7322MED: Assessment Item – Major Essay: Criteria Marking Sheet
Student Name:
Description
HD
D
C
P
PC
F
Critical Evaluation and
Relevance of Discussion
(70%)
Knowledge and critique based
on relevant important ideas,
theoretical concepts and valid
research findings.
Original, cohesive and quality
analysis and discussion.
Evidence of insightful and
critical understanding of
issues. Critical evaluation is
informed by the literature.
Demonstrates well
developed understanding of
the topic and coherent
development of ideas
discussed to appropriate
depth.
Evidence of a good
understanding of the
issues. Offers perceptive
opinion informed by the
literature.
Demonstrates good
understanding of the topic
and development of major
ideas that are discussed to
an adequate depth.
Evidence of a sound
understanding of the
issues. Offers opinion
informed by the literature.
Demonstrates an
understanding of the
topic and consistently
develops the major ideas.
The discussion has depth
in parts.
Evidence of a
satisfactory
understanding of the
issues. Offers opinion
on some of the issues.
Demonstrates an
understanding of the
topic. In parts, the
discussion needs to be
in more depth.
Limited understanding or
consideration of the issues.
Describes rather than
evaluates.
Provided some reference
to the topic and had some
ideas about it.
Discussion lacks clarity
and depth.
Has not demonstrated
understanding or
consideration of the
issues. Has not
demonstrated an
understanding of the topic.
Organisation, Structure and
Written Presentation (20%)
Clear, logical and evident
structure to the organisation
and presentation of the
discussion in the paper.
Demonstrates acceptable
standards of written work (e.g.
expression and grammar)
The paper is well organised
with a logical, clear and
evident structure.
Carefully edited with no
errors. Accurate referencing.
Appropriate length.
The paper is appropriately
organised with a logical
structure.
Carefully edited with few
errors. Appropriate
referencing and length
The paper shows
evidence of acceptable
organisation and logical
structure.
Well edited but with some
errors that may hinder
readability.
Appropriate referencing
and length.
The paper has a
satisfactory structure
with mostly logical
presentation.
Satisfactory editing, but
a few errors that hinder
readability.
Appropriate referencing
and length.
The paper is poorly
organised and lacks clear
structure.
Errors that hinder
readability. Referencing
incomplete, or
inappropriate.
Length -too long or too
short.
The paper is disorganised
with no clear structure.
Multiple errors hindering
readability. Referencing
incomplete and/or
inappropriate.
Length -too long or too
short
Use of Literature (10%)
Quality of and use of
supporting literature and
references
Academic reference style used
correctly
Excellent use of a wide
variety of academically
appropriate literature.
References used an
integrated manner that
substantiates the assertions.
Very good use of
academically appropriate
literature.
References used
appropriately to support
assertions.
Good use of literature to
support discussion and
assertions.
Adequate use of
literature to support
some of the discussion
and assertions.
Limited use of literature to
support discussion and
assertions.
Poor or no use of literature
to support discussion and
assertions.
Total
Marker:
Date:
Comments:
/50