Each student will have their notebook(s) read by two assessors and answer questions in a viva voce examination normally lasting 20 minutes. 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 description.
Marks (maximum total 100) are allocated under five headings:
judged according to the criteria below. The mark under heading (e) relates directly to performance in the viva, and marks under the other headings may be influenced by performance in the viva.
| Mark Range | (a) Quality of the record keeping |
|---|---|
| 17 - 20 | A professional standard of record keeping has been achieved, with only one or two minor inconsistencies or omissions. |
| 14 - 16 | Outcome at excellent level. The notebook has been kept in a systematic way and represents a true and useful record of the work carried out. No significant inconsistencies or omissions but a number of minor deficiencies. |
| 12 - 13 | Outcome at focal level. The notebook has been kept in a systematic way and represents a true and useful record of the work carried out. Only one or two significant deficiencies. |
| 10 - 11 | The student is developing a professional approach to keeping a notebook. No major inconsistencies or omissions, but a number of significant deficiencies. |
| 8 - 9 | Outcome at threshold level. A notebook has been kept, but there are one or two major inconsistencies or omissions. |
| 4 - 7 | A notebook has been presented but has not been properly used. A number of major inconsistencies and omissions. |
| 0 - 3 | No evidence that a notebook has been kept. |
| Mark Range | (b) Effort and Initiative |
|---|---|
| 17 - 20 | At the level expected from an able postgraduate student. The student has been self-motivated and self managing. Little guidance has been necessary from the supervisor. |
| 14 - 16 | Outcome at excellent level. The student has generally been self-motivated and self managing. Occasional guidance from the supervisor has been necessary, and the student has taken advantage of this. |
| 12 - 13 | Outcome at focal level. The student has worked very hard. Some guidance from the supervisor has been necessary, and the student has taken advantage of this. |
| 10 - 11 | The student has worked hard. A significant amount of guidance from the supervisor has been necessary, and the student has taken advantage of this. |
| 8 - 9 | Outcome at threshold level. At the minimum acceptable level of effort for a Stage 4 student. A significant amount of strong guidance from the supervisor has been necessary at times, and the student has generally taken advantage of this. |
| 4 - 7 | Little effort and initiative shown, and the student has generally failed to respond to guidance from the supervisor. |
| 0 - 3 | No detectable effort or initiative. No response to guidance from the supervisor. |
| Mark Range | (c) Technical prowess and practical scientific skills |
|---|---|
| 17 - 20 | A command of all relevant aspects which is difficult to fault. At the level expected from an able postgraduate student. |
| 14 - 16 | Outcome at excellent level. A command of most relevant aspects which is difficult to fault. Some minor deficiencies. |
| 12 - 13 | Outcome at focal level. A command of most relevant aspects in some depth. The student has the ability to produce experiments (or software, etc.) which work well. |
| 10 - 11 | An adequate command of most relevant aspects. The student has the ability to produce experiments (or software, etc.) which work adequately. |
| 8 - 9 | Outcome at threshold level. A command of most relevant aspects at a relatively superficial level. The student has the ability to produce experiments (or software, etc.) which work to some extent. |
| 4 - 7 | Little evidence of technical prowess or relevant skills. Experiments (or software, etc.) unlikely to work. |
| 0 - 3 | No evidence of technical prowess or relevant skills. |
| Mark Range | (d) Progress made |
|---|---|
| 17 - 20 | At the rate expected from an able postgraduate student |
| 14 - 16 | Outcome at excellent level. Approaching the rate expected from an able postgraduate student. Reasonably ambitious aims have been exceeded. |
| 12 - 13 | Outcome at focal level. Reasonably ambitious aims have been achieved. |
| 10 - 11 | Reasonably ambitious aims have mostly been achieved. |
| 8 - 9 | Outcome at threshold level. Some progress has been made towards achieving reasonably ambitious aims. |
| 4 - 7 | Little progress made. |
| 0 - 3 | No progress made. |
| Mark Range | (e) Oral performance (Marks are given to reflect the student's understanding.) |
|---|---|
| 17 - 20 | A thorough understanding of all aspects which allows questions to be answered accurately and fluently and the discussion to be extended with confidence into difficult or unfamiliar areas. |
| 14 - 16 | Outcome at excellent level. A thorough understanding of most aspects, with some ability to extend the discussion into difficult or unfamiliar areas |
| 12 - 13 | Outcome at focal level. An understanding of most aspects in some depth, with the ability to extend the discussion so as to make relevant links (e.g., between theory and experiment). |
| 10 - 11 | An adequate understanding of most aspects, with some ability extend the discussion so as to make relevant links. |
| 8 - 9 | Outcome at threshold level. A relatively superficial understanding of most aspects, with the ability to make relatively simple links. |
| 4 - 7 | Little understanding shown. Unable to make relevant links. |
| 0 - 3 | No understanding demonstrated. |