BIOL399 marking rubric for essays:
This page outlines the University grading policy. The following pages provide the marking rubric. Macquarie University’s grading policy:
HD High Distinction 85-100
D Distinction 75-84
Cr Credit 65-74
P Pass 50-64
F Fail 0-49
High Distinction
Provides consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding in relation to the learning outcomes. Demonstrates substantial originality and insight in identifying, generating and communicating competing arguments, perspectives or problem solving approaches; critical evaluation of problems, their solutions and their implications; creativity in application as appropriate to the discipline.
Distinction
Provides evidence of integration and evaluation of critical ideas, principles and theories, distinctive insight and ability in applying relevant skills and concepts in relation to learning outcomes. Demonstrates frequent originality in defining and analysing issues or problems and providing solutions; and the use of means of communication appropriate to the discipline and the audience.
Credit
Provides evidence of learning that goes beyond replication of content knowledge or skills relevant to the learning outcomes. Demonstrates substantial understanding of fundamental concepts in the field of study and the ability to apply these concepts in a variety of contexts; convincing argumentation with appropriate coherent justification; communication of ideas fluently and clearly in terms of the conventions of the discipline.
Pass
Provides sufficient evidence of the achievement of learning outcomes. Demonstrates understanding and application of fundamental concepts of the field of study; routine argumentation with acceptable justification; communication of information and ideas adequately in terms of the conventions of the discipline. The learning attainment is considered satisfactory or adequate or competent or capable in relation to the specified outcomes.
Fail
Does not provide evidence of attainment of learning outcomes. There is missing or partial or superficial or faulty understanding and application of the fundamental concepts in the field of study; missing, undeveloped, inappropriate or confusing argumentation; incomplete, confusing or lacking communication of ideas in ways that give little attention to the conventions of the discipline.
Title and Abstract
Criteria
Title/Abstract
HD (8.5 to 10)
Concise, clear title. Abstract summarises issue, states what the review covers, findings, future directions.
D (7.5 to 8.5)
Title is good indication of content. Abstract provides a good summary but could be stronger.
Cr (6.5 to 7.5)
Title verbose or missing key elements. Abstract summarises report with inappropriate detail (e.g.merely states that issues will be discussed rather than what the issues are).
P (5 to 6.5)
Title is vague. Abstract is basic.
F ( 5)
Absent.
Introduction
Criteria
Structure
HD (17 to 20)
Clearly explains issue and its importance. Provides broad overview of the topic. Gives a specific and strong aim.
D (15 to 17)
Provides strong background information, states the issue, is reasonably structured and gives a broad aim, although this could be more specific.
Cr (13 to 15)
Provides good information, but not always relevant or too much detail for an introduction. States a basic aim, but could be more strongly structured.
P (10 to 13)
Introduces topic, but does not have clear structure. Too much/little information given for introduction. Aim is unclear or very broad.
F ( 10)
Little introduction, little structure, no aim.
Scientific content
Criteria
Engagement with text and Development of arguments
HD (34 to 40)
Demonstrates advanced understanding of topic, excellent coverage of literature.
Develops specific ideas in depth with strong supporting examples.
Critically analyses rather than just presents arguments. Clearly demonstrates original thinking.
D (30 to 34)
Demonstrates firm understanding of topic, good coverage of literature. Develops specific ideas with supporting examples. Can critically analyse different arguments and demonstrates original thinking.
Cr (26 to 30)
Demonstrates sound understanding of topic. Incorporates many important sources. Discusses some key points or issues, develops specific ideas usually backed up with examples. While there is evidence of critical analysis this skill is still developing.
P (20 to 26)
Demonstrates basic understanding of topic. Mainly summarizes source material with few specific ideas. Key points or issues missed, little critical analysis.
F ( 20)
Does not demonstrate understanding of topic. Numerous key points or issues missed, no critical analysis.
Criteria
Conclusion
HD (17 to 20)
Extends into broader context of topic, avoids merely summarizing review. Clearly identifies knowledge gaps, provides firm direction for future research or decision making.
D (15 to 17)
Extends into broader context of theme, identifies knowledge gaps, future research, but could provide more detail.
Cr (13 to 15)
Some extension of theme, identifies some research gaps, future research direction.
P (10 to 13)
Primarily summarizes paper, little extension of theme, little information on research gaps or future directions.
F ( 10)
Mainly summarizes paper and does not extend beyond.
Categories
Provides consistent evidence of deep and critical understanding in relation to the learning outcomes.
