MSc MODULE ASSESSMENT GUIDELINES

The assessment grid below describes the criteria for module assessment in WMG on the Postgraduate Taught Programmes. The grid is to be used by markers, and where
applicable moderators and external examiners. This marking grid applies for both In-Module Assessment (IMA) and Post-Module Assessment. (PMA) where that
assessment is carried out by written work. For work that is not written, academic judgement will need to be used to map the performance onto the band descriptors.

The descriptors in the rows below represent the middle of the band, so, for example, the descriptors in the 60-68 row, represent a marks of 65%. Not that the band are
truncated to suggest avoiding marks near grade boundaries except where really necessary. Where a PMA does not fit the descriptors precisely or different elements of the
PMA could be described by descriptors in a number of bands then the markers are expected to use academic judgement to place the mark in the appropriate band.

Mark Level Critical Comprehension & Analysis Presentation Learning outcomes

80+ An exemplary piece of work, showing complete mastery of the
Outstanding subject, with an exceptionally developed and mature ability to
analyse, synthesise and apply concepts, models and
techniques. All requirements of the set work are covered and
work is free from errors. The work demonstrates originality of
thought, with strong critical reflection and the ability to tackle
questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are
explained with great lucidity and in an extremely structured
manner.
70-79 An excellent piece of work, showing mastery of the subject, with
Distinction a highly developed and mature ability to analyse, synthesise and
apply concepts, models and techniques. All requirements of the
set work are covered and work is free from all but very minor
errors. There is good critical reflection and the ability to tackle
questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are
explained very clearly and in a highly structured manner.
60-69 A strong piece of work, showing a sound grasp of the subject
Good Pass and a skilful attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of
concepts, models and techniques. Most requirements of the set
work are covered, but there may be a few gaps leading to some
errors. There is some critical reflection and a reasonable attempt
is made to tackle questions and issues not previously
encountered. Ideas are explained clearly and in a well organised
manner, with some minor exceptions.
Showing exceptional written communication All learning outcomes
skills. Well-structured with excellent use of
headings and sub-sections that show the are fully met.
development of a logical argument.
Diagrams where used are appropriately titled
and referenced in the text. All pages are
correctly and clearly numbered. All references
are properly cited and listed.
Showing exceptional written communication
skills. Well-structured with excellent use of
headings and sub-sections that show the
development of a logical argument.
Diagrams where used are appropriately titled
and referenced in the text. All pages are
correctly and clearly numbered. All references
are properly cited and listed.
Showing effective written communication skills. All learning outcomes
Reasonable overall structure and use of
headings with some evidence of development of are fully or partially met.
logical argument. Diagrams where used are As the marks approach 69 then
appropriately titled and referenced in the text, all fewer learning outcomes are
pages are correctly and clearly numbered and all partially met and more are fully
references are properly cited and listed however met.
there may be some minor errors.
Mark Level Critical Comprehension & Analysis
50-59 A satisfactory piece of work, showing a grasp of major areas of
Pass the subject, but probably with areas of ignorance. Analysis,
synthesis and application of concepts, models and techniques is
mechanical, with a heavy reliance on course materials. The
requirements of the set work are covered but with significant
gaps. Little or no critical reflection and limited ability to tackle
questions or issues not previously encountered. Ideas are
explained adequately but with some confusion and lack of
organisation.
40-49 An unsatisfactory piece of work. There is a weak attempt at
Fail, but module analysis, synthesis and application of concepts, models and
deemed techniques. Only some of the requirements of the set work are
completed1 covered. Inability to reflect critically and difficulty in beginning to
address questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas
are poorly explained and organised.
<40 An inadequate piece of work. There are extremely serious gaps
Fail in knowledge of the subject, and many areas of confusion. Few
or none of the requirements of the set work are covered. The
student has failed to engage seriously with the subject and finds
it impossible to begin to address questions and issues not
previously encountered. The levels of expression and
organisation in the work are very inadequate.
1
This has different implication for essential core, core and elective modules. See your course regulations page for details.
Presentation Learning outcomes
Showing competent written communication
skills. Fair overall structure and use of headings
with some evidence of development of logical As the marks approach 50 then
argument. Diagrams where used are more learning outcomes are
appropriately titled and referenced in the text, all partially met and fewer are fully
pages are correctly and clearly numbered and all met.
references are properly cited and listed however
there may be some errors.
Showing less than optimal written At least one learning
communication skills. Weak overall structure and
use of headings with little evidence of outcome is NOT met.
development of logical argument. Diagrams
where used may be poorly titled and referenced
in the text, pages may not be correctly and
clearly numbered and some references are not
cited or listed. There may be some major errors.
Showing poor written communication skills.
Inadequate overall structure and use of headings
with very little evidence of development of logical
argument. Diagrams where used may not be
titled or referenced in the text, pages are not
correctly or clearly numbered and many
references are improperly cited or listed. There
may be many errors.