7.27 Asssessment Criteria for Humanities Codes Modules 2021-2022

The below marking criteria may be used as a basic guide by examiners of HUM-coded modules, who may interpret them in the light of module-specific ILOs as well as degree stage. They can be read in conjunction with the university-wide TQA marking criteria, which differentiate by degree stage.

* ‘Essay’, here, mainly applies to a coursework essay or seen exam, but the criteria may be adapted for unseen exam essays.

** The adjectives ‘very good’ and ‘excellent’ should be understood as applying to a ‘low first’ (70–79%). Where work is ‘exceptional’ or ‘outstanding’, within the first-class category, it will normally earn a mark of 80% or higher.

*** This band includes both a fail (26–39%) and a weak fail (0-25%).

ARGUMENT, ANALYSIS, STRUCTURE First 70+ 2.1 60-69 2.2 50-59 Third 40-49 Fail 0-39
Essay*/report Very good/ excellent (70+) or exceptional (80+)** analysis and synthesis, with very good critical evaluation of supporting evidence. A very well-structured, logical, and sustained argument, which engages critically and comprehensively with the question or topic, and produces strong conclusions. Good level of analysis and synthesis, with competent critical evaluation of supporting evidence. A clearly structured argument, which engages critically and thoroughly with the question, and produces sound conclusions. Evidence of logical, analytical thinking and synthesis, reasonably well supported by evidence, but adopting a fairly basic and descriptive approach. A satisfactorily structured argument, covering the main points in answer to the question though some material may not be relevant. Conclusions are broadly valid. Some evidence of logical, analytical thinking, partly supported by evidence, but lacking in focus. An unclearly structured argument, which adopts a very basic and descriptive approach to the question and fails to address some important aspects. Some points are irrelevant to the question. Minimal (26-39%) or no (0-25%)*** evidence of analytical thinking; mostly or entirely descriptive. General statements with little or no evidence. No sense of an underlying structure or argument. Fails to address any of the important aspects of the question (26-39%), or indeed fails to address the question at all (0-25%).
Presentation/ poster/ publishing portfolio Of considerable interest; very informative; always relevant. Focus will be sharp and clear. Very clear argument; easy to follow; balanced. Supporting evidence for the arguments presented, at a high level. Of interest; informative. Relevant. Focus is neither too general nor too narrow. Clear argument; balanced, and fairly easy to follow. Supporting evidence for the arguments presented. Of some interest and will be fairly informative. Focus is on the whole neither too general nor too narrow. Argument may lack clarity in places. Not always be easy to follow. Generally balanced, but may have lapses. Evidence supports most arguments. Basic; of limited interest and relatively uninformative. Significant degree of irrelevance; rather too general or narrowly focused. Basic argument lacks clarity. Not easy to follow; lacking balance. Lacks supporting evidence for some arguments. Neither interesting nor informative. May be grossly irrelevant, far too general or far too narrow. Very basic. No clear argument; hard to follow; lacks balance. Severe lack of supporting evidence.
Learning log  Presents a critical appraisal of experience so far. Puts relevant aspects of the experience into a wider cultural/educational context. Attempts to justify why experiences have been as they are.  Will compare experiences with expectations. Also compare with the experiences of others. Will discuss impact of experiences in more detail, and beyond immediate emotional.  Fairly descriptive, though an attempt will be made to discuss the impact of the experiences on the student.  Descriptive. Focuses on practical or peripheral aspects at the expense of educational experiences.  Not submitted or not complete. Completely fails even to attempt an answer.
KNOWLEDGE/ PREPARATION/RESEARCH First 70+ 2.1 60-69 2.2 50-59 Third 40-49 Fail 0-39
Essay*/report  Demonstrates very good or excellent knowledge and understanding of the topic, with evidence of ability to handle complex concepts and deploy relevant critical vocabulary. Shows awareness of limitations, contradictions, and ambiguities. Very effective use of appropriate research methods.  Demonstrates good knowledge and understanding of the topic, and deploys a sound critical vocabulary. Effective use of appropriate research methods  Demonstrates satisfactory broad knowledge of the topic, and deploys a basic critical vocabulary. May include misunderstandings. Some use of appropriate research methods.  Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of the topic, with some evidence of basic misunderstanding or misinterpretation. Very limited evidence of use of appropriate research methods.  Demonstrates a superficial understanding of the main issues, but with major gaps and inaccuracies in knowledge and understanding. Very little if any evidence of relevant reading. Little or no evidence of use of appropriate research methods.
Learning Log  Includes potential expectations of others in similar situations. Compares situation with past experiences. Puts preparations into a wider cultural/educational context; demonstrates relevant reading and appraisal of that reading.  Evaluates implications of expectations. Discusses how fears may be overcome and other preparation. Addresses educational expectations. Compares and contrasts expectations in different areas.  Expectations go beyond the literal/physical, and address emotional aspects. Attempts to justify expectations and provide basis of where these have come from.  Literal description of what student expects to encounter. Focuses on peripheral questions.  Not submitted or not complete. Completely fails even to attempt answer.
Presentation/ poster/ publishing portfolio  High level of serious planning and thought; excellent handling of questions. Excellent level of research and reflection, with evidence of wide reading and awareness of differing views at a sophisticated level. No evidence of shortcomings and/or gaps. Clear evidence that the relationship between different parts of the presentation, poster or portfolio has been well thought-out.  Serious planning or thought. Competent handling of questions. Good level of research and reflection, with evidence of wide reading and awareness of differing views. No serious evidence of shortcomings and/or gaps.  Some serious planning or thought. Broadly competent handling of questions, but may reveal some ignorance. Research/reflection largely relies on approaches of lectures and/or textbook(s). Some shortcomings and/or gaps.  Little serious planning or thought. Ignorance of certain aspects of the topic. Degree of incompetence in dealing with queries. Serious shortcomings and/or gaps.  No serious planning or thought. Ignorance of central aspects and/or incompetence in dealing with queries. Pervasive, serious shortcomings and/or gaps.
ENGAGEMENT First 70+ 2.1 60-69 2.2 50-59 Third 40-49 Fail 0-39
Essay*/report  Very good critical engagement with the relevant scholarly literature. Very good evidence of independent analysis of evidence, going well beyond course materials and discussions. Where group work is involved, the student has worked very effectively with others, showing leadership skills where appropriate, and met all obligations to others.  Good overall knowledge of the relevant literature. Good evidence of independent analysis of evidence. Where group work is involved, the student has worked very effectively with others, and met all obligations to others.  Some evidence of independent reading and analysis, but possibly over-reliant on the work of others. Where group work is involved, the student has worked effectively with others, and met obligations to others.  Few signs of independent reading and analysis. Where group work is involved, the student has worked effectively with others, and met most obligations to others.  No evidence of independent reading and analysis. Where group work is involved, the student has not worked effectively with others, and has not met obligations to others.
Learning Log  Where a research task is set, the spread of sources is comprehensive and critically evaluated, covering a variety of media, and revealing very good contextual understanding. Where a research task is set, a range of sources is drawn upon, allowing for local constraints. Where a research task is set, an analytical understanding of the task is demonstrated. Where a research task is set, a descriptive and de-contextualised approach is adopted. Not submitted or not complete. Completely fails even to attempt an answer.
Presentation/ poster/ publishing portfolio Strong and original creative input. Where group work is involved, the student has worked very effectively with others, showing leadership skills where appropriate, and met all obligations to others. Serious evidence of personal input. Where group work is involved, the student has worked very effectively with others, and met all obligations to others. Some serious evidence of personal input. Where group work is involved, the student has worked effectively with others, and met obligations to others. Minimal evidence of serious personal input. Where group work is involved, the student has worked effectively with others, and met most obligations to others. No serious evidence of personal input. Where group work is involved, the student has not worked effectively with others, and has not met obligations to others.
PRESENTATION AND EXPRESSION  First 70+  2.1 60-69  2.2 50-59  Third 40-49 Fail 0-39
 Essay/report/ learning log/ publishing portfolio Very good presentation, including of any footnotes or bibliography where required. Clear, concise, and accurate writing style. Good level of presentation, including of any footnotes or bibliography where required. Generally clearly and accurately written. Adequate presentation, including of any footnotes or bibliography where required. Adequate command of grammar, syntax and spelling. Inadequate presentation, including of any footnotes or bibliography where required. Some significant errors in spelling, syntax, or grammar. Poor presentation, including of any footnotes and bibliography where required. Inadequate (26-39%) or incoherent (0-25%) English style.
 Presentation/ poster  Right pace to keep interest and allow the audience to follow it. Delivery will be clear. Can communicate very effectively. Manages time very well. Pace keeps interest and allows the audience to follow it. Delivery will be clear. Communication is confident. Time management is good. Pace generally holds interest and allows audience to follow, but with lapses. Delivery might be unclear in places. Communication is reasonably effective. Time management is broadly satisfactory. Too fast or slow, with a significant lack of clarity. Can communicate, but with clear weaknesses. Time management may need improvement.  Too fast or slow; very unclear. Major communication difficulties. Poor/ very poor time management.