Each student will have their plan, and the subsequent report read by two assessors. In accordance with the published Marking Strategy, each assessor should complete an individual pro-forma, on which comments are to be made and marks recorded. These, along with a further pro-forma of 'agreed marks' are to be returned to the Module Lead. All marks are subject to consistency checks and, if necessary moderation. The marks for this assessment contribute to the overall module mark in proportion to the weighting indicated in the module descriptor.
The overall mark for this assessment (out of 100) is obtained from marks given for the following three areas:
| Mark Range | Qualities of Report |
|---|---|
| 28–33(34) | Exceptional. A report that is difficult to fault, with the possible exception of one or two minor errors. |
| 24–27 | Excellent. No significant deficiencies, but a number of minor errors. Clear text and diagrams with a well defined focus, reflecting a good knowledge of material and good competence in its critical assessment. |
| 22–23 | Very good. No more than one significant deficiency. Expected components present, with good content, structure and presentation. |
| 20–21 | Focal level. Only one or two significant deficiencies. Expected components present, with good content, structure and presentation. |
| 17–19 | No major flaws, but a number of significant deficiencies. Expected components present in an acceptable form. |
| 14–16 | Threshold level. Only one or two major flaws. Expected components present in a recognisable form. |
| 6–13 | A number of major flaws. Lacking in overall structure. Evidence of a lack of basic knowledge and critical ability. |
| 0–5 | Nothing approaching an acceptable report. |