Assessment Matrix for BETH essays

Assessment Matrix for BETH essays

FAIL (0-49) PASS (50-64) CREDIT (65-74) DISTINCTION (75-84) HIGH DISTINCTION (85+)
Content (argument and
supporting evidence or
reasoning)
[around 60%]
Does not address or misinterprets
the question. Omissions of relevant
information. Misinterpretation of
theory or evidence of lack of
knowledge. Argument is non
existent, superficial or structured
so that it is difficult to understand.
Poor synthesis of literature and
little or no critical engagement with
sources. Few or no original
observations.
Some parts of the question may
not be addressed, but obvious
understanding of topic. Few
omissions of information. Theory
largely interpreted correctly;
knowledge generally
demonstrated. Good attempt or
success in presenting and
structuring argument. Some
synthesis of literature and
attempts at critical engagement,
but paraphrasing may be apparent.
Some original observations.
Addresses the question well, good
understanding of topic. Minor (if
any) omissions in information.
Theory interpreted correctly;
knowledge demonstrated.
Argument is cohesive and
defended with reasoning, perhaps
including responses to counter
arguments. Synthesis of and critical
engagement with literature and
positions of others. Good attempt
at original observations.
Addresses all aspects of the
question, very good understanding
of topic. No omissions in
information. Theory, including
those from varying perspectives, is
interpreted soundly; knowledge
readily apparent. Argument is
strong and backed up with
considerable relevant reasoning,
including identifying and
responding to counter-arguments.
Synthesis and critical engagement
with literature, positions of others
and field as a whole. Clear
originality.
Addresses all aspects of question to
exceptional standard, excellent
understanding. No omissions, nor
irrelevant information. Theories
from multiple perspectives
interpreted to high standard;
knowledge obvious. Argument is
excellent and backed up with
sound reasoning, including
identifying and responding to
counter-arguments. Excellent
synthesis and critical engagement
with literature, positions of others
and field as a whole. Innovative
and insightful.
Structure and organisation
[around 15%]
Assignment poorly structured, has
no structure or is over-structured
(lists). Introduction, body and
conclusion lacking or indistinct. No
attempt at explicitly stating and
addressing the object of the work
or signalling the argument.
Information is poorly organized and
does not flow logically.
Assignment has acceptable
structure. Introduction, body and
conclusion are distinct. Object of
essay identified and attempts at
signalling argument. Information
may be poorly organized or have
problems with clarity; at times it
may not flow logically.
Assignment structure generally
good. Introduction, body and
conclusion are distinct. Object of
work is identified and argument is
signalled. Most information is well
organized, clear and generally
logical.
Assignment has very good
structure. Clear introduction, body
and conclusion. Object of work
easily identified, argument
signalled well. Information is well
organized, clear and logical.
Assignment has excellent structure.
Clear and well organized
introduction, body and conclusion.
Object of work obvious and
argument impeccably signalled.
Flow of the assignment is logical.
Similar to published work.
Sources and references
[around 15%]
Very few sources and references
cited. Possible unacceptable
paraphrasing or lack of citation
(plagiarism). Referencing style very
poor.
Small number of sources and
references; may go beyond core
reading. Some sources may not be
acknowledged accurately.
Referencing style requires
improvement.
Good number of sources and
references, beyond core readings.
All sources are acknowledged.
Referencing style sound.
Comprehensive number of sources
and references, beyond core
readings. All sources
acknowledged. Good referencing
style.
Very comprehensive number of
sources and references, far beyond
core readings. All sources
acknowledged and well referenced.
Style and format
[around 10%]
Assignment is poorly written. Large
number of grammatical, spelling
and/or punctuation errors. Errors
in English construction rendering
parts of the text incomprehensible.
Poor presentation.
Assignment is written to
acceptable standard. A number of
grammatical, spelling and/or
punctuation errors. Problems with
English construction. Acceptable
presentation.
Assignment is well written. Fewer
grammatical, spelling and/or
punctuation errors. English is
sound. Very good presentation.
Assignment is very well written,
showing clarity and creativity. Only
a few minor grammatical, spelling
and/or punctuation errors. Very
good use of English language.
Assignment is cohesively written,
with clarity and creativity. Clear
format. No or very few
grammatical, spelling or
punctuation errors. Excellent use of
English language. Format is of
publication standard.