Law School Undergraduate Grading Descriptors For Oral Presentations

Law School Undergraduate Grading Descriptors for Oral Presentations
These Grading (or Class) Descriptors interpret the University of Hull Undergraduate Grading
Descriptors, and should be read and applied in conjunction with the level descriptors of the
QAAs The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
(August 2008), reproduced below.
QAA Level Descriptors1
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 4: Certificate of Higher Education
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any Certificate of Higher Education which should meet
the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 4
qualifications.
Certificates of Higher Education are awarded to students who have demonstrated:
knowledge of the underlying concepts and principles associated with their area(s) of study, and an ability
to evaluate and interpret these within the context of that area of study
an ability to present, evaluate and interpret qualitative and quantitative data, in order to develop lines of
argument and make sound judgements in accordance with basic theories and concepts of their subject(s)
of study.
Typically, holders of the qualification will be able to:
evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems related to their area(s) of study
and/or work
1 From: the QAAs The framework for higher education qualifications in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (August 2008), available at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/en/Publications/Documents/Framework-Higher-Education-Qualifications-08.pdf .
University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1
Page 1 of 23
communicate the results of their study/work accurately and reliably, and with structured and coherent
arguments
undertake further training and develop new skills within a structured and managed environment.
And holders will have:
the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of some personal
responsibility.
Holders of a Certificate of Higher Education will have a sound knowledge of the basic concepts of a subject, and
will have learned how to take different approaches to solving problems. They will be able to communicate
accurately and will have the qualities needed for employment requiring the exercise of some personal
responsibility. The Certificate of Higher Education may be a first step towards obtaining higher level
qualifications.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 5: Foundation Degree
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any Foundation Degree which should meet the descriptor
in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 5 qualifications, including
Diplomas of Higher Education, Higher National Diplomas, etc.
Foundation Degrees are awarded to students who have demonstrated:
knowledge and critical understanding of the well-established principles of their area(s) of study, and of the
way in which those principles have developed
ability to apply underlying concepts and principles outside the context in which they were first studied,
including, where appropriate, the application of those principles in an employment context
knowledge of the main methods of enquiry in the subject(s) relevant to the named award, and ability to
evaluate critically the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems in the field of study
an understanding of the limits of their knowledge, and how this influences analyses and interpretations
based on that knowledge.
use a range of established techniques to initiate and undertake critical analysis of information, and to
propose solutions to problems arising from that analysis
effectively communicate information, arguments and analysis in a variety of forms to specialist and nonspecialist audiences, and deploy key techniques of the discipline effectively
Page 2 of 23
undertake further training, develop existing skills and acquire new competences that will enable them to
assume significant responsibility within organisations.
the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring the exercise of personal
responsibility and decision-making.
The Foundation Degree is an example of a qualification that meets, in full, the expectations of the qualification
descriptor (and the Foundation Degree qualification benchmark)
Holders of qualifications at this level will have developed a sound understanding of the principles in their field of
study, and will have learned to apply those principles more widely. Through this, they will have learned to
evaluate the appropriateness of different approaches to solving problems. Their studies may well have had a
vocational orientation, for example HNDs, enabling them to perform effectively in their chosen field. Holders of
qualifications at this level will have the qualities necessary for employment in situations requiring the exercise of
personal responsibility and decision-making.
Descriptor for a higher education qualification at level 6: Bachelor's degree with honours
The descriptor provided for this level of the FHEQ is for any bachelor's degree with honours which should meet
the descriptor in full. This qualification descriptor can also be used as a reference point for other level 6
qualifications, including bachelor's degrees, graduate diplomas etc.
Bachelor's degrees with honours are awarded to students who have demonstrated:
a systematic understanding of key aspects of their field of study, including acquisition of coherent and
detailed knowledge, at least some of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of defined aspects of a
discipline
an ability to deploy accurately established techniques of analysis and enquiry within a discipline
conceptual understanding that enables the student:
o to devise and sustain arguments, and/or to solve problems, using ideas and techniques, some of
which are at the forefront of a discipline
o to describe and comment upon particular aspects of current research, or equivalent advanced
scholarship, in the discipline
an appreciation of the uncertainty, ambiguity and limits of knowledge
Page 3 of 23
the ability to manage their own learning, and to make use of scholarly reviews and primary sources (for
example, refereed research articles and/or original materials appropriate to the discipline).
apply the methods and techniques that they have learned to review, consolidate, extend and apply their
knowledge and understanding, and to initiate and carry out projects
critically evaluate arguments, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete), to make
judgements, and to frame appropriate questions to achieve a solution - or identify a range of solutions - to
a problem
communicate information, ideas, problems and solutions to both specialist and non-specialist audiences.
the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring:
o the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility
o decision-making in complex and unpredictable contexts
o the learning ability needed to undertake appropriate furthertraining of a professional or equivalent
nature.
Holders of a bachelor's degree with honours will have developed an understanding of a complex body of
knowledge, some of it at the current boundaries of an academic discipline. Through this, the holder will have
developed analytical techniques and problem-solving skills that can be applied in many types of employment.
The holder of such a qualification will be able to evaluate evidence, arguments and assumptions, to reach sound
judgements and to communicate them effectively.
Holders of a bachelor's degree with honours should have the qualities needed for employment in situations
requiring the exercise of personal responsibility, and decision-making in complex and unpredictable
circumstances.
Bachelor's degrees with honours form the largest group of higher education qualifications. Typically, learning
outcomes for these programmes would be expected to be achieved on the basis of study equivalent to three fulltime academic years and lead to awards with titles such as Bachelor of Arts, BA (Hons) or Bachelor of Science,
BSc (Hons). In addition to bachelor's degrees at this level are short courses and professional 'conversion'
courses, based largely on undergraduate material, and taken usually by those who are already graduates in
another discipline, leading to, for example, graduate certificates or graduate diplomas.
Page 4 of 23
Preamble to the University Grading Descriptors

1 Introduction
The University of Hull Grading Descriptors for levels 4, 5 and 6 have been developed to align with the Quality
Assurance Agencys Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (2008) and the SEEC Credit Level Descriptors
for Higher Education (2010). The appropriate descriptors for the level of study that students are undertaking
should be made available to students in all programme and module documentation.
The descriptors outlined in this document aim to provide a framework for articulating expected standards of
students work. The framework provides clear and consistent statements to describe student performance which,
in turn, facilitate transparency in feedback to students, helping students to understand how to improve their
performance.
2
Using the grading descriptors: some key principles
The descriptors included here outline the key features and general characteristics of assessed work associated
with each grade-band. However, in order that students are able to understand exactly how they are being
assessed and the standard of work they are expected to achieve, their work should always be assessed against
published assessment criteria. A programme of studys published assessment criteria differ from grading
descriptors as they create a direct link between the learning outcomes of the module(s) under study, the generic
grading descriptors contained in this document and the particular level of study (i.e. Level 4, 5 or 6) at which the
student is working. For further information on the differences between Levels 4, 5 and 6 please refer to the
Quality Assurance Agencys Framework for Higher Education Qualifications (2008) available at:
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/FHEQ08.pdf
The grading descriptors outlined in this document are not mutually exclusive. Students work may demonstrate
some characteristics of, for example, the 50-59 and 60-69 categories. The final grade for the work should always
be matter of academic judgement based on the balance of this. Examiners should be prepared to award the full
range of marks and should interpret the descriptors in the context of their discipline, field of study or area of
practice. The emphasis given to each descriptor, and the way it is used in the published assessment criteria will
necessarily vary depending on the nature of the assessment task, the level of study and the disciplinary area.
For example, module leaders will need to be able to identify and explain what exemplary, outstanding, excellent,
Page 5 of 23
good or satisfactory looks like in relation to the learning outcomes of their module in order that students are able
to understand why they have received the grade they have and how they could improve their work.
Page 6 of 23
THE UNIVERSITY OF HULL UNDERGRADUATE GRADING DESCRIPTORS (Levels 4, 5 and 6)

Exemplary First Class Honours
90-100
All learning
outcomes and
associated
assessment
The work represents an exemplary response to the task and attains the very highest standards
of scholarship that can be expected of an undergraduate submission. It is likely to demonstrate
most or all of the following characteristics:
Page 7 of 23
criteria have
Technical Characteristics:
been achieved All requirements for the assessment task have been adhered to, including the required time
to an
limit;
exemplary
The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work, including referencing
standard.
where appropriate, are exemplary throughout;
There is an exemplary standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
appropriate engagement with the audience) and the use of disciplinary terminology and
techniques displays the highest level of accuracy and understanding that can be expected.
Higher Order Academic Criteria:
There is an exemplary display of in-depth understanding, exploration and insight and/or
research;
The work is inspirational, creative, innovative and authoritative. Levels of intellectual rigour,
independence of judgement and insightful contextualisation are exemplary;
Use and application of a depth and breadth of contextual evidence, ideas, concepts, theory
and other relevant information and artefacts is exemplary;
There is exemplary evidence of high quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical
appraisal;
The work displays exemplary levels of creativity, initiative, decision-making, and self
reflection.
Page 8 of 23
Outstanding First Class Honours

80-89
All learning
outcomes and
associated
assessment
The work represents an outstanding response to the task and attains some of the highest
standards of scholarship that can be expected of an undergraduate submission. It is likely to
demonstrate most or all of the following characteristics:
Page 9 of 23
criteria have
been achieved
to an
outstanding
level and
some to an
exemplary
standard.
All requirements for the assessment task have been adhered to, including the required time
limit ;
where appropriate, are outstanding throughout;
There is an outstanding standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
Higher Order Academic Characteristics:
There is an outstanding display of in-depth understanding, exploration, insight and/or
research;
independence of judgement and insightful contextualisation are outstanding;
and other relevant information and artefacts is outstanding;
There is outstanding evidence of high quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical
appraisal;
The work consistently displays outstanding levels of initiative, decision-making, and self
reflection.
Page 10 of 23
First Class Honours

70-79
All learning
outcomes and
associated
assessment
The work represents an excellent response to the task and mostly attains the highest standards
of scholarship that can be expected of an undergraduate submission. It is likely to demonstrate
most or all of the following characteristics:
Page 11 of 23
criteria have
been achieved
to high level
of excellence
and some to
an
outstanding.
limit;
where appropriate, are excellent throughout;
There is an excellent standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
There is an excellent display of in-depth understanding, exploration, insight and/or research;
independence of judgement and insightful contextualisation are excellent;
and other relevant information and artefacts is excellent;
There is evidence of high quality analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal;
The work consistently displays excellent levels of initiative, decision-making, and self
reflection.
Page 12 of 23
Upper Second Class Honours - 2(i)

60-69
All learning
outcomes and
assessment
criteria have
been achieved
to a good
standard with
many (at the
higher ranges
of this band)
achieved to a
very
good/excellent
standard.
The work represents a good to very good response to the task and attains good standards of
scholarship. It is likely to demonstrate most or all of the following characteristics:
limit;
where appropriate, are good throughout;
There is a good standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
techniques display good levels of accuracy and understanding.
There are no significant inaccuracies, misunderstandings or errors;
There is a good display of understanding, exploration, insight and/or research;
The work shows evidence of intellectual rigour, independence of judgement and insightful
contextualisation though it may lack finesse;
The work displays evidence of creativity and innovation in the use of ideas, concepts, theory
and other relevant information and artefacts;
There are some good examples of critical analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical
appraisal;
The work displays good levels of initiative, decision-making, and self reflection.
Page 13 of 23
Page 14 of 23
Lower Second Class Honours - 2(ii)

50-59
All learning
The work represents a satisfactory response to the task and attains competent standards of
scholarship. It is likely to demonstrate most or all of the following characteristics:
Page 15 of 23
outcomes and
assessment
criteria have
been achieved
to a
satisfactory
standard with
some (at the
higher ranges
of this band)
achieved to a
good
standard.
There may be some minor divergences from the specifications of the assessment task,
including divergences from the required time limit;
The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work are satisfactory,
although some instances of poor organisation or limited use of referencing conventions may
be present;
There is a reasonable standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
appropriate engagement with the audience), though some errors may be present. The use of
disciplinary terminology and techniques displays satisfactory levels of accuracy and
understanding.
Inaccuracies, misunderstandings or errors are mostly minor;
There is some evidence of understanding, exploration, insight and/or research, but there are
some gaps;
The work shows some but limited evidence of intellectual rigour, independence of judgement
and insightful contextualisation;
The work shows some but limited examples of creativity and innovation in the use of ideas,
concepts, theory and other relevant information and artefacts;
The work is conscientious and attentive to the subject matter or task set but is balanced more
towards a descriptive approach than a critical and analytical approach. Topics are mostly
addressed but not always examined in sufficient detail;
The work displays some but limited examples of initiative, decision-making, and self
reflection.
Page 16 of 23
Third Class Honours

40-49
All learning
outcomes and
assessment
criteria have
been met but
only to the
minimum
required level.
The work represents an adequate, but weak response to the task and attains very limited
standards of scholarship. It is likely to demonstrate most or all of the following characteristics:
There may be some major divergences from the specifications of the assessment task,
including divergences from the required time limit;
The organisation, structure and standard of presentation of the work are poor;
There is a basic but poor standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace, and
appropriate engagement with the audience). The use of disciplinary terminology and
techniques displays minimal levels of accuracy and understanding.
Inaccuracies, misunderstandings and/or errors are present, but are not significant enough to
impact on the ability of the work to meet the learning outcomes and assessment criteria;
There is limited evidence of understanding, exploration, insight and/or research;
The work shows limited evidence of intellectual rigour, independence of judgement and
insightful contextualisation;
Students grasp of ideas, concepts, theory and other relevant information is weak and is
poorly articulated or contains flaws;
The work displays a descriptive approach and evidence used is likely to be limited to that
provided by lecturers;
The work displays very limited examples of initiative, decision-making, and self reflection.
Page 17 of 23
Page 18 of 23
Marginal Fail
30-39
The work represents an unsatisfactory response to the task. It may display some strengths but
One or more
these are outweighed by several weak features. It is likely to demonstrate most or all of the
of the learning following characteristics:
Page 19 of 23
outcomes and
assessment
criteria have
not been met.
The work pays insufficient attention to the assessment criteria and significantly diverges from
the specifications of the assessment task, including the required time limit;
The work is disorganised and unclear and the standard of presentation, including referencing
where appropriate, is weak;
There is an unsatisfactory standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace,
and appropriate engagement with the audience); there may be significant flaws in spelling,
grammar and composition which undermine the clarity of meaning. The use of disciplinary
terminology and techniques does not meet required levels of accuracy and understanding.
There are substantial inaccuracies, misunderstandings or errors which affect the ability of the
work to meet the learning outcomes and assessment criteria;
The work does not meet expected levels of understanding and exploration of major ideas. It
contains some material of merit but shows very limited insight and/or research;
There is insufficient demonstration of learning outcomes to justify a pass grade;
The work draws on a very limited range of contextual evidence, theory, literature and other
artefacts. There is very little evidence of wider reading and very limited evidence of the
mechanics of scholarship;
The work does not make any real attempts to assess or apply the evidence or theory.
Examples are occasionally provided but are poorly articulated;
The work demonstrates no substantive evidence of initiative, personal responsibility, decisionmaking and self-reflection.
Page 20 of 23
Page 21 of 23
Fail
1-29
Most or all of
the learning
The work represents a very unsatisfactory response to the task. Any strengths of the work are
heavily outweighed by its weaknesses. It is likely to demonstrate most or all of the following
characteristics:
Page 22 of 23
outcomes and
assessment
criteria have
not been met.
The work pays insufficient attention to the assessment criteria and there are serious
deviations from the specifications of the assessment task, including the required time limit;
The work is disorganised and unclear and the standard of presentation, including referencing
where appropriate, is extremely poor;
There is an unsatisfactory standard of oral communication (including articulateness, pace,
and appropriate engagement with the audience) - there are significant flaws in spelling,
grammar and composition which undermine the clarity of meaning. The use of disciplinary
terminology and techniques is extremely limited and unsophisticated.
There are significant inaccuracies, misunderstandings or errors;
The work does not meet expected levels of understanding and exploration of major ideas. It
shows very limited insight and/or research;
The work draws on a very limited range of contextual evidence, theory, literature and other
artefacts. Citations are almost or entirely absent and awareness of mechanics of scholarship
is very weak;
The work is wholly descriptive and lacks any sustained arguments or critical appraisal;
The work demonstrates no evidence of initiative, personal responsibility, decision-making and
self-reflection.
Non-submission
0
Page 23 of 23

Law School Undergraduate Grading Descriptors For Oral Presentations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Law School Undergraduate Grading Descriptors For Oral Presentations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Law School Undergraduate Grading Descriptors for Oral Presentations

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

Preamble to the University Grading Descriptors

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

THE UNIVERSITY OF HULL UNDERGRADUATE GRADING DESCRIPTORS (Levels 4, 5 and 6)

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

Outstanding First Class Honours

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

First Class Honours

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

Upper Second Class Honours - 2(i)

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

Lower Second Class Honours - 2(ii)

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

Third Class Honours

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

University of Hull Grading Descriptors UGMay 2014: Version 1

You might also like