SCHOOL OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
COVERSHEET FOR WORKSHEET (PG)
NAME (PRINT IN CAPITALS): ………………………………………………………………………
Print your name above and sign below and attach this form to the front of the worksheet. You
must submit a hard copy by the deadline specified below. If you have worked with other students in
the preparation of this piece of work give their name(s) below:
STUDENT(S) I HAVE WORKED WITH …………………………………..............................…………
MODULE NUMBER: …………………………..DEADLINE DATE: 10.00 am…………………………
TITLE OF PRACTICAL/ASSIGNMENT:
……………………………………………………………………………………………
LEARNING OUTCOME ASSESSED:
Demonstrate competence in data presentation, analysis and interpretation, numeracy, information
retrieval and written communication.
RELEVANT MODULE LEARNING OBJECTIVES:
To be signed by the student
I certify that this submission is my own work and has not been submitted previously for any
assignment. Where I have used published material or external work I have fully acknowledged its
source, with references. Where I have received the assistance of others (including students) this is
clearly acknowledged. I further agree that I have read and understood the material contained on
the University of Essex plagiarism web site. I understand that I may be penalised if I have used the
work or words of others without acknowledgement and that the work may be submitted to
Plagiarism Detection Software, use of which complies with UK Data Protection Law.
Signature of student…………………………………………………………….. Date…………………..
Failure to sign and clearly identify this piece of work will result in no marks being awarded.
Note: The standard turnaround time for marked coursework is three weeks. Turnaround times for
coursework involving multiple and/or external markers may be longer. In these cases the module
supervisor will advise when the coursework will be returned.
Page 1 of 2
FEEDBACK FOR WORKSHEET
Assessment Criteria. These elements are not necessarily given equal weight in the overall assessment.
(Marker: please circle relevant comments.)
Element
Top
distinction
>80%
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Low fail
70%-79%
60%-69%
50%-59%
<50%
<40%
Quality of
writing.
Outstanding:
great clarity.
Very concise.
Entirely logical
in structure.
Negligible errors
in spelling &
grammar.
Excellent, clear,
particularly neat,
completely
legible.
All sections
completed.
Excellent: clear
and concise.
Generally very
logical.
Minimal errors
in spelling &
grammar.
Very good: usually
clear and concise.
Only minor
weaknesses in logic.
Few minor errors in
spelling & grammar.
Excellent,
clear, neat,
completely
legible.
All sections
completed.
Very good, mostly
neat and all legible.
Adequate: some
lack of clarity and
not concise.
Some lapses in
logic.
Some errors in
spelling &
grammar.
Good, parts not
neat or complete,
all legible.
Very poor:
rambling,
unclear. Difficult
to understand.
Illogical.
Very many errors
in spelling &
grammar.
Poor, scruffy,
illegible,
incomplete.
Almost all sections
completed.
Most sections
completed.
Poor: lacks
clarity, and not
concise.
Grequently
illogical.
Many errors in
spelling &
grammar.
Poor, parts not
legible and
untidy, some
omissions.
Some sections
not completed.
Quality of
answers.
All the info.
required.
All accurate,
relevant and
concise.
All important
material,
concise, few
minor errors.
Considerable
content. Minor
errors, some
irrelevant material.
Results.
(if
appropriate)
Very clearly,
selectively &
concisely
described.
Data correctly
analysed &
interpreted.
Tables and
figures neat,
accurate &, fully
labeled.
Statistics
correctly used,
interpreted, &
reported.
Clearly &
concisely
described.
Data correctly
analysed &
interpreted.
Tables and
figures neat,
accurate & fully
labeled.
Statistics
correctly used,
interpreted &
reported.
Mostly clearly &
concisely described.
Data generally well
analysed; few
misinterpretations.
Some omissions /
errors in
presentation of
tables and figures.
Excellent.
Clearly
evidenced.
Substantial
evidence.
Reasonable info.
content. Minor
and some major
errors, some
irrelevant
material.
Generally clear,
but difficult to
identify key
results.
Data analysis &
interpretation
satisfactory but
some errors /
omissions.
Significant errors
in presentation of
tables & figures.
Some errors in
use, reporting &
interpretation of
statistics.
Some evidence.
Presentation
Completeness
Understanding
shown
Statistics mainly
correctly used,
interpreted, &
reported.
Limited answers,
and/or many
major errors, not
concise, some
waffle.
Unclear, key
results not
identified.
Many errors /
omissions in data
analysis &
interpretation.
Many errors in
presentation of
tables & figures.
Major errors in
use, reporting &
interpretation of
statistics.
Limited and
patchy.
Many / most
sections not
completed.
Little or no valid
info.
Many errors,
most material
irrelevant and/or
waffle.
No description of
results.
Data not
analysed; all key
points missed or
misinterpreted.
Tables and
figures very poor
or missing.
Statistics not
used or totally
inappropriate.
Little or none.
FEEDBACK: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:
(Good points/areas for improvement)
MARK:……………..NAME OF MARKER (PRINT IN CAPITALS):…………………………………….
SIGNATURE:…………………………………………………. DATE:……………………………………..
Page 2 of 2