代写留学生论文Form PGT B - Initial Assessment of Postgraduate Dissertation
(In accordance with M Level Grade Descriptors for marking MSc dissertations)
Name of Student
Name of Marker
Supervisor / second marker / third marker (please delete as appropriate)
Assessment
Descriptor Range Notes
Overall level
Scope
Understanding of subject matter
Use of secondary sources
Use of primary sources
Critical analysis based on evidence
Structure of argument
Presentation
Spelling, grammar, syntax, accuracy of referencing
INITIAL POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION MARK _________________%
M-level grade descriptors
Criterion / Mark range 90-100 80-89 70-79 60-69 50-59 40-49 0-39
Overall level
Standard comparable to journal publication Standard comparable to conference paper publication Distinctive work for Masters level Good work but below distinction level Acceptable for Masters Below Masters pass standard Significantly below Masters pass standard
Scope Outstanding clarity of focus, includes what is important, and excludes irrelevant issues. Excellent clarity of focus, boundaries set with no significant omissions or unnecessary issues. Clear focus. Very good setting of boundaries, includes most of what is relevant. Clear scope and focus, with some omissions or unnecessary issues. Scope evident and satisfactory but with some omissions and unnecessary issues. Poorly scoped, with significant omissions and unnecessary issues. Little or no scope or focus evident.
Understanding of subject matter
Outstanding with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Excellent with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Excellent expression of ideas. Very good with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Good with some awareness of relevance of issues. Ideas are expressed, with some limitation. Basic with limited awareness of relevance of issues. Limited expression of ideas. Poor with little awareness of relevance of issues Little or no understanding of subject matter is demonstrated.
Use of secondary sources
Comprehensive review of sources. Evaluation and synthesis of source material to produce an outstanding contribution. Excellent independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce an excellent contribution. Very good independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce a very good contribution. Good secondary research to extend taught materials. Evidence of evaluation of sources, some deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Limited secondary research to extend taught materials. Limited evaluation of sources, deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Little or no extension of taught materials. Poor choice and synthesis of materials. Poor use of taught materials. No synthesis.
代写留学生论文Use of primary sources (where relevant) Outstanding collection of pertinent data, using robust method of collection, and adding value to knowledge base in discipline Data collection of high standard, relevant to assignment and robust method, providing avenues for future research Data collection of high standard, allowing testing of analytical questions specific to assignment Good data collection, simple methodology, relevant results for the study Adequate engagement with data collection to provide basis for primary analysis, awareness of methodological issues Insufficient use of primary data for purposes of assignment. Methodologically weak. No evidence of awareness of primary data collection or methodology.
Critical analysis based on evidence Standard of critical analysis – showing questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought Excellent standard of critical analysis – excellence in questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought A very good standard of critical analysis. Sources are questioned appropriately, and a very good understanding of bias, showing independence of thought Critical analysis with some questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought. Analysis evident but uncritical. Sources are not always questioned, with limited independence of thought. Little or no analysis. No valid analysis.
Structure of argument Well structured, compelling and persuasive argument that leads to a valuable contribution to the field of study, paving the way for future work. Argument has excellent structure and persuasiveness, leading to /very significant insights and relevant future work. Well-structured and persuasive argument Insightful conclusion draws together key issues and possible future work. Structured and fairly convincing argument leads to conclusion that summarises key issues. Argument has some structure and development towards conclusion with limitations in summary of issues. Argument is unstructured, no recognizable conclusion. No evidence of argument or conclusion.
Presentation Excellent presentation. Carefully organised and well presented. Excellent presentation. Carefully organised and well presented. Excellent presentation. Carefully organised and well presented. Presentation and organization satisfactory Presentation and organization satisfactory Poorly organized and presented Poorly organized and presented
Spelling, grammar and syntax Excellent standard Excellent standard Excellent standard Acceptable standard./ Some errors in punctuation, use of words, spelling, sentence construction Acceptable standard./ Some errors in punctuation, use of words, spelling, sentence construction Significant errors in punctuation, use of words, spelling, sentence construction Significant errors in punctuation, use of words, spelling, sentence construction