Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 52 views

    Feedback Sheet 2014

    Uploaded by

    Kimi Rin
    This document outlines the criteria and grading scale used to assess undergraduate coursework at the Bradford School of Management. It provides descriptors for evaluating students' work in the areas of knowledge and understanding, analysis of issues, research and referencing, relevance of content, conclusions, written communication, structure and presentation, and length. The criteria are divided into categories for grades below 40%, 40-49%, 50-59%, 60-69%, and 70% or above. General comments, the overall mark, student name, student number, date, module, and intake are also included for assignment assessment purposes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Feedback Sheet 2014

    Uploaded by

    Kimi Rin
    52 views1 page
    This document outlines the criteria and grading scale used to assess undergraduate coursework at the Bradford School of Management. It provides descriptors for evaluating students' work in the areas of knowledge and understanding, analysis of issues, research and referencing, relevance of content, conclusions, written communication, structure and presentation, and length. The criteria are divided into categories for grades below 40%, 40-49%, 50-59%, 60-69%, and 70% or above. General comments, the overall mark, student name, student number, date, module, and intake are also included for assignment assessment purposes.

    Original Description:

    feedback sheet for university

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document outlines the criteria and grading scale used to assess undergraduate coursework at the Bradford School of Management. It provides descriptors for evaluating students' work in the areas of knowledge and understanding, analysis of issues, research and referencing, relevance of content, conclusions, written communication, structure and presentation, and length. The criteria are divided into categories for grades below 40%, 40-49%, 50-59%, 60-69%, and 70% or above. General comments, the overall mark, student name, student number, date, module, and intake are also included for assignment assessment purposes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    52 views1 page

    Feedback Sheet 2014

    Uploaded by

    Kimi Rin
    This document outlines the criteria and grading scale used to assess undergraduate coursework at the Bradford School of Management. It provides descriptors for evaluating students' work in the areas of knowledge and understanding, analysis of issues, research and referencing, relevance of content, conclusions, written communication, structure and presentation, and length. The criteria are divided into categories for grades below 40%, 40-49%, 50-59%, 60-69%, and 70% or above. General comments, the overall mark, student name, student number, date, module, and intake are also included for assignment assessment purposes.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    BRADFORD SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT ASSESSED COURSEWORK FOR UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMMES

    CRITERIA BELOW 40% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70% +


    Knowledge & understanding Fails to demonstrate
    understanding of
    topic/area.
    Shows a bare understanding
    of basic issues/theory.


    Shows grasp of basic issues/theory. Well informed. Demonstrates sound
    understanding.

    Demonstrates well co-
    ordinated, grounded and
    reasoned understanding.
    Analysis & identification of issues Little or no analysis. Fails
    to identify key
    issues/theory.

    Overly descriptive identifies
    obvious issues. Misses more
    subtle issues/theory.

    Some evidence of understanding.
    Coverage of obvious issues/theory
    only.

    Accurate & detailed coverage of obvious
    issues/theory. More subtle issues/theory
    recognised & reasonably dealt with.
    Presented in logically reasoned,
    coherent and evaluative manner.
    Provides concise analysis of all
    relevant issues/theory.

    Research & referencing No evidence of basic
    reading/sources out of
    date. Poor referencing.
    Lacking evidence/sources not
    up to date. Weak referencing.

    Key source & reference material
    covered. Adequate referencing.
    Evidence of further research.


    Appropriate use of evidence from a
    variety of up to date sources. Generally
    accurate and well informed. Clear
    referencing. Evidence of detailed
    research in some areas.
    Wide ranging use of relevant
    cases/materials. Excellent
    referencing & research in all
    areas.
    Subject relevance Irrelevant or repetitive
    material.
    Some irrelevant or repetitive
    material.
    Some material repeated/overused.

    Relevant material used.

    All material relevant to
    subject.
    Conclusion problem solving No proper concluding
    section. Poor or no
    attempt at application of
    knowledge.
    Conclusion repetitive, thin in
    content. Weak but satisfactory
    application of issues/theory

    Conclusion attempted but some
    points missing. Reasonable
    application of knowledge to main
    issues/theory.
    Cogent and intelligent conclusion. Good
    application of knowledge to all
    issues/theory.
    Excellent concluding section
    drawing together the various
    points made and adding an
    original perspective.
    Written communication spelling
    & grammar
    Purpose & meaning
    unclear. Language,
    grammar & spelling
    poor.
    Language mainly fluent, but
    frequent errors of grammar
    or spelling.

    Language mainly fluent.
    Grammar/spelling mainly accurate.

    Thoughts & ideas clearly expressed.
    Grammar/spelling accurate and
    language fluent.

    Articulate & persuasive use of
    language. Consistently
    accurate user of
    grammar/spelling.
    Structure & presentation Structure unclear. Poorly
    presented.
    Problems with structure and
    presentation.

    Structure coherent. Presentation
    satisfactory.

    Structure supports argument clearly.
    Presentation clear & appropriate.

    Structure guides reader
    through argument.
    Presentation excellent.
    Length This coursework has been
    penalised because it is
    significantly over length.

    Not all sections carry the same weighting and the final mark reflects the academic worth of the assignment as a whole.

    General Comments:
    Mark:
    .

    STUDENT NAME :

    ______________________________________________________________

    UB NUMBER:

    ____________________

    DATE:

    _______________

    MODULE:

    _______________________________(Individual assignment/ Group assignment)

    INTAKE:

    ____________________

    You might also like