MSc Dissertation Report- Marking Scheme

Candidate ID:

Percentage of Total Excellent Good Satisfactory Borderline Fail

Marks Assigned to 55-59
Project Component 70-100 60-69 50-54 (Less than) <49
Presentation of Very good use of Good use of English Consistent layout. Inconsistent layout. Very poor structure and
English language. language. Layout and Generally easy to Difficult to follow. Poor layout. No summary
Information and
Excellent layout and structure make follow. Summary/ summary and/or and/or conclusions.
Physical layout (10%) structure to help report easy to read. abstract included. conclusion. Poor Little logical
make report easy to Clear summary/ Logical order. references. Many progression. Errors
navigate/read. abstract. Clear, Relevant conclusions errors. have serious effect on
Logical sequence appropriate made. References reader's understanding.
proceeded with clear diagrams. included correctly. Missing or very poor
succinct summary References included Some errors. references.
representing main correctly. Few
points of project. errors. Relevant
Clear, appropriate, conclusions made.
high quality diagrams.
Comprehensive
references included
correctly. Very few
errors.

7-10% 6.-6.9% 5.5-5.9% 5-5.4% < 4.9%

Evidence of Comprehensive Reasonable analysis Some analysis and Descriptive summaries Published documents
analysis and and synthesis of synthesis of critical of published documents summarised, but not
Appropriate
synthesis of critical critical points of points of knowledge, with some linked in any effective
Literature Review points of knowledge, knowledge, ideas ideas and theories. importance or way to the aims or
(20%) ideas and theories, and theories. Themes not always relevance indicated but objectives of the
resulting in themes Themes mostly concise, unbiased, or not fully explained. project under
that are concise, concise, unbiased, relevant to investigation.
unbiased, and and relevant to the the thesis topic. May
relevant to the thesis thesis topic. Mostly lack clarity
topic. Clear and clear with a and a logical flow of
logical flow of idea logical flow of idea idea

14 - 20% 12-13.8% 11-11.8-% 10-10.8% <9.8%

Evidence of Original Very good content Good technical Satisfactory level of Insufficient activities in Tasks generally
with difficult topics content with some technical content number/technical inappropriate to
Thinking (10%)
explored to a high difficult topics included. Specific content. Some specific project. Very low
standard. High quality explored. Specific objectives covered. objectives ignored. technical content.
product. Specific objectives covered Some omissions/ Significant inaccuracies, Specific objectives
objectives covered well. Few omissions/ irrelevancies. Some irrelevancies/ largely ignored.
well. Few errors. irrelevancies. Few errors. omissions. Many Insufficient activities.
errors. errors. Work largely incorrect
or inaccurate.

7-10% 6 – 6.9% 5-5.9 % 5-5.4% < 4.9%

Development of Choice of data and Choice of data and Choice of data and Choice of data and Poor choice of data and
methods of collection methods of methods for collecting methods of collection methods,
Methodology (20%)
clearly described, collection clearly them described, but somewhat vague and handled incompletely,
including extent of described, including with some gaps, there with some gaps in the with little evidence of
data gathering. extent of data may be some doubt material. Methods of link to aims and
Methods well gathering. Methods about how well collection are mixed objectives
handled and adequately handled methods have been up but are partially
convincingly justified and justified against handled, or how related to the aims and
against the project the project aims and relevant they are to objectives.
aims and objectives, objectives, including the aims and
including discussion some discussion of objectives. Some
of access issues. access issues. Full background material
Some discussion of relevant background on methods
inappropriateness of material supplied in supplied in
other data collection appendices appendices
approaches. Full
relevant background
material supplied as
appendices

14 - 20% 12 – 13.8% 11-11.8% 10 – 10.8% < 9.8%

1
 MSc Dissertation Report- Marking Scheme

Critical Interpretation Key strengths and Some strengths and Some strengths and Little evidence of Little evidence of
weaknesses of weaknesses weaknesses learning and a learning and a
and Appraisal (20%)
thesis/research identified, with good of the project limited attempt to limited attempt to
process identified attempt to reflect on identified, but not identify identify
and critically them and learning completely implications for future implications for future
discussed, including gained from the convincing. practice or practice or
what happened that research. Reasonable attempt learning needs learning needs
was different from Implications for to identify
the plan and future research implications for future
assumptions that practice or learning practice or
needed to be needs identified. Not learning need
questioned. Clear and as comprehensive
convincing summary as “excellent”
of learning gained category
with particular
emphasis on
implications for
future research
practice.

14 - 20% 12 – 13.8% 11-11.8% 10 – 10.8% < 9.8%

Conclusions and Conclusions clearly Conclusions stated, Attempts to draw Conclusions are weak No detectable
stated, relevant to which are relevant to conclusions from and do not really follow conclusions or
Recommendations
aims and objectives, aims and objectives results are not entirely from data and results. recommendation
(20%) linked to results and and linked to results. convincing. Recommendations
to course Realistic proposals Recommendations appear neither suitable
perspectives. for action follow are incomplete, but nor feasible.
Discussion of what from conclusions there is still a basic
can be strongly based on new link to the conclusions
concluded and what insights, generally and results and basic
is more speculative. informed by the feasibility.
Clear and realistic forefront of a field of
proposals for action learning.
based on new
insights, generally
informed by the
forefront of a field
of learning

14 - 20% 12 – 13.8% 12 – 13.8% 10 – 10.8% < 9.8%

Examiner Mark:

Supervisor Mark:

AGREED FINAL MARK:

2
 MSc Dissertation Report- Marking Scheme

MARKERS COMMENTS:

Examiner

Supervisor