SOJU6902: Social Justice Dissertation Part 2

Result name

Mark range

Description

High distinction

85 - 100

Student demonstrates an exceptionally clear, well-formulated and significant research question, grounded in a compelling social justice problem. The dissertation makes a strong and original contribution to conceptual and/or theoretical debates and/or shows clear potential to inform policy, practice or social change. The literature review is comprehensive, critical and well-integrated, situating the study convincingly within relevant scholarly and practical contexts. Methods are rigorously justified, ethically sound, and clearly linked to the research question, with thoughtful discussion of limitations. Arguments are highly coherent, original and sustained throughout, supported by critical evaluation of high-quality evidence. The conclusion synthesizes all major arguments effectively, explicitly addressing the research question. The work demonstrates a high level of reflexivity and critical thinking. Presentation is polished and professional, with accurate referencing, excellent expression, and clear structure, all within the word limit.

Distinction

75 - 84

Student presents a clear and well-defined research question of evident significance to a social justice issue. The dissertation shows a strong contribution to conceptual understanding and/or practical outcomes, though originality may be more limited or uneven. The literature review is thorough and appropriately critical, providing solid contextualisation of the study. Methods are clearly described and justified, with appropriate attention to ethics. Arguments are logical, coherent and well supported, though some sections may be less fully developed or integrated. Evidence is used effectively, with some critical evaluation. The conclusion draws together the main arguments clearly in relation to the research question. Reflexivity and critical thinking are evident, though not consistently deep. Presentation is very good, with only minor issues in structure, style or referencing.

Credit

65 - 74

Student demonstrates a generally clear research question, though the significance or focus of the work may be underdeveloped. The dissertation shows sound engagement with relevant social justice issues but makes a modest or largely descriptive contribution to theory and/or practice. The literature review covers key sources but is more descriptive than critical, with limited synthesis. Methods are adequately explained, though justification, ethical reflection or linkage to the research question may be limited. Arguments are generally coherent but may lack depth, originality or consistency. Evidence is used appropriately but with limited critical evaluation. The conclusion summarizes key points but may not fully integrate them to address the research question. Reflexivity and critical thinking are present but uneven. Presentation is competent, with some issues in expression, referencing or organisation, though the dissertation remains readable and within the word limit.

Pass

50 - 64

Work at this level presents a basic or loosely defined research question, with limited articulation of its broader significance. Engagement with social justice issues is surface-level or largely descriptive, with minimal contribution to theory, policy or practice. The literature review shows basic familiarity with relevant sources but lacks critical analysis or clear contextualisation. Methods are outlined but insufficiently justified, with limited discussion of ethics or limitations. Arguments may be fragmented, repetitive or weakly developed, and evidence is used inconsistently or uncritically. The conclusion provides a general summary but does not convincingly address the research question. Reflexivity and critical thinking are limited. Presentation meets minimum academic standards but contains noticeable issues in structure, expression, referencing or clarity, though the work remains within the word limit.

Fail

0 - 49

Student has not met the minimum standard for argumentation, methods, conceptual work, relevant literature, presentation, or evidence.