PSYC 1011: Essay Marking Criteria



Criteria Outstanding (HD) Very Good (D) Good (CR) Fair (P) Inadequate (F)
Understands Key Concepts
(20%)
Identify the main
concepts/issues associated
with working memory
training

.
Comprehensive and
sophisticated explanation
of the concepts/issues
based on the literature.

Demonstrates a deep
understanding of the key
concepts/issues together
with original thinking
Comprehensive
explanation of the key
concepts/issues, based on
the literature,

Demonstrates a deep
understanding of the key
concepts/issues
Good summary of the
literature


Demonstrates
awareness of the key
concepts/issues but
lacks depth and/or clarity
at some points.
Basic summary based
on the literature.


Demonstrates a limited
awareness of the key
concepts/issues
Incomplete summary
of the literature.


Lacks evidence of
awareness of the key
concepts/issues
Strength of Argument (25%) Comprehensive and
sophisticated argument
based on the literature.

Demonstrates original
thought and integration of
the literature into a clear,
logical and
cohesive structure.
Comprehensive argument
based on the literature
.
Demonstrates clear
understanding of the key
points presented with a
logical and
cohesive structure.
Argument present and
based on the literature.

May be overly
descriptive in parts
and/or not entirely logical
and cohesive.
Basic summary, mainly
descriptive.

Some evidence of
argument, but limited
and lacks cohesive
structure or support from
the literature
No Argument
presented.

Incomplete summary
of the findings that
lacks argument
structure

Depth of Analysis in response
to the task (30%)

Engagement with and critical
consideration of the key
concepts underlying the topic.
This should be based on a
variety of theoretical and
empirical sources.
Highly perceptive
examination that integrates
a range of
theoretical/empirical
perspectives. A clear
examination of the issues
and evidence.
Demonstrates originality or
insight into the background
and potential explanations
in relation to the question.
Excellent and original
integration and
interpretation of the
evidence
Sophisticated examination
that integrates
theoretical/empirical
perspectives.

Demonstrates a sound
understanding of the key
concepts and integrates
evidence in relation to the
question.

Clear interpretation of the
evidence
Attempt to examine the
theoretical/empirical
perspectives.

Clear summary of key
concepts with some
integration of the
evidence in relation to
the question.

Interprets the evidence,
but not consistently
and/or not always clear.
Some consideration of
the literature in relation
to the question, but
limited.

Basic summary of the
key concepts with
limited integration of
evidence.

Some attempt to
interpret evidence but
limited and/or unclear.
Incomplete summary
of the literature.


Failure to engage with
the evidence in relation
to the question.

No interpretation of the
evidence
PSYC 1011: Essay Marking Criteria



Criteria Outstanding (HD) Very Good (D) Good (CR) Fair (P) Inadequate (F)
Structure and organization of
response (15%)

Appropriateness of overall
structure of the response to the
task
Clarity and coherence of
response to the task.
Addressed all parts of the essay
question.

Clarity and appropriateness of
sentence structure, vocabulary
use, spelling, punctuation and
word length
Comprehensively completed
all aspects. Excellent structure
and organization and clear
response for all parts of the
assessment.

Excellent use of language and
academic conventions.

Logical, clear, cohesive
paragraph structure.
Complete assessment
Appropriate structure and
organization and clear
response for all parts of the
assessment.

Accurate and appropriate use
of language and academic
conventions.

Clear, cohesive paragraph
structure.
Complete assessment.
Appropriate structure and
organization, Response is
mostly clear.

Appropriate use of language
conventions, may have some
small errors.

May be some issues with
paragraph structure, but
mostly clear and cohesive.
Complete assessment.
Some evidence of
appropriate structure or
organization, but response is
unclear in several sections.
Inaccurate/Inappropriate use
of language conventions but
assessment still readable.

Limited paragraph structure
and/or paragraphs are not
clear/cohesive.
Incomplete assessment
or no attempt to organize
response.

Inaccurate use of language
conventions throughout
making the assessment
difficult to read.

No paragraph structure
Appropriate APA
Formatting and academic
integrity (10%)
Clarity, consistency and
appropriateness of
conventions for quoting,
paraphrasing, attributing
sources of information and
APA 7th edition referencing (in
text and reference list)
Excellent use of APA 7th edition
formatting for in text citations
and final References list.
Accurate citations when
paraphrasing or quoting.
Excellent paraphrasing.
Limited/no use of direct quoting
- any quotes are highly
appropriate and effective.
Good use of APA 7th edition
formatting for in text citations
and final References list.
Accurate citations when
paraphrasing or quoting. Good
paraphrasing with limited use
of direct quoting.
Appropriate use of APA 7th
edition formatting for in text
citations and final Reference
list.
Citations present when
paraphrasing or quoting, and
mostly accurate.
Attempts to paraphrase but
may have small
inconsistencies and/or some
over-use of direct quotes.
Inconsistent use of APA 7th
edition formatting for in text
citations and final
References l iist.
Some citations missing
when paraphrasing or
quoting. Some inappropriate
paraphrasing and/or too
many direct quotes
Little to no use of APA 7th
edition formatting for in text
and final References list.
Lacks citations when
paraphrasing or quoting.
No attempt to paraphrase.
Mostly direct quotes.