PRACTICAL
Student Reference Number:
Module Code:
Module Title:
Coursework Title:
Date Due:
Number Of Pages (excluding cover sheet, marking criteria and
reference list):
Member Of Staff Setting Coursework:
Please note that University Academic Regulations are available under Rules and Regulations on the University website
www.plymouth.ac.uk/studenthandbook.
Marker Comments
REMEMBER TO CONVERT YOUR WORK TO PDF FORMAT BEFORE SUBMITTING
Criteria for awarding grades and categorical marks to practical reports in psychology. Please note that not all points have an equal level of grading.
YOUR MARK IS BASED ON THE OVERALL JUDGMENT OF THE WORK AND MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT FACTORS NOT COVERED IN THE FEEDBACK. THERE IS NO FIXED AND PRECISE RELATIONSHOP
BETWEEN FEEDBACK RATINGS AND THE FINAL MARK.
Abstract
First Class
Upper Second Class
Lower Second Class
Third Class
Borderline Fail
Serious Fail
Clearly written and
expressed
Mostly well written and
expressed
Moderately well written
and expressed
Acceptable grammar and
spelling
Poor grammar
and spelling
Incoherent
Written concisely
Written in a fairly
concise manner
Too short/long
Expansive/repetitive
Provides some of the
necessary information
Provides little of the
necessary information
disjointed Provides
very little of the
necessary information
Provides the
necessary information
Introduction
Provides most of the
necessary information
Good understanding of
theoretical framework
Reviews a good range of
appropriate literature
Reviews some
appropriate literature
Reviews a cursory level
of literature
Reviews a wide range of
appropriate journal articles
Correctly uses citations
most of the time
Uses some citations,
but not always correctly
Rarely or incorrectly
uses citations
Correctly uses citations
Tends to support claims
with evidence
Supports some
claims with evidence
Rarely supports claims
with evidence
Provides a good rationale
Provides an attempt at
a rationale
Limited or no attempt to
provide a rationale
Uses subsections
Uses some subsections
Mostly places details in
the correct section
Details not in the correct
sections
Does not use
appropriate subsections
Good level of detail of
the procedure
Supports claims with
evidence
Shows originality
Minimal acquaintance
or misunderstands
relevant material
Incorrectly uses
citations
Little or no evidence of the
relevant information
Serious
misunderstanding of the
literature or no literature
reviewed
Does not use citations
Does not support
claims with evidence
Does not support claims
with evidence
No rationale
No rationale
No subsections
Disorganised
and incoherent
Clear rationale
Method
Uses subsections
(participants, materials,
procedure)
Disorganised
Disorganised and
incoherent
Fair attempt to cover
procedure
Cursory coverage of
procedure
Limited/ incorrect
procedure
Mostly relevant
Some irrelevant details
Many irrelevant details
Contains mostly
irrelevant details
Performs the correct
statistical analysis
Presents mostly
correct analysis
Presents some
correct analysis
Limited/incorrect
analysis
Incorrect analysis
No analysis
Describes results correctly &
concisely
Describes most of the
results correctly & quite
concisely
Describes some results
correctly/some irrelevant
details
Limited understanding
Incorrect description of
results
No attempt to describe the
results
Incorrect use of tables
and figures with
incorrect labels
No attempt to use tables
or figures
Details in correct section
Instructions enable
replication
Only relevant details
Results
Uses appropriate figures or
tables with correctly labels
Provides SPSS outputs
in appendix
Uses mostly appropriate
figures or tables with
correct labels
Some appropriate
figures/tables with some
correct labels
Much irrelevant detail
Rarely uses
appropriate
figures/tables and with
incorrect labels
No procedural details
Contains no relevant
details
Discussion
Interprets results rationally
Links results back
to hypotheses and
prior literature
Critically evaluates with
evidence
Fully develops arguments
with supportive evidence
Suggests appropriate
future research with
evidence
Provides
appropriate
conclusion
Original exposition
References
Uses the correct format
Mostly interprets the
results rationally
Interprets some
results rationally
Good attempt to link
results back to
hypotheses and
prior literature
Fair attempt to link
results back to
hypotheses and
prior literature
Mostly provides critical
evaluation
Provides some critical
evaluation
Develops full arguments
for most points
Develops some points
fully
Suggests some
appropriate future
research
Suggests some fair
points for future research
Provides a
good
conclusion
Mostly uses the correct
format
Provides an attempt at
a conclusion
Sometimes uses
the correct format
Displays limited
understanding Rarely
links results back to
hypotheses or prior
research
Provides some
basic evaluation
Rarely develops points
fully
Limited suggestions for
future research
Limited or inaccurate
conclusion
Rarely uses the
correct format
Some references
missing and/or one or
two references are listed
but not cited in the body
of the report
Appendices
Provides
appropriate
appendices
Provides mostly
appropriate
appendices
Provides
some
appendices
Correctly labels
any appendices
Mostly uses correct
labels
Sometimes uses
correct labels
Appropriate grammar
Good grammar
Fair attempt at grammar
Accurate spelling
Good spelling
Fair attempt at spelling
Appropriate writing style
which has continuity
and flow
Good overall writing style
which tends to have
continuity and flow
Fair attempt at writing
style with some
continuity and flow
Uses correct
formatting overall
Mostly correct
formatting
Some use of
correct formatting
Irrational interpretation
of results
Incorrectly links results
back to hypotheses or
prior research
Incorrectly evaluated
points
No interpretation or
serious
misunderstanding
No attempt to link results
back to hypotheses or prior
research
No evaluation
Does not develop any
points fully
No attempt to develop
points
Incorrect suggestions
for future research
No suggestions for future
research
Incorrect conclusion
No conclusion
Few references
No references
Incorrectly formatted
Several references
missing and/or not
cited in report
Provides mostly
incorrect appendices
Provides incorrect
appendices
No appendices
Mostly uses incorrect
labels
Incorrect or no use of
labels
Acceptable grammar and
spelling
Poor grammar
and spelling
Very poor grammar or
incorrectly used grammar
Basic writing level
Incoherent and
disjointed writing style
Completely incoherent
writing style
Refers to appendices in
main report
Presentation
and style
Rarely uses
correct formatting
Double-click to enter Student ID
1