School of Modern Languages and Cultures:
German Studies
GUIDELINES ON
ASSESSED ESSAYS
AND
EXAMINATIONS
2014-15
The on-line A4 version under Academic Resources will have the latest updates.
www.warwick.ac.uk/german
Guidelines on Assessed Essays and Examinations
CONTENTS
page
1.
ASSESSED ESSAYS
1.1 Collaborative Work
1.2 Acknowledgement of Sources
A. Primary Texts
B. Secondary Literature including Internet citations
C. The Bibliography
1
1
3
3
5
2.
ESSAY SUPERVISION
6
3.
WRITING YOUR ASSESSED ESSAY
6
4.
PRESENTATION
7
5.
ESSAY SUBMISSION AND DEADLINES
5.1 Criteria For Extension of Essay Deadlines
5.2 Late Submission of Essays
5.3 Word Limit for Assessed Essays
5.4 E-submission
8
8
8
9
9
6.
DEPARTMENTAL PROCEDURE FOR DETERRING
PLAGIARISM
6.1 Information on Plagiarism
6.2 Self-declaration of Compliance with University Guidelines on
Plagiarism
6.3 Plagiarism software (Turnitin)
6.4 Procedure for Investigating Suspected Cases of Plagiarism
10
7.
ORAL EXAMINATIONS
7.1 First Year Oral Examinations
7.2 Second Year Oral Examinations
7.3 Final Year Oral Examinations
7.4 Preparation for Oral Examinations
7.5 Criteria Employed in Oral Examinations
12
12
12
12
13
13
8.
WRITTEN EXAMINATION PREPARATION AND TECHNIQUE
8.1 Revision
8.2 Written Examinations
8.3 Language Examinations
14
14
14
15
9.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES: Guidance for Students
9.1 What are mitigating Circumstances?
9.2 Nature of Mitigating Circumstances
15
15
16
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2
APPENDIX 3
APPENDIX 4
Essay Marking Criteria for Second and Final
Year German Language Essays
GE401 Final Year German Language Essay
Guidelines
Translation marking Criteria for Second and
Final Year
Mark Scheme
Assessed essay feedback sheet
10
10
10
10
17
18
19
20
24
1. ASSESSED ESSAYS
Assessed essays should be presented in accordance with established scholarly
conventions. Sources should be precisely acknowledged, and a bibliography of
works consulted, plus, where relevant, a filmography must be included. It is important
to bear this in mind and note full bibliographical details when you are researching
your essay.
You also need to be aware of two important University regulations on 'cheating' and
'supervision of assessed essays':
University Regulations are quite specific on the matter of "cheating", which is defined
as:
“An attempt to benefit oneself, or another, by deceit or fraud. This shall include
deliberately reproducing the work of another person or persons without
acknowledgement. A significant amount of unacknowledged copying shall be
deemed to constitute prima facie evidence of deliberation, and in such cases
the burden of establishing otherwise shall rest with the candidate against whom
the allegation is made.” (University Regulation l2)
This is of relevance to at least two aspects of your assessed essays:
1.1
Collaborative Work
Although you are encouraged by the Department to work together, the notion
of collaboration does not extend to copying from or simply re-phrasing
other students' essays. You should not collaborate with other students on the
writing of your essay, your essay must be your own work.
1.2
Acknowledgement of Sources
Where, in your essays, you draw on or use the work of others in any way, you
should adopt either of the following two conventions:
a)
Paraphrase or summarise A BRIEF SECTION of the work you have consulted,
and then acknowledge your source in a footnote. An example would be as
follows:
One critic1 has argued that Fritz Lang’s Metropolis is best understood as a
representation of masculine fears of femininity.
Your footnote might then read:
1. Andreas Huyssen, After the Great Divide (London, 1988), p.72
If you adopt this method you must ensure that the paraphrase is put in your
own words and not ‘lifted’ directly from the text. It is not sufficient just to change
one or two words – it must be a paraphrase that is genuinely in your own
words. If, in the example above, Andreas Huyssen had actually written ‘Fritz
Lang’s Metropolis is best understood as a representation of masculine fears of
femininity’ and you used this phrase without putting it in quotation marks, this
would almost certainly be regarded as an instance of plagiarism. To be on the
safe side, it is much better for you to adopt the technique outlined in (b) below.
1
Quote directly from the work consulted. In this case, anything directly ‘lifted’
from that work MUST be placed in quotation marks, as follows:
b)
Andreas Huyssen suggests that, in Metropolis, “femininity…poses a threat to
the male world of high technology, efficiency, and instrumental rationality.” 2
Your footnote would read similarly to (a) above, i.e.:
2. Andreas Huyssen, After the Great Divide (London, 1988), p.72
The message here is that you MUST acknowledge your source, even in cases
where the actual wording may be your own. Specific arguments derived from a
particular source should be attributed as such; simply to include your source in
a bibliography appended is not enough.
By acknowledging your sources properly you will not only avoid the suspicion of
cheating, you will also gain credit for thoroughness.
If you do not acknowledge your sources properly, you lay yourself open to a
charge of plagiarism. Plagiarism involves the unacknowledged copying or
summarising of arguments from another source. If you are caught plagiarising,
your work may be disqualified. You should remember also that
unacknowledged lifting of secondary literature, whether in printed or electronic
form, is not difficult to spot: lecturers are familiar with critical literature, and can
usually spot shifts of register, syntax and terminology. Spot checks in suspect
material are easily carried out.
c)
Conventions for footnotes and references
It is essential that you reference every source you use for your essay properly and
that your references and bibliography corresponds to academic standards. This
handout will hopefully clarify some of the questions you have with respect to
referencing standards.
There are various referencing systems and referencing conventions and they
frequently vary from publisher to publisher both with respect to the system and with
respect to punctuation conventions in the reference. The MHRA has an on-line guide
which will cover every scenario you are likely to encounter and is the preferred
system of the German Department!

Modern Humanities Research Association (MHRA,
www.mhra.org.uk/Publications/Books/StyleGuide/index.html),
The most important thing is that you are consistent, i.e. that all your references
follow the same system. What follows below is an example based on the MHRA
system.
2
Citations (Foot- or Endnotes):
Footnotes (at the bottom of the page) or Endnotes (at the end of the essay before the
bibliography) are numbered consecutively.
You should not allow notes to proliferate unduly. One way of reducing notes
(particularly when you refer frequently to a clearly identified primary source), is to
insert page numbers (in parentheses) in the main body of your essay, after giving the
first reference in full as in the following example:
Theodor Fontane, Frau Jenny Treibel, in Werke, Schriften und Briefe, ed.
Walter Keitel and Helmuth Nürnberger, 20 vols (Munich, 1962-94), Abt. I, Bd. 4
(1974), 360. (Subsequent references follow quotations in parentheses.)
A. Primary Texts:
Author’s first name(s), Author’s surname, Title of book (in italics), Place of
publication, Publisher (optional), Year, (all in brackets), page number.
1.
Heinrich Böll, Das Brot der frühen Jahre (Munich: dtv, 2006), p. 25.
Formatting of the citation, i.e. the use of punctuation or brackets, varies between
publishers and between referencing styles. For example the following is also
possible:
1. Heinrich Böll, Das Brot der frühen Jahre. Munich: dtv, 2006, p. 25.
Whichever formatting or style you use: be consistent!
Films are quoted with director, title (in italics), country of origin and year. You don’t
need to give DVD timecode but if you do, again mention the DVD you’re referring to
and put subsequent references in brackets in the body text.
1.
Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Die Ehe der Maria Braun (BRD, 1979),
Arthaus DVD, 00:19:34. Subsequent timecodes will be given in brackets
in the text.
Quotes from films should be given in the original German. You do not need to
footnote film quotes, but must include the title quoted in your filmography.
B. Secondary Literature:
For books (i.e. single author monographs): Author’s first name(s), author’s
surname: Title of book (in italics), place of publication, publisher (optional), year,
page number.
It will then look something like this:
1.
James H.Reid, Heinrich Böll. A German for his Time (Oxford: Wolff,
1988), p 23.
Subsequent citations to the same source can be abbreviated like this:
1. Reid, Heinrich Böll, p. 124
For essays from edited books: Author’s first name(s), Author’s surname, ‘Title of
3
essay’ (in single inverted commas), in: Name of editor (s) (ed./s.), Title of book (in
italics), Place of publication, Publisher (optional), Year, page numbers, here: page
you quoted from.
It will then look like this (MHRA style):
1.
Christine Hummel, ‘Das Brot der frühen Jahre’, in Heinrich Böll:
Romane und Erzählungen: Interpretationen, ed. by Werner Bellmann
(Stuttgart: Reclam, 2000), pp. 137-148 (p. 140).
Subsequent citations can be abbreviated like this:
1. Hummel, ‘Das Brot der frühen Jahre’, p. 141.
For essays from academic journals: Author’s first name(s), Author’s surname,
‘Title of essay’ (in single inverted commas), Title of journal (in italics), Issue
number/Year, page numbers, here: page you quoted from. Important: If it is a
paper based journal, give the journal’s paper reference and not the online
reference even if you’ve accessed it online!
It will then look something like this:
1.
Monika Albrecht, ‘Jenseits des "Dazwischen”: Renan Demirkans
Beitrag zur Diskussion gegenwärtiger kulturtheoretischer Fragen’,
German Life and Letters, 4 (2006), pp. 540-554, p. 541.
Newspaper articles: Author (if given in article), ‘Title of article’ (in single inverted
commas), Title of newspaper (in italics), date (or issue number/year for news journals
like Der Spiegel), page number.
It will then look something like this:
1.
Günter Franzen, ‘Links, wo kein Herz ist’, Der Spiegel, 44/ 2003, pp. 216218, p. 218.
Internet Citations: are given with the complete url and (in brackets) the date you’ve
last accessed it. If your source has a paper version, always cite the paper
version!
Fux, Nani, ‘Kleine Fluchten. Die neuen Filme aus China’, artechock: point of view,
http://www.artechock.de/film/text/artikel/2002/12‗05_china.htm, 2002, World
Wide Web publication, accessed December 2012
Illustrations: only use illustrations if you are discussing them in the body of the
essay. Do NOT simply use them as ornament. They should be labelled Fig. 1, Fig. 2
etc.
Some publishers use different punctuation or omit the brackets between place,
publisher and year or give journal issue and year as (4/2006). This is not
important, what matters is that the references in your essay all follow the same
style, are accurate, complete and appropriate.
4
C. The Bibliography:
A bibliography is a list of all sources actually consulted for your essay.
Bibliographies can be subdivided into Primary Literature (your source text or film – in
which case it is called a Filmography) and Secondary Literature (your research).
Bibliographical entries are in alphabetical order and look like this:
Author’s surname, author’s first name(s), Title of book (in italics), Place of
Publication, Publisher (optional), Year.
e.g: Reid, James H., Heinrich Böll: A German for his Time (Oxford, Wolff, 1988).
Journal articles and essays from book follow the same rule, i.e. author’s
surname comes first. Apart from this, the information given in the first
reference is repeated, with the exception of the page number(s) you quoted
from. For articles and book chapters, page ranges must be given.
The bibliography should be divided into two sections:
1) Primary texts (in most cases the novels/plays/poems) etc. you are writing
about.
2) Secondary literature.
Within each section works should be listed alphabetically (by author).
Filmography. You must include the following, in the order given:
Video or Film Title (italics)
Director/Filmmaker
Production OR release Date (separated from the director etc. by a comma).
Example:
Die Ehe der Maria Braun. Dir Rainer Werner Fassbinder, 1978
If you wish to highlight the special features of the version you have viewed, you may
include the following details, placed in the order given here, and situated between the
name of the director, and the date.
Key Actors or other Key Performers.
Version, release, or other distinguishing information, if appropriate
Format. (e.g. Film, Video, DVD, Videodisc, etc. Note: indicate the format you
watched, NOT the format of the original work).
Studio Name OR Production Company OR Distributor.
Examples:
Citizen Kane. Dir. Orson Welles. Perfs. Orson Welles, Joseph Cotton. Film.
RKO Radio Pictures, 1941.
À Bout de Souffle (Breathless). Dir. Jean-Luc Godard. Perfs. Jean-Paul
Belmondo, Jean Seberg, Liliane David. Videocassette. Prod Georges de
Beauregard-S.N.C., 1960; Dist. Connoisseur Video Collection, 1989.
Metropolis. Dir. Fritz Lang. Perfs. Gustav Fröhlich, Brigitte Helm, Alfred Abel.
Reconstructed DVD release. UFA, 1927; dist. Connoisseur Video, 2000.
5
2.
ESSAY SUPERVISION:
UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES WITH REGARD TO ESSAY SUPERVISION READS AS
FOLLOWS:
Essay Supervision
“Assessed work contributing credit towards final degree classification is
comparable to work completed under examination conditions in that it is
necessary to ensure that such work is the candidate's own. Supervisors may
offer general advice and critical comment on such work at all stages but shall
not at any stage suggest amendments to drafts in such a way as to contravene
the principle that work submitted should be the candidate's own work.”
These guidelines were designed not in order to deter students from seeking advice
but rather to indicate the limits of supervision. That is to say, you are encouraged to
seek advice at any stage in the essay writing process where you feel critical
comment would be helpful. This might include asking a lecturer to look at a proposed
structure, but would exclude asking them to read a section. The deadline for
consulting module tutors with an essay plan is two weeks before the essay
deadline.
You should bear in mind, however, that the comments of a supervisor on an essay
relate essentially to the progress of the individual student; it is not his/her job to
anticipate the verdict of the examiners: you should not ask your supervisor what mark
s/he would give your essay.
3.
WRITING YOUR ASSESSED ESSAY
Consider the following when writing assessed essays (NB: these points relate
directly to the assessment criteria used by markers: see p. 17 Appendix 1):
1.
Have I planned my essay properly?
Ideally you should be able to structure your answer on one page of A4. “Spider
diagrams” seem popular, although beware of ones which get out of control.
Once you have devised a satisfactory plan, stick to it!
2.
Does my essay answer the question?
Essays are invitations to argue a case based on informed judgements. A good
essay is one that defines its terms of reference (see 3), analyses the primary
material (see 6), considers the secondary literature (see 7) and offers reasoned
argument and a balanced conclusion.
3.
Am I defining key concepts adequately?
Essay questions usually have key terms in the title. These are not onedimensional self-evident concepts. They are chosen precisely because they
allow for a variety of different readings. Your essay should make clear what
particular interpretation of those terms you are using as a basis for your
analysis.
4.
If the question asks me to, am I providing a genuine comparison and
contrast?
Such questions are usually best answered on a “point-by-point basis”, i.e. by
devising an analytical structure based on the key issues implied in the question.
This enables you to construct an argument, and makes repetition less likely.
6
5.
If the question asks me to, am I interpreting “representation” and
“portrayal” correctly?
Remember these words require you to analyse how an issue is addressed in a
text, i.e. to show how, for instance, form, genre, narrative perspective,
language, imagery, stage directions, camera work, editing, mise-en-scene etc.
affect the way we as reader bzw. viewer perceive the issues raised by the text.
6.
Am I really analysing, as opposed to telling the plot?
Assume the reader knows the texts as well as you do. Don’t tell them what
happens, but why, and what it means in relation to the question you are
answering.
7.
Am I making correct use of secondary literature?
Use critics constructively, i.e. as a stimulus, rather than a substitute, for your
own argument. Absence of a wide range of secondary literature should not
deter you from writing on a topic. Have faith in your own judgement!
8.
Have I proofread my essay properly?
Make sure you re-read your final version to eliminate typos and ambiguities. If
you’re fed up with re-reading for the umpteenth time, offer a friend a glass of
wine, a pint or Kaffee und Kuchen to do it for you. They will often pick up on
things you’re too tired to notice. If you can get your friend to tell you whether
the case you’re arguing is cogently and lucidly expressed, as well as
persuasive, um so besser!
9.
Do I acknowledge all my sources correctly? (See p.3)
4.
PRESENTATION
At all times you should pay particular attention to clarity and correctness of
expression, and accuracy of spelling and punctuation in English. (If you use a word
processor you may use a spell-checker, but must bear in mind its limitations. It may
not give the appropriate spelling of principal/ple, their/there/they’re, who’s/whose etc.)
A grammar checker is also useful.
1.
You should submit your essays in typed or word-processed form with 1.5
spacing in pitch 12. Remember that computer discs involve risks to the data
stored on them. If you write with a Word Processor, work on the hard-drive
(normally the C or D drive), and be sure to back up your work regularly. USB
sticks offer a good method of back-up. Also allow sufficient time for printing.
2.
Every essay should be submitted with the appropriate cover sheet, which can
be collected from the Departmental Secretary H205. You should sign the
statement at the bottom, which declares that you are familiar with the University
Regulations on assessed work and that the accompanying essay is your own
work.
3.
In order that departmental procedures for anonymous marking shall function
smoothly you must be sure to enter your name and university number clearly
where indicated on the cover sheet. You should provide no more information
than that which is expressly required.
You must NOT print your name at the top of each page.
7
5.
ESSAY SUBMISSION AND DEADLINES
The dates for submission of all assessed essays are in your Handbook and on the
dates and deadlines page of the website; the time for submission is always l2 noon.
Deadlines are to be regarded as absolute, e.g. "by l2.00 on the first Wednesday of
the summer term", means precisely that, and to submit your essay at any point after
the time specified will mean you have failed to meet the deadline and should expect
to be penalised.
Where no extension has been granted, the penalty will be 5% per day.
When submitting an essay you must countersign the list in H205 (Secretary's office).
You should state word length at the end of your essay. Footnotes should not be
included in the word count.
5.1
Criteria for Extension of Essay Deadlines
1.
Where a student seeks an extension on medical grounds, a medical certificate
must be submitted to the Director of Undergraduate Studies, who will decide on
the length of the extension.
2.
Where a student seeks an extension on personal (i.e. non-medical) grounds,
the initial approach should be to his/her personal tutor, who, where appropriate,
will refer the student to the Senior Tutor; the Director of Undergraduate Studies
will decide whether an extension should be granted.
3.
You should note that technical problems arising from word processing - such as
problems of file conversion or printing - would not normally be accepted as
grounds for an extension. Save your work frequently and always have a backup copy of files. Do not leave printing until the last minute. If you work via the
University network, use the H-drive. Provided it is saved, work on that drive
cannot be ‘lost’. USB sticks are also a good ‘back-up’.
4.
You should note that, by Senate regulation, extensions of the time for assessed
essays (including those for option modules) may be granted only by the Head
of Department or his deputy i.e. Director of Undergraduate Studies, normally on
the basis of a medical certificate. If you require an extension please contact
the Director of Undergraduate Studies by email or during office hours including
an explanation of why the extension is required (contact details on website):
Term 1:
Dr Jim Jordan
Term 2 & 3:
Professor Mary Cosgrove
5.2
Late Submission of Essays
1.
The University policy on penalties, to which the Department adheres, calls for a
reduction in marks of 5% per day, or per part thereof, for the late submission of
work where no formal extension has been granted. Where an essay is
submitted late, a penalty will normally be imposed unless there are strong
mitigating circumstances. Saturday and Sunday are counted as full days in this
context, and penalties imposed accordingly.
2.
A student who wishes that penalty to be waived or reduced should make the
case to his/her personal tutor, who will report to the examination board with
whom the final decision rests.
8
5.3
Word Limit for Assessed Essays
The word limit for assessed essay can be expanded by 5% of the specified word limit
without attracting any penalties e.g. for a 4,000 word essay the maximum length
would be 4,200 words.
5.4
E-submission
In keeping with a University-wide development, the Department of German Studies is
introducing the electronic submission of ALL assessed work.
We will still be keeping the hard copy submission procedure in place, but you are
required to submit an additional e-copy of your work in advance of handing in a copy
of your essay to the secretary.
The procedure is quite simple. Many of you will have gone through similar processes
in other departments. Please read through all the instructions carefully that are
outlined on the departmental page for e-submissions at:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/german/esubmissions/
Please note that the e-submission will trigger a receipt e-mail, which you must print
and submit with the hard-copy essay.
The hard copy (plus this receipt) should be handed in by 12 noon as normal on the
day. The e-submission should be made before this, leaving enough time so as not to
delay your hard copy submission.
In order to have satisfied the requirements for submission you MUST have submitted
BOTH a hard copy AND uploaded an electronic copy.
The procedure for the submission of the hard copy is as follows:

Essays counting towards examination (assessed essays) MUST be handed in
by the given deadline to the Department Office and NEVER left in pigeonholes
in the foyer, or under the door, or anywhere else. Other essays should be
given to your tutor.

They must have the correct cover sheet for each module available from the
Secretary’ office H205.

You must sign-in to confirm you have submitted.

All work that contributes towards end-of-year marks and final classification is
marked anonymously.

Failure to submit essays by the specified time constitutes a breach of
examination requirements and will normally result in the imposition of a penalty,
which will depend on the nature of individual circumstances. The standard
faculty penalty for late submission is 5% per day or part thereof. Please note
that Saturdays and Sundays each count as full days, and that lateness
penalties will be imposed accordingly. In case of illness you should consult
your module tutor and your personal tutor as early as possible.
9
6.
DEPARTMENTAL PROCEDURES FOR DETERRING PLAGIARISM
6.1 Information on Plagiarism
Detailed information on plagiarism is available on the Departmental Website at:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/german/undergrad/materials-copy/plagiarism/
You are strongly recommended to read this material and attempt the on‐line
plagiarism course (PLATO) before submitting your first assignment.
http://go.warwick.ac.uk/plato
6.2 Self-declaration of Compliance with University Guidelines on Plagiarism
For each piece of work that you submit for formal assessment you must sign a
statement (on the cover sheet) in which you declare the work to be your own. The
wording of the statement is:
“I confirm that I have consulted the Department of German Studies’ document
“Guidelines on Assessed Essays and Examinations” and that I am aware of the
University’s Regulations governing “Cheating in a University Test” concerning
plagiarism and proper academic practice as specified on p.2 of the “Guidelines”
document. I also confirm that the assessed work now submitted is in accordance
with the above Regulation and Guidelines.
You may not submit any work which has previously been submitted either in whole or
in part for another qualification at this or any other institution, unless you have the
prior approval of your department to do so.
Failure to comply with either of the above may make you liable to proceedings under
Regulation 12.”
6.3 Plagiarism software (Turnitin)
For each piece of work that you submit for formal assessment you must ALSO
submit an (identical) electronic copy (via the departmental e-submission) which the
department may, at its discretion, check via plagiarism detection software.
6.4 Procedure for Investigating Suspected Cases of Plagiarism
(i) The marker (if not the Module Convenor) should inform both the Module
Convenor and the Director of Undergraduate Studies that a suspected case of
collusion or plagiarism has been identified.
(ii) The Module Convenor should then contact the Director of Undergraduate Studies
and provide brief details (e.g. student ID number, module code, module title,
percentage weighting of the assessment and reason for suspecting plagiarism) along
with copies of the Turnitin report and your original submission.
(iii) A check will then be made to identify whether the case constitutes a repeat
offence. If it is not, a standard letter will be sent by the Head of Department to you,
informing you that your assessment is under investigation for possible plagiarism.
You will be informed that you may be invited to attend an interview and, if so, you will
have an opportunity at that stage to make full representations about the matter. If the
case constitutes a repeat offence the process for severe plagiarism will be followed
(see section c) below).
(iv) The Head of Department will then convene a plagiarism panel (normally
consisting of the Head of Department, the Director of Undergraduate Studies and the
Module Convenor).
The panel will make an initial assessment of the case deciding whether the case is:
a) negligence; b) misconduct; or c) severe plagiarism.
10
a) Negligence
A decision of negligence will be made in cases of work deemed to have been
improperly referenced through the incompetent or careless academic practices of the
student. When considering the penalty to be imposed in such cases, an assessment
should be made of the individual’s circumstances (e.g. the stage the student has
reached in their studies, any mitigating factors and the nature and extent of the
unacknowledged copying)
(i)
(ii)
If the case in question is deemed to be an example of poor scholarship, the
Module Convenor will be directed to reduce the mark in line with the degree of
the offence.
A letter will be sent to you (copied to your personal tutor). You will be advised
that your assignment was improperly referenced due to poor scholarship,
advised to meet with your personal tutor to receive further guidance on correct
referencing techniques and warned that any future occurrences will be dealt
with more severely.
b) Misconduct
A decision of misconduct will be made in cases where it is deemed that you have
deliberately cheated, either through collusion or plagiarism, and that the offence
should be pursued within the Department without recourse to a University
Investigating Committee.
If the case in question is deemed to be an example of misconduct, the Module
Convenor will be directed to reduce the mark in line with the degree of the offence.
In severe cases of misconduct the Module Convenor will have the option of awarding
a mark of zero for the piece of work in which the plagiarism has occurred.
A letter will be sent to you (copied to personal tutor) inviting you to attend an
interview with the plagiarism panel. A copy of the Turnitin report will, if applicable,
accompany the letter. You will be advised that you will have an opportunity to make
representations during the course of the interview. In addition, you will be advised
that you may submit written evidence prior to the interview. Written evidence should
be submitted to the Head of Department no later than 24 hours prior to the interview.
You will be given at least 3 days’ notice of the interview.
Upon completion of the interview a decision will be made regarding the penalty to be
imposed and communicated by the Head of Department by letter (copied to personal
tutor).
You will then be invited to either accept the penalty or to appeal, and allowed 10 days
to respond.
If you accept the penalty, a report of the circumstances and level of penalty exacted
will be lodged with the Secretary of the Board of Examiners.
If you opt to appeal, the procedure for considering severe cases of plagiarism will be
invoked and the matter referred to a University Investigating Committee (as in the
University Calendar, Regulation 11, Section B, paragraphs 5‐9).
c) Severe Plagiarism
If the initial assessment concludes that a more severe penalty should be imposed
than the Department is allowed to levy under University regulations, the case should
be referred to a University Investigating Committee.
11
The following list contains examples of cases that should normally be referred:

Second offences of misconduct;

Allegations relating to a research thesis submitted for examination for a higher
degree

(MPhil or PhD);

Allegations relating to an assessment that contributed to the previous approval
of an award to the student;

Allegations of a serious nature e.g. the student is suspected of having stolen
work from another student or accessed work from a commercial internet site;

Where a mark of zero would potentially result in the student being ineligible to
qualify for the award for which they are registered;

Where there are multiple allegations of cheating, affecting more than one
module, against the same student which, if proven, would result in the student
being ineligible to qualify for the award for which they are registered;

Where the case is complex, for example involving allegations of collusion
against two or more students.
(i)
The plagiarism panel, having discussed the case with the markers, concludes
that the case is a severe one and should be referred directly to the Investigating
Committee.
(ii)
In the event of the case being confirmed as a severe case of plagiarism you
will be notified that the case has been referred to a University Investigating
Committee (letter copied to programme manager, academic director, personal tutor
and NIE). You will then be provided with information relating to Regulation 11,
Section B, paragraphs 5‐ 9 of the University Calendar.
7.
ORAL EXAMINATIONS
7.1
First-Year Oral Examinations last fifteen minutes, during which time you will
be required to give a brief presentation on the topic of your media project
lasting about 5 minutes. In the following 5 minutes you should present the
findings of some additional research you have made on the topic. In the last 5
minutes of the exam you will be asked to talk about a German current affairs
topic. For more details on the first year oral exam see module outline for 1st
Year Language.
7.2
Second-Year Oral Examinations also last fifteen minutes. Here however you
will be expected to be able to discuss two topics from a list of circa five topics,
all of which will have been discussed in class during the year. The examiner
will choose which two topics at the beginning of the examination. You will be
assessed on content as well as language and you are expected to do some
additional research on the topics discussed in class.
7.3
Final-Year Oral Examinations last 25 minutes and are conducted by two
examiners and they will have the following structure.
1)
2)
3)
5 minutes: introduction of a topic of your choice (has to be agreed with your
language tutor) as a discussion topic. This will be practised in class.
10 minutes: discussion on the above topic.
10 minutes: you will be questioned on one of four/five prescribed and prenotified topics drawn from material discussed during the year in the
conversation and comprehension classes. You will be expected to have
prepared this topic in depth based not only on what has been discussed in
class but also some of your own independent additional research.
12
Please note that you are being assessed on the content of what you say, the
fluency with which you say it as well as the overall structure and
grammatical correctness.
7.4
Preparation for Oral Examinations
You are advised to prepare your topics thoroughly and in depth. Whilst preparation
is important, you should not simply recite material verbatim from memory. The bestprepared candidates have sufficient command of their topic to be able to talk freely
using a few Stichworte on a small card as an aide-memoire or even a PowerPoint
presentation on a laptop. You should also be able to discuss topics at an intellectual
level appropriate to the year of the course.
7.5
Criteria Employed in Oral Examinations
You should aim to conduct the conversation at an appropriate level. Category 6
(below) means deploying the specialist language appropriate to the topic. Register
means “Er hat die Maßnahmen scharf verurteilt” is preferable to “er fand es sehr
schlecht und hat etwas dagegen gesagt”.
The following criteria are considered when assessing and marking performance in
German language oral examinations:
1.
Topic content
Thoroughness of preparation, extent of research, coverage of topic, intellectual
level.
2.
Presentation
Organisation of material, clarity of structure, retention of examiner’s interest.
3.
Pronunciation, accent, intonation, diction
To what extent does the German sound authentic?
4.
Sprachgefühl
Ability to think in target language; freedom from first language interference,
use of idioms.
5.
Comprehension and response
Immediacy, spontaneity and fluency thereof.
6.
Complexity and range of vocabulary and structures; Register
Use of specialist terminology where appropriate, accurate use of verb/noun
combinations (e.g. avoidance of kriegen and machen).
7.
Grammar
Accurate use of adjectival endings, verb/noun agreement, cases and
prepositions, word order, verb conjugation.
13
8.
WRITTEN EXAMINATION PREPARATION AND TECHNIQUE
8.1

Revision
The best preparation for examinations starts right at the beginning of the
module with good note-taking practice.

Noting module aims and objectives and checking past exam papers gives you
an idea of what the examiners expect you to achieve by the end of the module.
Past examination papers are available online via Warwick Insite.

Reread your lecture and seminar notes. Arrange to swap your assessed essay
with those of friends. A process of gradual reduction is often useful when trying
to memorise information and ideas. This involves condensing your notes into
ever-smaller units, until you can fit all your key points on to one small card.
Quotations can be recalled by memorising key words.

In the summer term time-management is vital: devise a schedule for each
module, and stick to it.
8.2
Written Examinations
1.
Read the rubric carefully. Do as it says.
2.
Read the entire question paper. Decide which questions you are best able to
answer. At this stage strategies vary. Some prefer to boost confidence by
getting one answer on paper right away. Others prefer to make brief notes on
all 2/3 questions as soon as seeing the question triggers the thoughts, lest they
forget in one/two hours’ time. You have to decide which method suits you best.
But either way, make sure you have plans for each essay and stick to them.
3.
Make sure you answer the right number of questions and divide the time
appropriately (note that in certain exams not all questions carry equal weight).
Simple arithmetic shows that two answers have to be extremely good indeed to
compensate for a non-existent third. Even if you mismanage the time and have
only 5 to 10 minutes left for the final answer, get some notes down, however
brief. They might make the vital difference.
4.
Read the question carefully. Decide what it is the question is asking you to do.
If you are asked to what extent you agree or disagree with an assertion or a
quotation, or to compare and contrast two works, make sure you do that. Often
candidates treat exam questions as an excuse to write as much as they know
about a topic or text. A good answer will always adapt revised material to the
needs of the question. Consider the key words in the question. Often their
meaning is not self-evident. Remember that examination questions are devised
to enable candidates not just to show what they know, but also to engage
critically with the material, by arguing a case.
5.
Examination answers are not the same as assessed essays. It is not possible
to be as thorough or as detailed. Quotations are a useful addition to exam
answers, but you are not expected quote to the same extent as in an assessed
essay. It’s important to get to the point quickly in an examination answer.
14
The first 30-40% of marks for each question are relatively easy to clock up. Thereafter
it’s a matter of:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Does the candidate know the text/topic well?
Is s/he answering the question?
Is the essay well structured?
Is the answer well written, is it easy to read?
Is the answer interesting?
8.3
Language Examinations

Read the rubric Some language examinations ask students from different
German and German-related degree programmes to do different things, so
make sure you don’t, for instance, translate the wrong passage, or translate a
passage provided for a comprehension exercise.

Read the entire paper Highlight words you don’t know, phrases you can’t
follow. That way they can be logged in your unconscious, which will work on
them whilst you’re doing other things.

Reading comprehension Read the questions before you read the passage.
That way you know what you’re looking for in the text.

Translation into German (First year) This is more a grammar than a
vocabulary test. If you are unsure of adjectival endings, write them down. It will
give you confidence. Read the passage carefully with a view to spotting
grammar points.

Translation into English Remember the guidance in material handed out in
the course of the year, and try to put it into practice.

Leave enough time at the end for proof reading Ideally you should read
your answer several times, restricting each read-through to one particular
grammar point e.g. position of verb, genders, adj. endings, cases, etc.

If the marks vary for each question spend the appropriate amount of time on
each.
9.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES: GUIDANCE FOR STUDENTS
9.1
What are mitigating circumstances?
1.
Sometimes circumstances or events beyond your control may adversely affect
your ability to perform in an assessment to your full potential or to complete an
assignment by the set deadline. In such cases mitigation may be applied, i.e.
treating marks or results in a way that recognizes the adverse impact that may
have resulted from those circumstances or events, or waiving penalties that
would arise from late submission.
2.
Mitigation will not result in the changing of any marks, unless penalties for
late submission are waived after an assignment has already been marked.
Instead, mitigation may result in some marks being disregarded and the
assessment being excused because it was adversely affected. You may also
be given a mark for a whole module based on your performance in the parts
that were not adversely affected. Mitigation may also mean treating your overall
15
performance as borderline even though the marks you obtained would not
normally be high enough, and so considering you for a more favourable result
such as a higher degree class.
3.
Requests for mitigation (together with the appropriate professional
documentation) should be submitted at the earliest possible stage. Requests for
mitigation submitted after the published date for the submission of an assessed
essay or an examination will not normally be considered without a credible and
compelling explanation as to why the circumstances were not known or could
not have been shown beforehand.
If you wish you believe that you have mitigating circumstances that merit
consideration you must fill out the appropriate form on the German Studies’
Undergraduate Academic Resources section of the website and submit this via
your personal tutor at the earliest possible opportunity.
9.2
Nature of mitigating circumstances 4.
It is important to remember that, in order to qualify for consideration, the
adverse circumstances or events must be unforeseeable or unpreventable as
far as you are concerned, and sufficiently disruptive to have a significant
adverse effect on your academic performance or your ability to complete
assignments by the due date.
5.
Circumstances or events that merit consideration may include:




6.
suffering a serious illness or injury
the death or critical /significant illness of a close family
member/dependant
a significant family crisis leading to acute stress
unplanned absence arising from such things as jury service or maternity,
paternity or adoption leave.
Circumstances or events that would NOT normally merit consideration include:







holidays or other events that were planned or could reasonably have
been expected
assessments that are scheduled close together or on the same day
misreading the timetable for examinations or otherwise misunderstanding
the requirements for assessment
inadequate planning or time management
failure, loss or theft of a computer or other equipment (including inability to
print off work for whatever reason)
exam stress or panic attacks not diagnosed as illness
minor disruption in an examination room during the course of an
assessment.
16
APPENDIX 1
Essay marking Criteria for Second and Final Year German Language Essays
Content
Structure/
Argumentation/
Coherence
Grammar/
Syntax
Style/
Vocabulary
70+
All aspects of the topic
are covered with excellent
use of illustrative
examples.
A wide range of good and
appropriate ideas show a
very good understanding
of the topic and originality.
All facts are correct.
The essay is well
organised throughout and
all ideas are well linked
showing a coherent
argumentation at an
intellectually complex
level.
An original viewpoint is
developed.
60-69
Many aspects of the topic
are covered using good,
illustrative examples.
A range of good and
appropriate ideas show a
good understanding of the
topic and some originality.
Most facts are correct.
A wide range of complex
grammatical structures
used with consistent
accuracy show a very
good command of
German grammar and
syntax.
A range of grammatical
structures are attempted,
many of which are
complex. Although these
may not always be
accurate, a good
command of German
grammar and syntax is
apparent.
A broad range of
vocabulary is used to
good effect. There is
some use of accurate
topic-related terminology.
The choice of register is
mostly correct.
A broad range of
vocabulary is used to very
good effect. Topic-related
terminology is accurately
and effectively used.
The choice of register is
always appropriate.
The essay is mostly well
organised and most ideas
are well linked showing a
reasonably intellectually
demanding level of
argument.
A good attempt at
developing an original
viewpoint is made.
Content/ Structure/ Argumentation/ Coherence = 50%
Grammar/ Syntax/ Style/ Vocabulary = 50%
50-59
Some aspects of the topic
are covered using some
illustrative examples.
An understanding of the
topic is shown using some
good and appropriate
ideas.
The facts are mainly
correct.
Certain ideas are linked
providing evidence of
some intellectually
organised argument
though this may not
always be effective or
apparent throughout.
Little attempt is made to
develop an original
viewpoint.
The grammatical
structures used are
predominantly simple.
The level of accuracy
shows a reasonably
sound understanding of
German grammar and
syntax.
The range of vocabulary
used is limited. There are
few examples of correctly
used topic-related terms.
There is some awareness
of the appropriate use of
register.
40-49
A few illustrative
examples and a limited
number of appropriate
ideas reveal only a basic
understanding of the
topic.
Some important/
relevant facts are
incorrect.
Although there is some
attempt to structure the
argument it is mainly
weak or inappropriate.
Very few ideas are
effectively linked.
39A lack of ideas and the
use of mainly incorrect
facts point to a very
limited understanding
of the topic.
Hardly any complex
grammar is attempted
and there are some
intrusive errors in the
simple structures used.
Numerous significant
errors in basic German
grammar, syntax and
spelling occur.
The vocabulary is
insufficient, too simple
and impedes
presentation of the topic.
There is little awareness
of an appropriate use of
register.
Repeated, serious
errors in the use of
German grammar,
syntax and spelling
severely restrict
effective
communication.
The ideas are either
not linked or are poorly
linked showing an
incoherent or random
structure.
The essay shows an
inadequate use of
vocabulary, multiple
errors and a lack of
any awareness of
register.
APPENDIX 2
GE401 Final Year German Language Essay Guidelines
Content/ structure and language are weighted 50%/ 50%
The following criteria should be taken into account when writing an essay:
Content/ Structure:
- Quantity and quality of arguments; coverage of all/ most important aspects;
context/ background knowledge
- Has the question in the title been read carefully and answered adequately?
- Do the arguments develop convincingly; does the text (argumentation) flow?
- Has the answer been thought through? Has the student developed his/ her own viewpoint? Is the answer original? (True originality being a
hallmark of a first class essay!)
Language:
- Accuracy: Mistakes in order of severity:
1. incomprehensible sentences/ structures
2. interference (direct translation from English into German etc.)
3. word order
4. verbs (endings, irregular verbs, perfect with “haben” and “sein”, passive with “werden” and “sein”)
5. gender, cases, prepositions
6. adjective endings
7. the use of the article
8. spelling
-
Register/ Style
Vocabulary (use of appropriate vocabulary, technical terms)
Readability: Does the text (language) flow? How convincing is the text as a piece of German?
Guidelines on length of essay:
You should bear in mind that quality is of greater importance than quantity, but as a rule of thumb, your essay should be no less than 600 words
and no more than 1200 words in length.
18
APPENDIX 3
Translation marking Criteria for Second and Final Year: Application of the 17 point mark scale, with descriptors.
Mark
96
Classification
Excellent First
Descriptor
Outstanding work – at a level comparable to staff ‘fair copy’ or better/ publishable.
This will be grammatically accurate, have no omissions and demonstrate excellent mastery of idiom, vocabulary and register.
It will perform the elusive task of both accurately reflecting the original and reading well as a piece of English prose throughout.
89
High First
Work in this class will be very good to excellent. The work must in most cases make sense and read well in English and be a largely accurate
rendering of the original. There will be no fundamental lapses in accuracy of grammar, meaning and no significant omissions in any first class work.
81
Mid First
At the upper end of this category work will be similar to the category above (96), though may contain a few more lapses in idiom or register.
74
Low First
Work in the middle and lower categories will display a few more of these lapses. There may be occasional unsuitable choices of vocabulary.
68
High 2:1
Work in this class will be sound to very good.
65
Mid 2:1
At the upper end of the class, work will be largely accurate in capturing the sense of the original. There may be a few omissions and/ or lapses in
register, idiom and vocabulary.
Low 2:1
In the middle and lower sections of the class the above mentioned lapses will be more frequent. There may be instances of approximation or ‘near
misses’
62
The work must make sense in English, even if inaccurate or incomplete or stylistically compromised as a translation.
58
High 2:2
Work in this class will be sound and largely make sense in English. However, it is likely that work in this category will miss out on some of the more
nuanced aspects of successful translations; appropriate register, effective use of idioms in English.
55
Mid 2:2
At the upper end of this class work will contain many sections that make sense in English and capture the sense of the original, though there may be
several lapses in these areas.
52
Low 2:2
In the middle and lower sections of this class there will be increasingly frequent lapses of accuracy of translation and intelligibility.
48
rd
High 3
45
42
Mid 3
rd
Low 3
38
High Fail (Near
Miss)
25
Fail
These texts contain overwhelmingly inaccurate translations and/ or poor English. The renderings imply that the translator struggles to make any
sense of German texts and grammar. There is evidence of a marked failure to work out meaning of individual sentences from the context of the
whole text.
12
Low Fail
At the bottom end of the class, large sections of the text are likely to be missing also.
0
Zero
Work not submitted or so little work done, that no grade is awarded.
rd
Texts in this class try to stick too literally to the German, reading as and at times unintelligible English, or read as reasonable English but are far too
inaccurate vis-a-vis the original. They often demonstrate fundamental misapprehensions of the original and/ or significant omissions. There may be
some, though not sustained redeeming evidence of an attempt to work out meaning logically from context.
19
APPENDIX 4
Mark Scale
All undergraduate modules are marked using one overall system, which runs from 0100. Marks fall into different classes of performance:
70-100 First Class
60-69 Second Class, Upper Division (also referred to as "Upper Second" or "2.1")
50-59 Second Class, Lower Division (also referred to as "Lower Second" or "2.2")
40-49 Third Class
0-39
Fail
The department or lecturer running any particular module will be able to tell you what
specific marking criteria apply in the department or on the module.
With effect from first-year students in 2008-09 the University is making some
changes to how we use this overall scale. The standard required to achieve a
given class on any piece of work remains the same as before, so the
borderlines separating classes lie at the same standard. The following
sections apply only to first-year undergraduate students 2008-09 and 2009-10;
these students will have their work marked as set out here throughout their
courses.
More information is available from the Teaching Quality website:
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/quality/categories/examinations/markscalesconv
entions/forstudents/
Within the overall system set out above, your assessed work and exams will be
marked on one of two scales, depending on certain characteristics of the assessment
or exam. The department or lecturer running any particular module will be able to tell
you which scale applies to the module.
Numerically based work, work with smaller questions (all points on 0-100
scale)
Where an assessment or exam is based on numerical work, or where there are a
large number of questions in an exam with small numbers of marks for each
question, we can use all of the points from 0 to 100. This is typical of many
assessments and exams in Science, some language work, some exams in
Economics and the Business School and so on. You can find examples on the
Teaching
Quality
website
at
www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/quality/categories/examinations/markscalesconvention
s/forstudents/ug08/markscale/examplepapers/
In the German Department Modern German Language I in the first year and Modern
German Language II in the second year are marked using this scale.
Other work (17-point marking scale) – applies to all assessed essays
Where an assessment or exam is a single piece of work, or a small number of long
exam answers, work is marked using the following scale. This is typical for essaybased subjects, dissertations and many pieces of work where there is no right
answer and the quality of your analysis and argument is particularly important. You
can
find
examples
on
the
Teaching
Quality
website
at
www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/quality/categories/examinations/markscalesconvention
s/forstudents/ug08/markscale/examplepapers/
20
In the German Department all modules in all years, except Modern German
Language I and II, are marked according to this 17-point scale.
With the exception of Excellent 1st, High Fail and Zero, the descriptors cover a range
of marks, with the location within each group dependent on the extent to which the
elements in the descriptor and departmental/faculty marking criteria are met.
Class
Scale
Numerical
equivalent
Excellent
1st
96
High 1st
89
Mid 1st
81
Low 1st
74
High 2.1
68
Mid 2.1
65
Low 2.1
62
First
Upper
Second
(2.1)
Descriptor
Exceptional work of the highest quality which
at final-year level may achieve or be close to
publishable standard.
 Exceptional perceptive and accurate
analysis of primary material coupled with
some evidence of original thought/research
 Ability to engage critically with – and go
beyond – secondary material
 Very clear grasp of historical and critical
contexts
 Essay is clearly structured and reads very
fluently
 Sustained address to the issues the
question raised
 Quotations properly referenced
 Bibliography/filmography complete and
properly presented
Very high quality work which may extend
existing debates or interpretations:
 Excellent perceptive and accurate analysis
of primary material coupled with some
evidence of original thought/research
 Ability to engage critically with – and go
beyond – secondary material
 Very clear grasp of historical and critical
contexts
 Essay is clearly structured and reads very
fluently
 Sustained address to the issues the
question raised
 Quotations properly referenced
 Bibliography/filmography complete and
properly presented
High quality work with the following qualities:
 Good or very good perceptive and
accurate analysis of primary material
 Critical terms are properly defined
 Good grasp of historical and critical
contexts
 Secondary sources are properly evaluated
 Essay is clearly structured; argument
develops logically
 Sustained address to the issues the
question raised
 Quotations properly referenced and
evidence that works/films cited in
bibliography/filmography have been used
21
Lower
Second
(2.2)
High 2.2
58
Mid 2.2
55
Low 2.2
52
High 3rd
48
Mid 3rd
45
Low 3rd
42
Third
High Fail
(sub
Honours)
38
Fail
25
Fail
12
Low Fail
Zero
Zero
0
Competent work with the following features:
 Satisfactory analysis of primary material
 Limited explanation of historical and critical
contexts
 Some confusion over the use of critical
terms
 Address to the question not consistently
sustained. Inclusion of some material not
relevant to the question
 Some over-reliance on secondary sources
used and/or some key secondary sources
not properly evaluated
 Inadequate use of quotations
 Some errors in referencing and/or
presentation of bibliography
 Structure unclear in places; some errors in
syntax, punctuation and spelling
Work of limited quality characterised by:
 Limited analysis of primary material
 Very limited understanding of critical terms
 Historical and critical contexts inadequately
explained
 Little or no evaluation of secondary sources
 Little or no use of quotations
 Quotations not properly referenced and
little evidence that works/films cited in
bibliography/filmography have in fact been
consulted
 Multiple errors in presentation of
bibliography
 More a general essay on the text than a
sustained address to the question
 Essay is poorly structured; errors in English
syntax, punctuation and register
Work does not meet standards required for the
appropriate stage of an Honours degree:
 Little or no evidence of an adequate
engagement with the primary material
 General essay about the text/s that does
not address the question at all
 Little or no evidence of an ability to tackle
other issues relating to the topic
 Little or no evidence of any sustained
attempt to engage with historical and critical
contexts
Poor quality work well below the standards
required for the appropriate stage of an
Honours degree.
Work of no merit OR Absent, work not
submitted, penalty in some misconduct cases
22
For calculating module results, the points on this marking scale have the following
numerical equivalents:
Point on
numerical
range of marks for work marked using
Class
scale
equivalent
all points on 0-100 scale
First
Upper
Second
Lower
Second
Third
Fail
Excellent
1st
96
93-100
High 1st
89
85-92
Mid 1st
81
78-84
Low 1st
74
70-77
High 2.1
68
67-69
Mid 2.1
65
64-66
Low 2.1
62
60-63
High 2.2
58
57-59
Mid 2.2
55
54-56
Low 2.2
52
50-53
High 3rd
48
47-49
Mid 3rd
45
44-46
Low 3rd
42
40-43
High Fail
38
35-39
Fail
25
19-34
Low Fail
12
1-18
Zero
Zero
0
0
You can see that marks for all work, whether marked using every point on the 0-100
scale (numerically based work and similar) or on the 17-point scale (essays,
dissertations etc), fall into the same categories. A piece of work given a mark of 81
has reached the standard for "Mid 1st" whether it is a Mathematics exam or a History
essay, an oral language exam or a design project in Engineering.
Alles klar?
Now have a look at the German Department’s Assessed Essay Feedback Sheet
below.
The Assessed essay feedback sheet is attached to and returned to every essay in
Year 1. From Year 2 the original essays are kept in the Department and you have a
copy of the feedback returned to you.
You should also have a look at the Department’s Feedback Arrangements (on
the German Studies’ Undergraduate Academic Resources).
23
Department of German Studies: Assessed Essay Feedback Sheet
Comments: Module Marker
Moderator comments (in the event of altered marks):
Final comments
Moderated
Mark Mark (if applicable)
24
excellent
CONTEXTUALISATION
Critical context established?
Historical context established?
Relevance of context clear?
EXPRESSION/PRESENTATION
Spelling, syntax, punctuation
Fluency of English
Scholarly presentation
(footnotes , bibliography, filmography)
good
STRUCTURE
Overall structure
Clear line of argument?
Address to question
ANALYTICAL ABILITY
Textual analysis
Definition of terms
Evaluation of secondary lit.
excellent
Moderator:
good
Module marker:
satisfactory
Student no.
poor
Module Title
satisfactory
Copy:
File with essay
Feedback returned to students via Tabula
Feedback to student file
poor
Original: