UCL Computer Science: Marking Criteria and Grade Descriptors
1-19: Misunderstanding of assignment or similar 20-29: 5 inadequate 30-34: 4 inadequate 34-39: 3 inadequate
Fail
Inadequate
Below 40: BSc: Fail MEng: Fail
Either no argument or argument presented is inappropriate and irrelevant. Conclusions absent or irrelevant.
Misunderstanding of the issues under discussion.
Erroneous analysis. Misunderstanding of the basic core of the taught materials. No conceptual material.
No solution to the given problem, completely incorrect code for the given task.
Style and word choice seriously interfere with comprehension.
Poorly formatted, inappropriate visuals, and incorrect reference formatting.
Weak
40-49: BSc: 3rd MEng: Fail
An indirect response to the task set, towards a relevant argument and conclusions.
Rudimentary, intermittent grasp of issues with confusions.
Analysis relying on the partial reproduction of ideas from taught materials. Some concepts absent or wrongly used.
Rudimentary algorithmic/technical solution, but mostly incomplete.
Style and word choice seriously detract from conveying of ideas.
Formatting, visuals and referencing seriously distract from argument.
Pass (2:2)
Satisfactory
50-54: 55-59: Low pass High pass
A reasonable response with a limited sense of argument and partial conclusions.
Reasonable grasp of the issues and their broader implications.
Reasonable reproduction of ideas from taught materials. Rudimentary definition and use of concepts.
Reasonable solution, using basic required concepts, several flaws in implementation.
Style and word choice sometimes detract from conveying of ideas.
Formatting, visuals and referencing sometimes distract from argument.
Merit (2:1) Good
Distinction (1st)
Excellent
70-79
A distinctive response that develops a clear argument and sensible conclusions, with evidence of nuance.
Thorough grasp of issues; some sophisticated insights.
Evidence of innovative analysis. Concepts deftly defined and used with some sense of theoretical context.
Excellent algorithmic solution, novel and creative approach.
Style and word choice show fluency with ideas and excellent communication skills.
Formatting, visuals and referencing are impeccable.
Outstanding Exceptional
80-89 90+
Exceptional response with a convincing, sophisticated argument with precise conclusions.
Exceptional grasp of complexities and significance of issues.
Exceptional thought and awareness of relevant issues. Sophisticated sense of conceptual framework in context.
Exceptional solution and advanced algorithm/technical design.
Reads as if professionally copy edited. Exceptional high quality of writing.
Exceptional presentation, impeccable formatting of the document and references.
1
2
3
4
5 6
Quality of the response to the task set: answer, structure and conclusions Understanding of relevant issues
Analysis: reflection, discussion, limitations
Algorithms and/or technical solution
Writing, communication and documentation Formatting aspects, visuals, clarity, references
A sound response with a reasonable argument and straightforward conclusions, logical conclusions.
Sound understanding of issues, with insights into broader implications.
Evidence of student¡¯s own analysis. Concepts defined and used systematically/ effectively.
Good solution, skilled use of concepts, mostly correct and only minor faults.
Style and word choice work well to convey most important ideas. Well documented.
Formatting well-done and consistent, good visuals and consistent referencing.
60-64: Low merit
65-69: High merit