Page 75 - EDU_Programme_Handbook_2015

MEd grade guidelines: characteristics of performance for each grade
Criteria Ungraded: 0-39% (Fail)
Integration & Demonstrates very little evidence of having
Application read, or integrated, central texts and
research findings; scarcely relates these to
Critical use the topic
of literature
Demonstrates very little or no awareness of
Reflection, insight differing viewpoints, and of relations
and evaluation between them.
Presents very little or no evidence of
reflection and evaluation of own and others’
teaching practices.
Understanding & Presents very little evidence of, or
Relevance misunderstandings of, main knowledge,
concepts, theories, issues policy, ideas and
practice relevant to the topic; makes very
few or no connections between them.
Reasoning Provides very few, or no hints, on the
Structure, Argument rationale and narrative arc of the study;
submits work with very little or no structure;
Independence develops few or no arguments, presented
arguments are flawed not sustained or are
Technical accuracy* mutually contradictory; presents very little or
of presentation no discussion of the work.
Demonstrates very little or no independence
of thought; accepts as given ideas and
findings from the educational literature and
research.
Considerable error in level of technical
accuracy in written work
Research Methods Makes very little, or inappropriate, use of research Makes limited use of research and
and analytical methods; very poor write-up and
organisation, makes it difficult for readers to
discover what was done and found in the study.
*Technical accuracy is taken to include: punctuation, essay organisation, paragraph and sentence structure, spelling, tone, word usage, referencing
Grade D: 40-49% (Fail)
Demonstrates a limited, fragmented
knowledge of the literature and
research findings; presents few and/or
limited applications of these to the
topic.
Demonstrates limited awareness of
differing viewpoints, and of relations
between them;
Presents little evidence of reflection
and evaluation of own and others’
teaching practices.
Presents limited evidence of, or
flawed understandings of, main
knowledge, concepts, theories,
issues, policy ideas and practice
relevant to the topic; makes few or
simple connections between them.
Provides little information about the
overall rationale and narrative arc of
the study; submits work with little
structure; develops weak arguments,
and/or the arguments are not followed
through; presents little discussion of
the work as a whole.
Demonstrates little independence of
thought; accepts without question
most ideas and findings from the
educational literature and research.
Some errors in level of technical
accuracy in written work
analytical methods; poor write-up and
organisation: makes it difficult for readers to methods; adequate write-up and
judge the quality and value of what was
done and found in the study.
Grade C: 50-59% (Pass)
Demonstrates a modest, partially
integrated knowledge of the basic
literature and research findings;
presents some modest applications
of these to the topic.
Demonstrates modest awareness of
differing viewpoints, and of relations
between them.
Presents modest and/or unclear
evidence of reflection and
evaluation of own and others’
teaching practices.
Presents modest grasp of main
knowledge, concepts, theories,
issues policy, ideas and practice
relevant to the topic and makes
some relevant connections between
them.
Acknowledges the rationale and
narrative arc of the study; submits
work with an adequate structure;
develops and sustains some
modest arguments; presents some
discussion of the work as a whole.
Demonstrates modest
independence of thought; questions
some ideas and findings from the
literature and research; shows an
ability to generate practical
recommendations.
An acceptable, if fairly basic, level
of technical accuracy in written work
Makes use, without major errors, of
standard research and analytical
organisation: makes it possible for
readers to evaluate the quality and value the study.
of the study.
Grade B: 60-69% (Merit)
Demonstrates a well-integrated
knowledge of the basic literature and
research findings; presents pertinent
applications of these to the topic.
Demonstrates awareness of differing
viewpoints, and of relations between
them. Is familiar with main texts and
findings; presents some critique but is
not incisive.
Presents clear evidence of reflection
and evaluation of own and others’
teaching practices.
Presents a good grasp of main
knowledge, concepts, theories, policy
(when applicable), ideas and practice
relevant to the topic; makes salient
connections between them.
Makes clear the rationale and
narrative arc of the study; submits
clearly structured work; develops
clear and sound arguments with some
defence but little evidence of
creativity; presents a substantive
discussion of the work as a whole.
Demonstrates independence of
thought; routinely questions ideas and
findings from the literature and
research; shows an ability to generate
robust recommendations.
Considerable accuracy and
correctness in technical presentation
in written work
Makes good use of appropriate research
and analytical methods; competent write-up
with good organisation: makes it easy for
readers to evaluate the quality and value of readers of the high quality and/or value of the
Grade A:70-100% (Distinction)
Demonstrates an excellent, well-
integrated knowledge of the basic
literature and research findings;
presents convincing applications of
these to the topic.
Demonstrates excellent awareness of
differing viewpoints, and of relations
between them. Is widely read, and is
critically incisive.
Presents strong evidence of complex,
insightful reflection and penetrating
evaluation of own and others’ teaching
practices.
Presents an excellent grasp of main
knowledge, concepts, theories, issues
policy, ideas and practice relevant to the
topic; and makes interesting and/or
compelling connections between them.
Explains the rationale and narrative arc
of the study; presents rigorously
structured work; provides lucid, cogent
and sophisticated arguments that are
well substantiated and defended;
presents a thorough and critical account
of the work as a whole.
Demonstrates independence of thought
and argument; challenges ideas and
findings from the literature and
research; shows an ability to generate
rigorous recommendations; is creative,
innovative & goal-oriented.
Very few flaws in accuracy and
correctness in technical presentation in
written work
Makes excellent use of well-chosen research
and analytical methods; comprehensive write
up with meticulous organisation: convinces
study.