MA marking criteria 2021-22

Distinction

90+

Candidates will demonstrate all of the qualities for a distinction required in the 80-89 range. Outstanding work in all respects with reflection and analysis that are thoroughly independent, original and insightful. Flawlessly presented and showing exceptional sophistication and insight. An outstandingly critical reflection that draws on the author’s personal learning experience/work placement and, where relevant, integrates it with the wider literature to suggest major revisions to our understanding of the topic. 

The work’s structure and writing has attained the highest professional standards in the discipline.

80-89

Candidates will demonstrate all of the qualities for a distinction required in the 70-79 range. An exceptionally critical reflection that draws on the author’s personal learning experience/work placement, and integrates it with a remarkable command of the relevant wider literature to develop our understanding of the topic in significant and imaginative ways.

The reflection is profound, self-aware and nuanced, and the analysis is highly innovative, rigorous and thoroughly original.

70-79

A highly critical reflection that draws on the author’s personal learning experience/work placement and, where relevant, effectively integrates it with a sophisticated knowledge of the relevant wider literature.

The reflection is deep, self-aware and nuanced, and the analysis is creative, incisive and executed with flair. The reflection goes beyond description of experience to an analysis of how the experience informs the candidate’s understanding of themselves, others, and/or the relevant historical material. The reflection demonstrates the ability of the candidate to question their own biases, stereotypes, preconceptions, approaches, methods or assumptions, and to revise their thinking as a result.

They should write fluent, lucid and stylish prose, which engages the reader’s interest.

Merit

60-69

A critical reflection that draws on the author’s personal learning experience/work placement, and integrates it with a reasonable knowledge of the relevant literature. 

The reflection is self-aware and nuanced, and the analysis is coherent and logical. The reflection shows some understanding of how the experience might inform the candidate’s understanding of themselves, others, and/or the relevant historical material.

The prose should be clear and effective, some developing sense of style and the emergence of an authorial voice are to be expected; technical presentation should be mostly accurate.

Pass

50-59

Reflection that draws on the author’s personal learning experience/work placement, and shows some knowledge of the relevant wider literature.

The reflection is sometimes self-aware and nuanced, and the analysis is mostly coherent and logical, although the discussion may be directed more narrowly, or more inappropriately, compared with candidates whose work is marked in the 60-69 range.

The prose should be clear and effective, although the style might lack fluency in places. They may not entirely have followed the guidelines set; there may be inaccuracies in the technical presentation of work.

Fail

30-49

Reflection with little reference to the author’s personal learning experience/work placement, and with little attempt to link to the wider literature.

The reflection is descriptive and lacks nuance, and the analysis is neither coherent nor fully logical.

Candidates will have failed to understand the task set; will not shown any evidence of their ability to write grammatically accurate, clear English prose; will have thought and read narrowly or inappropriately; or will have failed to engage meaningfully with their experience. The presentational guidelines may have been ignored, or the discussion be of tangential relevance to the assignment.

1-29

No serious attempt to carry out the task assigned. No attempt at reflection or analysis. Little understanding or knowledge of the course

0

Indicates work either not submitted or unworthy of marking.