Methodological case study Report Marking Criteria_CRIM1001 –
Criteria Fail Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Accurate and
clear
presentation
(Weight:
20/100)
Some elements
may be present,
but these may
be poorly
executed
Presentation of
theory or issue
is inaccurate
Sufficient
presentation of
report
Presentation of
issue and theories
are mostly
accurate, though
some mistakes or
inconsistencies.
The presentation
of information in
one section may
be stronger than
others.
Demonstrates a
reasonable ability
in relation to
report
presentation.
Includes an
accurate but
general
presentation of the
issue in the
introduction and
theoretical
sections. The
presentation of
information
throughout the
theoretical section
may be stronger at
times, and weaker
some other times
(i.e. some sections
may be more
comprehensive)
Demonstrates a
superior ability in
relation to report
presentation
Includes a
comprehensive and
accurate presentation
of the issue in the
introduction and
theoretical sections
Demonstrates an
outstanding ability in
relation to report
presentation.
Includes a
comprehensive, concise
and accurate
presentation of the issue
in the introduction, and
theoretical section.
Research and
comprehensive
understanding
(Weight:
30/100)
Little research
has been
undertaken
Use less that the
minimum
requirement of
SEVEN scholarly
resources.
Satisfactory
research
The minimum
requirement has
been met (SEVEN
academic sources
are used).
Evidence of
research effort
Meets all minimum
requirements
(SEVEN academic
sources) and
demonstrates an
attempt to engage
Strong research and
comprehension
Exceeds the minimum
requirements (i.e. uses
more than SEVEN
academic sources) and
demonstrates critical
usage of the sources.
Exceeds the minimum
requirements (uses more
than SEVEN academic
sources).
A synthesis of material
including academic
research, theoretical
accounts, and
government or sector
AND/OR
Relies on non-
scholarly
sources
Results in
under-
developed or
incorrect
understanding
of the theory
and issue
There may be a
heavy
dependence on
one or two
sources without
clear extraction
of theoretical
ideas,
engagement with
concepts, and
empirical
support.
with the research
by extracting
evidence (eg.
Empirical or
theoretical/
concepts). The use
of research may be
unbalanced
resulting in a
general level of
comprehension of
the issue and the
theory.
Demonstrates a
balanced use of the
material (theoretical
and empirical) to
demonstrate a
comprehensive
understanding of the
theories and the issue.
reports, and other topical
sources are used to
demonstrate a
sophisticated
understanding of the
theories and the issue.
Logical and
clear structure
(Weight:
30/100)
Unstructured
argument
Flow of ideas
may be
problematic
Lacks structure
The sequence of
ideas, is at times,
not well
considered or
presented. There
may be
inconsistencies
between the
information
presented in the
introduction and
the theoretical
section and/or
the conclusion
section.
However, most
information
presented is
generally
accurate
The sequence of
ideas is well
considered.
Some
improvement could
be made in the
flow of ideas
between the
information
presented in the
introduction and
the theoretical
section and the
conclusion/
recommendation
section
The sequence of ideas is
effective.
There is clear logical
flow between the
information presented
in the introduction and
the theoretical sections,
and the conclusion/
recommendation
section.
The sequence of ideas is
independent, logical and
effective.
There is clear logical flow
between the information
presented in the
introduction and the
theoretical section, and
the conclusion/
recommendation,
including logical flow and
connection between the
claims made.
Quality of
written
expression
(Weight:
10 /100)
Problems
Central ideas
are not clearly
expressed.
Grammatical
errors and
spelling
mistakes make
the report
difficult to
comprehend
Some Problems
General ideas are
present, but
several
grammatical and
spelling errors are
masking the
overall quality of
the ideas being
put forward.
Adequate
A few grammatical
errors and spelling
mistakes. But these
do not mask the
overall quality of
the ideas being
expressed.
Strong
Arguments are
presented using strong
written expression.
Only minor grammatical
errors.
Professional level
Arguments are presented
using outstanding written
expression. Grammar is
correct and spelling
mistakes absent.
Correctly
formatted
citations and
reference list
(Weight:
10 /100)
Significant
problems
Fails to provide
appropriate in-
text citations of
the reference
list is
incomplete or
has major errors
Some problems
Some references
cited incorrectly
or absent in-text
or/and in the
reference list.
Accurate
Most references
cited correctly in-
text and/or in
reference list.
Excellent
Most references cited
correctly in-text and in
reference list
Professional Level
All references cited
correctly in-text and in
reference list.