High distinction

85 - 100

• The work demonstrates a deep and intelligent understanding of, and individual engagement with material;
• presents a very close analysis of focal texts or issues;
• addresses a specific issue and develops an independent critical or theoretical argument successfully;
• indicates awareness of complexities and qualifications in argumentation;
• demonstrates careful thought about the critical, historical and/or theoretical context of the texts or issues;
• provides evidence of wide-ranging reading;
• is properly referenced and well-presented.

Distinction

75 - 84

• The work demonstrates an intelligent understanding of, and individual engagement with material;
• analyses focal texts or issues appositely;
• addresses an issue and presents a well-argued, coherent case;
• demonstrates careful thought about the critical, historical and/or theoretical context of the texts or issues;
• provides evidence of reading beyond what is strictly required for the task;
• is properly referenced and well presented.

Credit

65 - 74

• The work provides evidence of reading and thinking about focal texts or issues and their contexts;
• shows some clear understanding of relevant critical and theoretical considerations and of the conceptual issues raised by a unit of study;
• uses close critical analysis;
• avoids summary;
• attempts a critical or theoretical argument;
• is clearly and effectively written;
• is adequately referenced.

Pass

50 - 64

• The work provides clear evidence of having read and thought about focal texts or issues
• The work is structured coherently and may attempt an independent argument;
• uses some close critical analysis;
• may sometimes present quotation for illustrative purposes, or may provide simplistic comment or unsubstantiated assertions
• is adequately expressed though there may be some weaknesses in this area;
• has references but may contain some errors.

Fail

0 - 49

• The learning outcomes of the unit are not met to a satisfactory standard.

Work may fail for any of the following reasons:

• no evidence of having read the prescribed material closely;
• sloppy, inconsistent presentation;
• preponderance of paraphrase, mere plot summary or listing of superficial characteristics;
• excessive use of quotation for illustrative purposes only, without any attempt at analysis;
• excessive level of generality in answering a question;
• inappropriate or obscure expression;
• incoherent general structure;
• inadequate referencing;
• late submission of work without extension.