School of Computing & Engineering Assessment Criteria Grid

Mark Comment Grade & Theory & Practice &

% Characteristics Academic Approach Deliverables
0 Fail plagiarism, collusion, non-pres., name as theory
only
1-39 Reassess: no understanding, very short, inadequate, poor effective deliverables, requirements
inadequate but factual but little interpretation, lacks not met, deliverables partially complete,
recoverable with coherence, short, errors, misconceptions, limited response to brief.
effort coherent but mechanical notes, partial -
rudimentary answer, limited interpretation,
lack of knowledge of topic, no evidence of
background reading, weak English but
some appropriate use of language of
topic.
40-49 3rd, D adequate response, demonstration of deliverables meet basic requirement
Pass: Sufficient for basic knowledge, relevant content, clear correctly but limited, just adequate but not
award of credit intention communicated, evidence of innovative, interesting or exciting, for higher
reading, acceptable minimum level of marks, 45+ just exceeds minimum
adequate mainly English for business presentation but may specification, might be good in some areas
descriptive lack precision, some limited analysis / but not consistent
approach, fair, application of knowledge / theory /
limited conceptual or weighting of evidence, inconsistent
theoretical ability
50-59 2ii, C good response to task, collates info, good deliverables, some evidence of good
Satisfactory satisfactory analysis & judgement, design or execution, coherent and
constructs generalisations based on organised product, some limited evidence
Satisfactory with evidence & opinion, argues clearly, of self-criticism concerning deliverable,
some conceptual logically & constructs a case, some limited some independence, initiative, autonomy,
ability but lacks good ability to state a personal position, correct appropriate techniques, integration of
evaluation or English with few imprecise statements knowledge for task
synthesis of ideas
60-69 2i, B evaluates info. & synthesises all criteria met to good standard, evidence
Good. generalisations, good ability to state & of good design or execution, good
defend personal position, good analysis & integration of academic & practical issues,
Good analysis, judgement, applies knowledge to new solid evidence of self-critique/evaluation of
evaluation, situations, sound on theory, critical, deliverables, products well organised -
synthesis, understands limitations of methods, documented - coherent. Evidence of
integration & selective coherent & logical approach, well independence, initiative, autonomy,
argument. written with clear, correct and precise creativity, adaptability, resourcefulness.
English Integration of knowledge,
70-79 First class, A, very strong ability to state & defend most criteria met to high standard, strong
Excellent. position, uses criteria & weighting in evidence of evaluation of deliverables, 75+:
judgements, wide knowledge and deliverables excellent - all criteria met in
as above but also theoretical ability, full understanding of clear and definite manner, evidence of
stronger evidence of possibilities and limitations of methods & excellent design or execution, elegance,
excellent, original, theories, 75+ more original, innovative innovation, very good evaluation of
innovative, articulate approach, command of critical positions, deliverables,
work lively articulate writing, excellent grasp of
material - synthesis of ideas
80-89 Outstanding. as above but also:- as above but also :-
as above but also seen all possibilities in task, gone beyond all aspects of deliverables superlative
authoritative, accepted conceptual/critical positions, beyond 80% emphasis on theory rather
superlative, evidence of creative, intelligent, innovative than practice/deliverables
approach consistently & forcefully
creative expressed
90-100 Faultless as for 80-89 but also:- as for 80-89
all work superlative & without fault

© University of Gloucestershire 1