SOSS1000 Policy and Society
Essay writing: Marking criteria and rubric

Marking criteria for essay writing
In grading your essay, the instructor will use the following criteria to determine your grade:
1. Argument
• Relevance: How well does the essay answer the question asked?
• Quality of the Argument: Does the essay provide a logical, consistent and sustained argument?
2. Critical Analysis
• Critical Analysis versus Description: Does the essay provide a critical analysis of the subject
matter, or is it merely descriptive?
• Competing Perspectives: Does the essay show understanding of competing perspectives?
• Level of Analysis: Does the essay weigh competing perspectives logically, rigorously and fairly?
• Originality and Creativity: Does the essay show original and creative thought?
3. Knowledge and Understanding
• Use of sources: Does the essay demonstrate wide reading of appropriate sources?
• Accurate Knowledge: Is accurate knowledge of the subject matter demonstrated?
• Level of Knowledge: What level of knowledge of the subject does the essay demonstrate –
broad or in-depth knowledge?
• Understanding of relevant theory: Does the essay show an understanding of relevant theoretical
concepts and how they may be applied?
• Evidence of Understanding: Does the essay overly paraphrase the works of other authors, or
does it show a good attempt to explain ideas and concepts in the writer’s own words.
4. Evidence/Resources
• Relevance of Evidence: Does the essay use relevant supporting evidence? Does it use relevant
empirical and theoretical examples?
• Argument supported by evidence: Are the conclusions drawn supported by the evidence
provided?
• Quality of Evidence: Are the sources academic or scholarly?
5. Structure and Organisation
• Logic and Consistency: Is the argument presented in a structured in a logical and consistent
way?
• Clarity of Purpose: Is the purpose of each paragraph or sub-section clear?
• Signposting: Are linking sentences and sign-posting used at appropriate points in the essay?
• Introduction and Conclusion: Does the essay use these effectively?
• Word Length: Does the essay keep to the required word length?
6. Style & Presentation
• Grammar: Does the essay use correct English grammar, punctuation and spelling?
• Clarity of Expression: Is the meaning of the expressions used clearly understood?
• Errors: Are there many typographical errors present?
• Creativity of Expression: Is the essay written creatively or with some flair?
7. Referencing
• Fair use of sources: Are sources used acknowledged? Is there evidence of plagiarism?
• Correct academic referencing: Are referencing styles or systems correctly used?

2
Criterion < 50% Fail 51-64%
Pass
65-74%
Credit
75-84%
Distinction
85% + High
Distinction
Argument Does not answer
the question asked
and/or provides an
inadequate
answer in terms of
relevance, logic
and consistency.

Some argument
presented, but with
weaknesses in
relation to relevance,
logic, consistency,
coherence and
sustainability.
Puts forward a
competent argument
which clearly
answers the question
asked – logical,
consistent, coherent
and sustained
throughout the essay.
Some attempt to use
relevant theoretical
concepts.
Strong argument in
terms of complexity,
logic, consistency and
coherence that clearly
addresses the question,
and which makes good
use of relevant
theoretical concepts.

Argument which is
highly complex,
logical, consist, and
engaging. Shows a
strong development
of conceptual/
theoretical points.
Critical
Analysis
No real attempt at
critical analysis of
opposing
viewpoints. Highly
descriptive.


Analysis at a largely
descriptive level.
Does makes some
attempts at critical
analysis of opposing
viewpoints but with
deficiencies in terms
of logic, rigor and
fairness.
Good analysis of
opposing views -
logical, consistent
and fair evaluation of
opposing arguments.
Attempts to provide
some original and
creative contribution
to debate.

Strong critical analysis,
well evaluated in terms
of logic, rigor and
fairness. Attempts to
get behind the evidence
via engagement with
underlying
assumptions. Develops
an original and creative
contribution to debate.
Sharp and insightful
critical analysis,
excellent
interrogation of
underlying
assumptions and
contested concepts.
Highly original and
creative contribution
to debate.
Knowledge &
Understanding
Content based on
shallow reading,
demonstrates poor
understanding of
topic, substantial
inaccuracies in
knowledge. May
paraphrase to an
unacceptable
level.

Work demonstrating
a largely broad and
descriptive
knowledge of the
relevant subject
matter but with
overall accuracy.
Tendency to over-
paraphrase in parts.
Competent work
showing a good,
accurate
understanding of
relevant theories,
concepts. Makes a
good attempt to
explain using own
words. Evidence of
relatively wide
reading. Also
attempts to apply
theoretical
knowledge.
Superior work showing
in-depth and highly
accurate knowledge of
relevant subject matter.
Evidence of wide
reading and
understanding of
theoretical concepts
and a good attempt to
apply this knowledge.
Exceptional in-depth
knowledge of the
relevant subject
matter. Provides a
clear and complex
explanation of
theories and
concepts using own
understanding with a
sophisticated attempt
to apply this
knowledge. Evidence
of very wide reading
and insightful
interpretation of
evidence.
Evidence/
Resources
Evidence used is
largely irrelevant,
arguments not
supported by
evidence, use of
non-academic
sources to an
unacceptable
level.

Evidence used is
relevant to the
question asked, on
the whole, and
provides support for
the arguments made,
but with some
weaknesses. Some
use of relevant
examples. Use of
scholarly sources
most of the time.
Arguments supported
by solid range of
relevant academic/
scholarly sources.
Good use of relevant
examples.
Use of a wide range of
highly relevant
academic sources.
Insightful use of
relevant examples.
Evidence clearly
supports the arguments
presented.
Use of a very wide
range of highly
relevant academic
sources which clearly
support the
arguments presented.
Insightful and creative
use of relevant
examples.
Structure/
Organisation
Inconsistent and
illogical essay
structure, purpose
of large sections is
unclear. Poor use
of sign-posting
making the
argument very
difficult to follow.
Ineffective use of
introduction and
conclusion. May
be over or under
the required word
length.

Essay structure is
generally logical and
consistent but with
some weaknesses
with coherence and
clarity. Attempt
made to use
introduction and
conclusion to
structure ideas raised
but with deficiencies.
May be over or under
required word length.
Majority of the essay
organised with logic
and coherence,
evidence of
linkages/signposting
of arguments. Good
use of introduction
and conclusion as
structuring tools.
Keeps within required
word length.
Logical, coherent and
consistent essay
structure throughout,
supportive of main
arguments presented.
Purpose of
paragraphs/subsections
clear through good use
of signposting.
Developed use of
introduction and
conclusion to structure
argument made. Keeps
within required word-
length.
Highly logical and
consistent structure
throughout which
strongly supports the
arguments presented.
Content highly
purposeful with
excellent use of sign-
posting. Excellent
use of introduction
and conclusion as
structuring tools.
Keeps within the
required word length.
Style &
Presentation
Serious problems
with grammar and
expression making
the argument very
difficult or
impossible to be
understood.


Correct English
grammar and
expression used on
the whole. Meaning
of expressions used
is generally clear, but
with some minor
problems. Low level
of spelling and
typographical errors.
Correct English
Grammar and
expression
throughout. Meaning
of language used
clear. Rare spelling
and typographical
errors.
Correct use of English
grammar and
expression. Language
used is clearly
understandable, with
evidence of creativity
and flair.
Correct use of
English grammar,
clear expression,
shows high level of
creativity and flair in
the use of language.
Referencing Significant levels
of incorrect
academic
referencing and/or
plagiarism.
Fair use of sources,
most of the time.
Correct use of
referencing styles in
general, but with
some small errors.
Fair use of sources
throughout,
referencing styles
used correctly with
rare errors.
Fair use of sources, no
evidence of plagiarism,
correct use of
referencing styles
throughout.
Fair use of sources
with no evidence of
plagiarism, correct
use of referencing
styles throughout.