Knowledge

Knowledge and understanding of the academic discipline, field of study, or area of professional practice.

SCOPE: critical engagement with the primary and secondary

sources used to answer the

question.

Insightful and sophisticated

engagement with research

and/or practice pertaining to

field(s) and disciplines of study;

Sophisticated demonstration

and application of knowledge,

offering innovative and/or

original insights, possibly

unparalleled in their

application;

A sophisticated degree of

synthesis, quite likely of

complex and disparate

material.

Advanced engagement with

research and or practice

pertaining to the field(s) and

disciplines of study;

Accomplished demonstration of

knowledge, contributing

towards innovative and/or

original insights;

Extremely high degree of

synthesis of research material.

A high degree of engagement

with research and/or practice

pertaining to field(s) and

disciplines of study;

Excellent demonstration of

knowledge, with the possibility

for new insights;

A high degree of synthesis

relating to research material.

Sustained engagement with

research and/or practice

pertaining to disciplines of

study;

An assured understanding of current problems, supported by

critical analysis with the

potential for new insights;

A sustained application and

depth of research material and

accuracy in detail.

Engagement with relevant

knowledge pertaining to

discipline and key issues;

Satisfactory understanding and

conceptual awareness enabling

critical analysis;

Response is appropriate and

addresses the range of

learning outcomes; where the

knowledge is accurate. Work

may lack sustained depth.

Unsatisfactory engagement

with relevant knowledge

pertaining to discipline and key

issues;

Insufficient understanding and

conceptual awareness of

knowledge(s) pertaining to the

field;

Response does not address

the full range of learning

outcomes, inaccurate and/or

missing knowledge at times.

Inadequate coverage of

relevant issues, inconsistent

understanding shown;

Inadequate understanding of

underpinning issues, weak and

underdeveloped analysis;

Response does not address

learning outcomes, inaccurate and missing knowledge.

Lack of relevant research and

little understanding shown;

Very weak understanding of

key issues, work lacks critical

oversight;

Substandard engagement with

research material,

misunderstanding evident.

Severely lacking in relevant

research and underpinning

knowledge;

Slight understanding of key

issues, little attempt at critical

analysis;

Slight engagement with research material, inaccurate

knowledge and misunderstanding throughout.

Negligible understanding of key

issues, which is likely to show

no critical analysis or

engagement with the learning

brief;

No engagement with research

tasks.

Sources

Reading and use of appropriate sources.

SCOPE: accurate and consistent

acknowledgment and referencing of sources.

Extensive range and

sophisticated use of

appropriate sources;

Unparalleled standard of

research both in breadth and

depth, which demonstrates a

very high intellectual

engagement and rigor.

Extensive range and use of

appropriate sources;

Extremely well referenced

research both in breadth and

depth, which demonstrates

high intellectual engagement

and rigor.

Substantial range and

sophisticated use of sources;

Well-referenced research both

in breadth and depth, which

demonstrates clear intellectual

rigor.

An assured range of reading,

with sustained reference to

key and core texts. The work

may include current research

at the leading edge of the

discipline;

Very good referencing in

breadth and/or depth, which

shows a very good level of

intellectual rigor;

Sources acknowledged

appropriately according to

academic conventions of

referencing.

A satisfactory range of core

and basic texts, which

references current research in

the discipline;

Sources acknowledged

appropriately according to

academic conventions of

referencing. The work may

contain minor errors and be

limited in breadth, depth and

intellectual rigor.

Insufficient range of source

reading of core and basic

texts;

Sources not acknowledged in

line with academic

conventions of referencing.

Reading material is

inadequate and may not

include core and basic texts;

Sources inaccurately

referenced.

Very weak engagement with

source reading of core and

basic texts;

Inconsistent and/or limited

referencing of sources.

Severely lacking source

reading;

Sources either not present and/or not referenced.

Negligible attempt to identify

source material;

No indication of source reading.

Methodology

SCOPE: critical engagement with

methodologies underpinning

original research or current

developments in the discipline.

Insightful and sophisticated

interpretation, application and

evaluation of the possibilities

and limitations of the

methodologies used by the

student and key

scholars/ practitioners

pertaining to the field(s) of

study;

Methods used offer new

insights and contributions to

knowledge.

Advanced interpretation,

application and evaluation of

the possibilities and limitations

of the methodologies used by

the student and key

scholars/ practitioners

pertaining to the field(s) of

study;

Methods used contribute

towards new insights to

knowledge.

Excellent interpretation,

application and evaluation of

the possibilities and limitations

of the methodologies used by

the student and key

scholars/ practitioners

pertaining to the field(s) of

study;

Methods used may offer new

insights or contributions to

knowledge.

A comprehensive

understanding shown and a

sustained application of

established methodologies and methods applicable to the student’s own research;

Research work planned in

scale and scope so that robust

and appropriate evidence can

be gathered and articulated.

A satisfactory application of

research techniques and

enquiry that are used to create

and interpret knowledge in the

discipline;

Research work planned

systematically in scale and

scope so that appropriate

evidence can be gathered.

Unsatisfactory application of

research techniques pertaining

to the discipline;

Unsatisfactory research

undertaken, resulting in

underdeveloped and poorly

executed work.

An underdeveloped

understanding of established

methodologies and those used

by the student;

Research work is weak and

executed inaccurately.

Very weak understanding of

established methodologies and

those used by student;

Substandard research,

methods mainly erroneous.

Research works show very

little planning and

understanding;

Erroneous use of methods to

explain the work.

Negligible understanding of

established research methods

and those used by the student;

No research methods evident.

Analysis

Critical analysis and interpretation.

SCOPE: 

appropriate analytical

discussion and interpretation of source material.

A sophisticated command of

imaginative, insightful, original

or creative interpretations;

An unparalleled level of

analysis and evaluation;

A sophisticated cogent

argument offering new and

original contributions to

knowledge.

Advanced command of

imaginative, insightful, original

or creative interpretations;

Accomplished level of analysis

and evaluation;

A highly developed cogent

argument with the potential to

bring new and original

contributions to knowledge.

An excellent command of

imaginative, original or creative

interpretations;

A high degree of analysis and

evaluation;

A sustained argument with the

possibility for new insights to

knowledge.

A convincing and sustained

command of accepted critical

positions;

A developed conceptual

understanding that enables the student to find new meanings in established hypotheses;

A developed and sustained

argument with the possibility

for new insights to knowledge.

An ability to deal with complex

issues both systematically and

creatively;

A satisfactory evaluation of

current research and critical

scholarship in the discipline;

Ability to devise a coherent

critical/ analytical argument is

supported with evidence.

A lack of ability to deal with

complex issues;

Judgements not fully

substantiated and understood;

The ability to construct an

argument is underdeveloped

and not supported fully with

evidence.

A lack of ability to deal with

complex issues;

Judgements are not

substantiated or understood

and the critical position is not

made clear;

Weak interpretation of

research and work is not

supported with evidence.

Very weak analysis, possibly

limited to a single perspective;

Substandard argument, work

lacks scholarly analysis and

interpretation;

Episodes of self-contradiction

and/or confusion.

Slight indication of ability to

deal with key issues;

Slight analytical engagement

and reflection, work lacks

criticality throughout;

Lacks evidence, work shows

self-contradiction and

confusion.

Negligible coverage of learning

outcomes;

No attempt to interpret

research material.

Communication

Communication skills: creative, written and presented.

SCOPE: communication of intent, adherence to academic

subject discipline protocols.

A sophisticated response, the

academic form matches that

expected in published and

professional work;

Mastery and command of

specialist skills pertaining to the

academic form;

Idiomatic and highly coherent,

scholarly expression.

Persuasive articulation, where

the academic form largely

matches that expected in

published work;

Accomplished command of

specialist skills pertaining to the

academic form, discipline and

context(s);

A high degree of skill, the

academic form shows

exceptional standards of

presentation or delivery;

A high command of specialist

skills pertaining to the academic

form, discipline and context(s).

Secure and sustained

expression, observing

appropriate academic form;

Fluent and persuasive

expression of ideas, work

shows flair;

Assured interpretation of the

style and genre, content, form

and technique for specialist and

non-specialist audiences as

appropriate.

Good expression, observing

appropriate academic form;

Predominantly accurate in

spelling and grammar, ideas

communicated appropriately

and satisfactorily;

Satisfactory application of

specialist skills with effective

technical control.

Unsatisfactory demonstration

and application of key

communication skills;

Recurring errors in spelling and

grammar, ideas limited and

underdeveloped, possibly poor

paraphrasing;

Skills demonstrated are

insufficient for the task and work

may lack technical judgement.

Significant errors evident in the

academic form;

Weaknesses in spelling and

grammar, lacks coherence and

structure, possibly poor

paraphrasing;

Work lacks technical

judgement.

Very weak observation of

academic conventions;

Severe deficiencies in spelling

and grammar and expression

undermines meaning, possibly

poor paraphrasing;

Substandard relationship

between content, form and

technique.

Slight observation of academic

conventions;

Weak expression, mostly

incoherent and fails to secure

meaning, poor paraphrasing;

Slight engagement with the work.

Negligible observation of

academic conventions;

Incoherent and confused

expression, poor paraphrasing;

No discernible demonstration

of key skills (pertaining to the

discipline);

No engagement with the work.

Reflection

Critical reflection and/or

personal and professional application.

SCOPE: Intellectual engagement with the processes by which the work is realised.

Insightful response to

critical self-evaluation,

reflecting exemplary

professional and/or

personal standards of

engagement and conduct

throughout;

Sophisticated application

of new insights (or highly

advanced application of

established ways of working pertaining to the

discipline).

Advanced level of critical

self-evaluation, reflecting

professional and/or

personal standards of

engagement and conduct

throughout;

Accomplished application

of new insights (or

advanced application of

established ways of

working pertaining to the

discipline).

A high degree of critical

self-evaluation, reflecting

professional and/ or

personal standards of

engagement and conduct;

Excellent application of

new insights (or a highly

skilled application of

established ways of

working pertaining to the discipline).

An assured level of self-evaluation, reflecting

sustained professional

and/or personal standards

of engagement and

conduct;

Assured application of new

or established ways of

working;

Work evidences thorough

independent planning and

execution of key tasks.

A satisfactory self

evaluation, reflecting

appropriate standards of

professional and/or

personal engagement and

conduct;

Satisfactory engagement

with established ways of

working pertaining to the discipline;

Independent planning and

execution.

Unsatisfactory self-evaluation

of professional

and/or personal

engagement and conduct;

Unsatisfactory

engagement with

established ways of

working pertaining to the

discipline;

Insufficient planning, work

not executed in full.

Weak self-evaluation of

professional and/or

personal engagement and

conduct;

Weak engagement with

established ways of

working pertaining to the

discipline;

Inadequate planning.

Very weak self-evaluation

of professional and/or

personal engagement and

conduct;

Substandard engagement

with established ways of

working;

Inappropriate execution of work.

Slight evidence of self-evaluation of professional

and/or personal

engagement and conduct;

Inappropriate execution of

key tasks and work may

be a cause for concern.

Negligible evidence of self-evaluation of professional

and/or personal

engagement and conduct;

No engagement with

established ways of

working;

In professional or equivalent contexts the

work will be cause for

concern.