poor standard of presentation and expression, bibliography and footnotes may not be supplied at all.

Lowest fail 0-25%

Only the barest attempt, or no attempt to answer. Fails to demonstrate any appropriate knowledge.

Revised, 13.x.2015

College Taught Handbook

For College wide policies and procedures for taught students, including information about attendance, mitigation and support, please see the College Taught Handbook