程序代写代做 Excel graph Appendices

Appendices
Appendix 1: Marking Criteria for Essays/Reports/Examinations — Masters
Criterion
Distinction 70+
Merit 60-69
Pass 50-59
Fail <50 UNDERSTANDING OF QUESTION/ TASK SET: Development of answer Thoughtful, well- informed, consistently interesting interpretation; perceptive understanding; accurate, focussed on the question throughout. Valid interpretation; generally accurate, with good understanding; mostly focussed on relevant issues. Some inaccuracies; showing an understanding of the subject, but not effectively focussed on the question. Many inaccuracies; only partial or no evidence of understanding, with a frequent failure to focus on the question. STRUCTURE: Overall structure and organisation; introduction; conclusion Coherent structure; effective organisation of material; clear and appropriate aims; reflective conclusion that relates to aims. Well organised work; generally successful structure; with relevant aims and reflective conclusion. Structure is present, although not always clear; aims and conclusion are stated but show only partial relevance and/or coherence. Limited or no organisation of material; poorly stated or no aims and conclusion; lacking coherence. CLARITY/ DEPTH/ ORIGINALITY OF ARGUMENT: Effectiveness of argument; original ideas/ evidence/ analysis; critical insights Cogent, consistent and original argument; excellent level of critical engagement and/or analysis; showing excellent clarity of expression and innovative thinking. Consistent argument; showing critical engagement and/or analysis; generally well written; some original insights. Showing evidence of argument; patchy indications of critical judgement and/or analysis; occasionally disjointed; few signs of original thought. Only partial or no attempt to establish argument; limited or no evidence of critical judgement and/or analysis; disjointed; totally lacking in originality. BREADTH AND RELEVANCE OF CONTENT: Engagement with relevant ideas; selection of relevant examples; integration of ideas and examples Very well executed research; fully engaged on an intellectual level; excellent use and integration of illustrative examples. Well planned and executed research; engages with relevant ideas; good use of illustrative examples. Some evidence of research; lacking in intellectual engagement; not always properly integrated; some relevant examples provided. Poorly planned and executed research; examples tending to be irrelevant. READING AND REFERENCING Reading of relevant sources; bibliographical research; citation and reference style Comprehensive and well integrated review of the relevant literature; showing a thorough understanding of a wide range of literature; consistent and accurate citation and reference style. Well grounded review of relevant literature; significant evidence of bibliographic research; shows clear understanding; largely consistent citation and reference style. Some evidence of reading and research, but not well integrated; inconsistencies in citations and references. Limited or no evidence of relevant reading; no or very poor integration; poor or no style in citations and references. WRITING STYLE AND PRESENTATION: Grammar, spelling, legibility; figures, tables, and other graphics Written with verve and without errors; excellent use where appropriate of well- designed figures, tables, graphics. Few stylistic errors; sound use where appropriate of figures, tables, graphics. Some stylistic errors; somewhat inconsistent and inappropriate use of figures, tables, graphics. Many errors; poor and inappropriate figures, tables, graphics. 10