BENVGFEE Space + Workplace Management
Assignment Grading Criteria


BENVGSC1: Urban Systems Theory – Coursework Mark Scheme
We are required to use the marking scheme set out by the University of London (which is A: 70 - 100%, B: 60 - 69%, C: 50 - 59%, Fail: 0 - 49%). For example, with the pass
mark at 50%, marks in the 60%s generally seen as merit quality, with a mark of 70% indicating work of distinction quality, most marks fall into the narrow band from 50 to
70, with marks rarely aw r ed above 80%.
A+ (80-100%) A (70-79%) B (60-69%) C (50-59%) Fail (near pass)
(40-49%)
Fail (1-39%)
Quality of
writing –
presentation,
spelling,
punctuation,
grammar and
structure
Exceptionally well
written; stylish with
no errors in spelling,
punctuation or
grammar. The piece of
work is clearly and
logically structured
and is a joy to read.
Very well written with
virtually no errors in
spelling, punctuation
or grammar. The piece
of work is clearly and
logically structured
and flows well.
A good, well written
piece of work with few
errors in spelling,
punctuation or
grammar. The work
shows structure and is
clearly presented.
A more-or-less
competent piece of
work but may contain
some errors in
spelling, punctuation
or grammar. The may
lack structure and
presentation could be
improved.
A more-or-less weak
piece of work
containing a number
of errors in spelling,
punctuation or
grammar. The piece
may lack any kind of
structure.
A poor piece of work.
Written English is bad,
with numerous errors
in spelling,
punctuation and
grammar.
Knowledge and
research
The work shows
extensive knowledge
of the topic chosen
and an in-depth
understanding of the
links between the
problem and a much
wider literature. The
work is also set or
acknowledges its
position within a
wider, social,
economic, political,
scientific or other
paradigm.
The work shows
excellent or very good
knowledge of the
topic chosen and a
clear understanding of
the links between the
problem and the
wider literature in the
area. The work is also
set or acknowledges
its position within a
wider, social,
economic, political,
scientific or other
paradigm.
The work shows good
knowledge of the
topic chosen and an
understanding of the
links between the
problem and some of
the key literature in
the area. The work
may reference a
wider, social,
economic, political,
scientific or other
context influencing
approaches to
problem.
The work shows
adequate knowledge
of the topic chosen
and makes some links
between the problem
and some of the key
literature in the area.
The work might not
fully understand
importance of a wider,
social, economic,
political, scientific or
other context in
situating the problem
The work shows poor
knowledge of the
topic chosen and fails
to make links between
the problem and even
the core literature in
the area.
Understanding of any
wider, social,
economic, political,
scientific or other
context is not
demonstrated
effectively
The work shows that
lectures were either
not attended or not
understood at all.
Virtually no
understanding of the
wider literature or any
relevant social,
economic, political,
scientific or other
context is
demonstrated.
Argument,
synthesis and
analysis
The argument
presented is
exceptionally well
constructed, clear,
focused and
persuasive. It might
The argument
presented is very well
constructed, clear and
persuasive. It might
synthesise a range of
material or establish a
The argument
presented is cogent
and logical. The piece
might synthesise a
well-chosen selection
of material or indicate
The argument
presented may not be
entirely cogent or
logical. The piece
might attempt to
synthesise some
Any argument is hard
to follow or illogical.
Material selected is
narrow or poorly
chosen and little
attempt is made to
An effort at something
has been made, but it
is devoid of any
context, relevance or
anything that
approaches an
(10%)
(35%)
(35%)



We are required to use the marking scheme set out by the University of London (which is A: 70–100%, B: 60–69%, C: 50–59%, Fail: 0–49%). For
example, with the pass mark at 50%, marks of 60%–69% are generally seen as merit quality, with a mark of 70% indicating work of distinction quality, most
marks fall into the narrow band from 50% to 70%, with marks rarely awarded above 80%.


synthesise a broad
range of material or
establish a truly
original perspective on
the topic. Analysis is
bold, sharp and is able
to demonstrate a
critical approach to
established or
orthodox views.
novel perspective on
the topic. Analysis is
ambitious and is able
to demonstrate some
critical evaluation of
established views.
some original thinking
on the topic. Analysis
is coherent and
demonstrates some
critical engagement
with commonly held
views.
material on the topic,
but this may not be
well-chosen. There is
evidence of some
original thinking, but
for the most part,
established views are
regurgitated. Analysis
is cursory and may
contain some
conceptual errors.
Critical engagement is
limited.
synthesise. There is
little evidence of some
original thinking and
the work barely even
recognises established
views on the topic.
Analysis is misguided
and prone to error.
Critical engagement is
non-existent.
argument.
Bibliography/
references
Background reading is
very extensive and
shows an almost
exhaustive
appreciation of the
wider literature, far
beyond that on the
prescribed reading list.
Few or no inaccuracies
in bibliography and
citation of references.
Background reading is
extensive and shows
an excellent
appreciation of the
wider literature. There
are few or no
inaccuracies in the
bibliography and the
citation of references.
Background reading is
broad and shows a
good appreciation of
the wider literature.
There may be some
inaccuracies in the
bibliography and the
citation of references.
Background reading is
evident but may be
limited to the
prescribed reading list.
There may be obvious
inaccuracies in the
bibliography and the
citation of references
Very little background
reading is evident
beyond the material
contained in lectures.
Bibliography may be
incomplete or
inconsistent and
citations poor.
There is no evidence
of wider background
reading at all.
Overall
presentation
The final piece of work
is presented to a
professional standard
and would be
immediately ready for
publication.
The final piece of work
is presented very well
and would only
require minor editing
for publication.
The final piece of work
is presented well but
may require the odd
edit before
publication.
The final piece of work
may lack polish and
would need attention
before reaching
publication standard.
The final piece is
poorly presented and
would need serious
editing before
publication.
The final piece is very
badly presented. Only
a complete re-write
would bring it up to
standard.
(10%)
(10%)











































































































































































































































































































































学霸联盟