Level 2 and Level 3 Essay marking criteria

Criterion	1	1	1	2.1	2.2	3	Marg fail	Clear fail	Poor fail	Very poor fail
Originality	++	+	(+)
Appreciation of associated implications	++	+	(+)
Relevant outside reading	++	++	++	+ or (+)
Accuracy	++	++	++	++	+	(+)
Logical organisation	++	++	++	++	+	(+)
ILOs adequately met	++	++	++	++	++	+	(+)
Relevant examples	++	++	++	++	+	(+)	(+)	(+)
Comprehension of question requirements	++	++	++	++	++	+	+	+	+	(+)

Class	Range	Description
1	90-100	Outstanding: Demonstrates a thorough comprehension of the question's requirements and provides evidence of insight into associated implications. Integrates a strong selection of relevant examples, and is conceptually innovative and original. Content is accurate and shows evidence of relevant outside reading *. Logically organised and articulate. Difficult to recommend improvements given the time available.
	80-89	Excellent: Demonstrates a thorough comprehension of the question's requirements and provides evidence of insight into associated implications. Integrates a strong selection of relevant examples, with clear evidence of original thought. Content is accurate, and shows evidence of relevant outside reading *. Logically organised and articulate. Some areas for improvement noticeable.
	70-79	Very good: Demonstrates comprehension of the question's requirements and provides evidence of some insight into associated implications. Integrates a strong selection of relevant examples with some evidence of original thought, but tending towards description rather than interpretation. Content is accurate, and shows evidence of relevant outside reading *. Logically organised and articulate.
2.1	65-69	Good: Demonstrates broad comprehension of the question's requirements. Presents a good selection of relevant examples. Largely descriptive in approach. Content is accurate, and shows evidence of outside reading *. Logically organised and articulate.
	60-64	Fairly good: Demonstrates comprehension of most of the question's important requirements. Presents an adequate selection of relevant examples. Largely descriptive in approach. Content is accurate and shows evidence of some outside reading *. Logically organised and articulate.
2.2	55-59	Pedestrian: Demonstrates comprehension of some of the question's important requirements. Presents relevant examples. Content is largely accurate, but virtually no evidence of relevant outside reading *. Presentation is fairly well organised. Descriptive in approach.
	50-54	Weak: Demonstrates comprehension of some of the question's requirements, and presents some relevant examples. Factually inaccurate in places. Virtually no evidence of relevant outside reading *. Poorly organised or illogical.
3	45-49	Poor: Demonstrates some comprehension of the question's requirements. Evidence of some sound knowledge derived from the module that is relevant to the question, but presentation of examples is poor, being incomplete or irrelevant in part. No evidence of relevant outside reading *, and lapses in accuracy, logic, and / or organisation.
	40-44	Very poor: Demonstrates some comprehension of the question's requirements, but with serious omissions. Evidence of some knowledge derived from the module that is relevant to the question, but the examples presented are inadequate. No evidence of relevant outside reading *, and with serious lapses in accuracy, logic, and / or organisation.
	35-39	Marginal Fail: Demonstrates some comprehension of the question's requirements, but with serious omissions and factual errors. Evidence of some knowledge that is relevant to the question, but lacks evidence to show that an adequate range of the intended learning outcomes of the module that are relevant to the question have been met. OR Demonstrates evidence of fairly detailed, module-derived knowledge, but the essay is based on a relatively minor, identifiable misinterpretation of the question's requirements.
	25-34	Clear Fail: Demonstrates some comprehension of the question's requirements, but evidence only for a minimal knowledge of the subject. Little evidence to indicate that any of the intended learning outcomes of the module that are relevant to the question have been met. OR Demonstrates evidence of fairly detailed, module-derived knowledge, but the essay is based on an identifiable misinterpretation of the question's requirements.
	15-24	Poor Fail: Little evidence that the question's requirements have been understood and / or relevant content virtually absent. Virtually no evidence to indicate that any of the intended learning outcomes of the module that are relevant to the question have been met. OR Demonstrates evidence of fairly detailed, module-derived knowledge, but the essay is based on a major, identifiable misinterpretation of the question's requirements.
	1-15	Very Poor Fail: Virtually no evidence that the question's requirements have been understood and / or relevant content to the question is virtually absent.
	0	Complete Fail: No evidence that the question's requirements have been understood and no relevant content to the question.

* Outside reading represents any material used in an essay answer that could not have been derived solely from attendance at lectures / practicals / tutorials. For example:

Level 2: In the case of Level 2 modules, this is most likely to come from recommended (or other) textbooks. In some cases students may use reviews or primary literature as a source of knowledge. Level 2 students will be given additional credit for going beyond the use of recommended textbooks.

Level 3: In the case of Level 3 modules, this is expected to come from recommended research-based literature, most likely reviews and primary literature, although a number of Level 3 modules will have textbooks that are highly relevant for extra reading due to the nature of the research in their disciplines.