Marking Criteria (Level Three)
This is a guide to the criteria used by staff in assigning a mark to a piece of work. To obtain a particular class of assessment a piece of work does not have to fulfil all the criteria listed for that class — judgements are formed on the basis of the predominant character of the work — but the guidelines help to show what examiners are looking for in their evaluations.
- First Class (70+)
A well argued and perceptive response to the question, providing clear references to relevant literature and examples; shows independence of thought and originality; shows an ability to distinguish between different ideas and arguments; well written, with style and flair.
90+
Outstanding work in all aspects that is thoroughly independent, original and insightful; significantly pushes the boundaries of existing historiography; suggests major revisions to our understanding of the topic; writing that has attained the highest professional standards in the discipline.
80-89
Exceptional insight, weight and sophistication and an ability to undertake advanced historical study with imagination and tenacity. Highly accurate work, innovatively analytical and critical, demonstrating thoroughly original approaches and developing existing historical work in significant ways.
75-79
High level of critical and original thought. Evidence of a capacity to pursue independent lines of enquiry and to conduct perceptive and scholarly research.
70-74
Shows a clear awareness of the salient points and an ability to discuss them analytically and incisively as well as with some originality. Frequent evidence of undoubted quality in the use of sources, but not sustained across the entire range. - Upper Second Class
60-69
Well argued and clearly focused, based on wide reading; uses a range of examples to support the argument; well structured, revealing a clear logic; shows breadth of knowledge but lacks real original thought; weighs up and evaluates different arguments and identifies key issues. Well written with few technical errors. A mark at the top of this range suggests thoughtfulness, good information and cogent argument with an awareness of nuance and complexity; a mark at the bottom end indicates proficiency, coherent and defensible arguments and adequate examples but a bit mechanical. - Lower Second Class
50-59
A relevant response to the question but with a poorly developed argument. More descriptive than analytical. Based on more limited reading; over-reliant on course text or other basic course material. Provides a reasonably structured account but with some signs of confusion; may contain errors of fact or interpretation. Some grammatical and spelling errors. A mark at the top of this range suggests a reasonable degree of competence and knowledge but insufficiently developed argument with one or more key points neglected; a mark at the bottom end indicates a thin argument with little analytical awareness; reliant on a small range of reading. - Third Class
45-49
Bare response to the question set; shows some knowledge of relevant material. Includes failure to address the question set; insignificant or no argument; superficial; often irrelevant or tangential. Inadequately informed, erroneous in matters of fact and interpretation, poorly organised. Poorly written with numerous grammatical and spelling errors. - Pass without Honours
40-44
Signs of some knowledge but at an elementary level. For the most part confused and poorly expressed. A small element of analysis. - Fail (0-39)
20-39
Failure to carry out the task assigned. Negligible or wholly irrelevant content. Some attempt at analysis, but misconceived and/or incoherent. Plagiarism.
1-19
No serious attempt to carry out the task assigned. No attempt at analysis. No understanding or knowledge of the course. Plagiarism.
0
Indicates work either not submitted or unworthy of marking.