Criteria for Marking of Level 1 Coursework
MARK CONTENT (Knowledge)
Excellent Excellent for this level with respect to: coherence of
First argument, factual accuracy and selection of material.
93 – 100
First Logically presented with well-focused arguments and
conclusions based on evidence. Entirely accurate with
70 – 92 an appropriate depth and/or breadth of coverage of
subject, good use of material from beyond set reading
lists.
Upper Sound structure, clearly written, relevant and mostly
Second accurate. May lack depth and/or breadth of
comprehension, overly reliant on set reading lists.
60 – 69
Lower Basic framework is sound; ideas are organized and
Second clearly presented. Work is broadly accurate with the
description adequately demonstrating factual
50 – 59 knowledge and comprehension of appropriate
terminology and principles.
Third Structure is weak. Contains a basic description of the
factual knowledge required and identifies some facts
41 – 49 and concepts, but with a narrow or misguided selection
of material. Some key information wrong or missing but
sufficient information and relevance to give cursory
coverage of subject.
Enough structure, breadth and depth of material to reach
Bare Pass
a minimum acceptable standard of factual knowledge
(40)
and comprehension.
ARGUMENT & INTERPRETATION (Analysis)
Concisely presents excellent, coherent, evidence-based
arguments and can identify some original thinking on the
subject. Good synthesis of literature and/or application
of key principles. Ideas are expanded and there is
demonstration of evaluative skills, critical analysis,
originality, or independent thought.
Demonstrates a detailed knowledge and
comprehension of concepts. Accurate synthesis of
relevant literature and/or application of key principles.
Well-structured reflection on practice. Clear analysis of
ideas, and some evaluation of strengths and
weaknesses of developed arguments.
Good comprehension and some synthesis of
concepts. Use of literature and/or application of key
principles to support arguments. Ideas are developed
through coherent arguments and there is a clear
analysis of some relevant issues and/or reflection on
practice.
Adequate comprehension and some application
and/or analysis of concepts. Your reflection on practice
is adequate and appropriate. Adequate development of
arguments and use of evidence.
Sufficiently demonstrates that the writer has a basic
comprehension of the subject. Weak application of
learning and/or limited analysis. Presents arguments
with insufficient evidential support. Limited reflection on
practice.
STYLE & STRUCTURE (Communication)
A clear and coherent presentation of ideas in a concise and fluent
manner, extremely well written. Excellent presentation and use of
illustrative material. Citation of references conforms to School
guidelines in their entirety.
Consistently clear communication of ideas in a fluent writing style.
Good presentation and use of illustrative material. Proper citation of
references in text and reference list.
Good communication of ideas, generally clear writing. Sound use of
language but may contain minor errors. Good use of illustrative
material. May contain minor errors in citation of references in text
and reference list.
Generally good communication of ideas but contains some
ambiguities or lack of clarity. Acceptable use of language but may
lack fluency and contain occasional errors. Adequate use of
illustrative material but requires improved presentation, further
explanation or context. May not fully comply with School guidelines
in regard to referencing.
Contains a number of ambiguous or unclear sections. Minimal
acceptable standard of writing style. Illustrative material may be
missing, poorly presented, unexplained, or lacking context. Where
appropriate, numerous inconsistencies or inaccuracies in citation of
references in text and reference list.
 Fail Marred by poor structure, lack of relevance, inaccurate Little evidence of comprehension of concepts. Contains substantial material that lacks clarity. Organisation and/or
information, weak understanding and an inadequate coherency are poor. Illustrative material is missing or irrelevant.
19 – 39
display of knowledge. Inaccurate and/or incomplete bibliography.

Low fail Deficient in structure, fails to address the question, No evidence of comprehension of the subject. Work is incoherent and/or disorganised. Clarity of written expression
numerous omissions and errors in factual knowledge. is very poor. Bibliography is grossly inaccurate and/or incomplete.
0 – 18