Marking Key for Examiners
|Expert- PASS||Competent- PASS||Novice-PASS||Beginner- PASS||Fail|
|Literature review||The literature reviewed is extensive and relevant for an article. Exhibits in-depth evaluation and provides theoretical or empirical justification for research questions/hypothesis||The evaluation and integration of existing literature is sound without being outstanding||Provides an adequate coverage of the literature, although it tends to be more descriptive than evaluative, and arguments are sometimes disjointed.||Coverage of the necessary literature is weak, with insufficient information provided to support the arguments made, or conclusions drawn, within the article. Tendency to summarise individual works.||Coverage of the necessary literature is inadequate, with little information provided relevant to the claims made, or conclusions drawn, within the dissertation.|
|Insight||Evidence of significant insight and original thought in dealing with critical issues||Reasonable insight and some evidence of original thought in dealing with critical issues||Occasional evidence of insight into the issues underlying the dissertation, but little evidence of original thinking||Little evidence of insight and ideas tend to be highly derivative||Serious misunderstanding of key concepts and issues|
|Research methods||Sophisticated understanding of research methods, with evidence of careful attention to critical design issues||Evidence of a solid understanding of research methods||Basic but somewhat limited understanding of the research methods||Knowledge of research methods is deficient||Knowledge of research methods is lacking|
|Data analysis and presentation||Appropriate choice of data analysis, (where needed), and outstanding presentation and reporting of results||Choice of data analysis that is appropriate for the design and clear presentation of results||Serviceable choice of data analysis, although other approaches may have been more appropriate; the presentation of results lacks clarity||Data analysis techniques are arbitrary or inappropriate; the results are poorly presented||Data analysis techniques are inappropriate and the results are presented inadequately|
|Study design||Excellent research design which enabled the research to meet its aims||Adequate design of the research project although possibly containing minor but retrievable errors||The design of the research project is generally adequate but is marred by some errors and oversights||Serious flaws exist in the design of the research project making it difficult for the research to meet its aims||Serious flaws exist in the design of the research project making it difficult or impossible for the research to meet its aims|
|Interpretation of results||Comprehensive understanding of the importance of the results in the context of the theoretical framework and the aims and objectives of the study.||Generally sound interpretation of results and their importance to the theoretical context. Interpretation reflects the aims and objectives of the study||Interpretation of results or other studies is adequate but limited||Interpretations are superficial, demonstrating a weak understanding of the results and their relevance to the theoretical framework.
Interpretations not tied sufficiently to the aims and objectives of the study.
|An inability to show how the results of the research project relate to the theoretical framework and study aims and objectives; serious misinterpretations of results|
|Discussion||Results are related to the current literature and developments in the field in order to advance the main arguments or purpose of the dissertation. Treatment is analytical comprehensive and well organised.||Results are related to current literature and developments in the field. Relationship to argument or purpose is clear.||Results are discussed with some reference to current literature but discussion lacks a comprehensive and insightful treatment. Attempt is made to relate discussion to argument or purpose.||There is an attempt to relate the results to current literature but treatment is limited.||An inability to relate the results to current literature in a coherent way.|
|Expression and structure||Outstanding command of expression and logical argument in a skillfully structured manuscript. Referencing error free and appropriate||The manuscript is well written, logically argued and generally well-structured manuscript. Referencing mostly error free and appropriate||Generally competently written, although some problems exist in the logical organisation of the text and the way it is expressed, Referencing errors and/or inappropriately used.||The work is not well written and shows flaws in the structuring of logical arguments, Referencing errors||The work is poorly written and shows a serious inability to structure and present a logical argument, Referencing errors|
|Overall||Overall an outstanding article with potential for publication.||Exhibits a good level of analysis, evaluation, interpretation and argument in article.||A sound piece of work but tends to description rather than analysis and evaluation.||The candidate showed difficulty in mastering the higher-order skills required at Masters level.||The candidate failed to demonstrate mastery of the higher-order skills required at Masters level.|
Place your order now to enjoy great discounts on this or a similar topic.
People choose us because we provide:
Essays written from scratch, 100% original,
Delivery within deadlines,
Competitive prices and excellent quality,
24/7 customer support,
Priority on their privacy,
Unlimited free revisions upon request, and
Plagiarism free work,