FC310 Logic and Critical Thinking – Argumentative Essay - Marking Scheme

TUTOR 1 TUTOR 2
Specific criteria being assessed 5 4 3 2 1 0 5 4 3 2 1 0

Content and argument (40%) marks

 A number of relevant ideas and arguments are presented
 A clear focus on the essay question and wider topic is maintained throughout Evidence
 A number of counterarguments and refutations are included and support the author’s opinion
 A range of relevant sources is referred to
5 – Excellent
Critical Evaluation and Use of Sources (40%) marks
 Arguments, counterarguments and refutations are analysed and evaluated perceptively and from a number of perspectives, 4 – Very good
showing a deep understanding of each of the issues presented
 Synthesis of ideas and sources is present and highlights the high quality of critical evaluation done 3 – Sufficient
2 – Limited
Structure, Coherence and Clarity (10%) marks
 Highly logical structure is used throughout the essay which allows the reader to follow all arguments with ease 1 – Insufficient
 Arguments and critical evaluations are developed in a logical manner which showcase skilful use of links made between
and within paragraphs 0 – None
 The conclusion provides a clear and logical summary of the argument
 Formatting (font and size, spacing, page numbers, text alignment) is accurate throughout

Academic Integrity (10%) marks

 Information from sources is appropriately paraphrased/summarised rather than relying on quotes 
 Any direct and indirect quotations are clearly marked and acknowledged with correct citations 
 References match the citations and are correctly formatted    
 Data/facts presented are genuine and accurate 

Weightings Calculation: C&A x 8; CE/UoS x 8; S, C&C x 2; ACs x2

Total Marks: T1 Actual marks:

T2 Actual marks:

Comment: Agreed Final mark:

Marking guidance:
5 – Excellent evidence – as comprehensive as could be expected
4 – Very good evidence – a thorough attempt to represent this aspect with only a few minor errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities
3 – Sufficient evidence – a good attempt to represent this aspect with all main aspects covered but noticeable errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities
2 – Limited and/or inconsistent evidence – this aspect is represented reasonably well at times but numerous errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities exist throughout
1 – Insufficient evidence – the attempt to represent this aspect is inappropriate or too weak to convey anything very meaningful and/or academic.
0 – No attempt to represent this aspect

| Kaplan International Pathways | 1 | kaplanpathways.com