The ultimate criterion in marking an Essay is: How good is the student’s discussion of the question, with reference to their general writing, their understanding of the primary readings, and their discussion of the issue? This is determined by consideration of more specific sub-criteria:
WRITING (30%),
with sub-criteria:
– Referencing, etc
– Presentation
– Structure, etc Inadequate use of general academic standards. Very many mistakes re sub-criteria Basic use of general academic standards. Quite a few mistakes re sub-criteria Sound use of general academic standards.
Some mistakes re sub-criteria Good use of general academic standards. Few mistakes re sub-criteria Excellent use of general academic standards. Very few if any mistakes re
sub-criteria
EXPOSITION
(50%), with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Accuracy
– Active Understand’g Student displays very little if any understanding of the reading, with significant inaccuracies Student displays basic understanding of the reading, but exposition is marred by some inaccuracies Student displays sound understanding of the reading, with very few inaccuracies Student displays good understanding, with a competent mode of exposition. Student displays excellent understanding, with a creative mode of exposition.
DISCUSSION
(20%), based on further readings, or original, with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Relevance
– Effectiveness Student has done very little if any extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes very little if any contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes some contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a competent contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a good contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) very much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes the marker think.

The sub-criteria will be evaluated as follows:

WRITING—NOTE: This refers to the General Presentation of the Essay

– Referencing, etc (quote format, quote page nos., footnotes, bibliography, TURNITIN): How good is the formatting of the quotes (short quotes in text, long quotes in blocks)? Do ALL quote references include page numbers? How relevant are any footnotes? Is there a bibliography, and how well formatted is it? How high is the TURNITIN originality score, and how indicative is this of poor referencing practices?
– Presentation (length, grammar, spelling, punctuation, expression): What is the paper’s word count, and is within 5% of the word limit? On average, how many errors of grammar, spelling and punctuation are there per page?
How good is the essay’s overall expression?
– Structure, etc (introduction; fluency, sectioning, flagging devices; paragraphs): Does the introduction to the essay address the set question, and indicate what the essay will do? How fluent are the transitions between paragraphs? How well does the essay fall into neatly divisible sections? How often does the essay flag to the reader what is happening? How often do paragraphs have topic sentences, and how often does its content focus solely on that topic?

EXPOSITION (of Primary Readings)—NOTE: Exposition of a Primary Reading includes the presentation of a point of view, possibly with examples and justification for that view, and any objections and responses, which that reading itself contains.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to the Exposition of the Primary Readings, ie the one’s marked “•” in the reading list (roughly, at least one-third of the essay)?
– Accuracy: How accurately has the student described the contents of those readings?

School of Humanities and Social Science

7
– Active Understanding: How intellectually active has the student been in re-presenting material from those readings? (NB. Avoid passive description of the readings, by, eg, trying to explain the ideas in your own terms).

DISCUSSION (with Other Readings, or of an Original Nature)—NOTE: Other Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which is sourced from some Non-Primary Reading; Original Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which the student comes up with for themselves.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to critically discussing the issue, based on other Readings, or based on the student’s own ideas?
– Relevance: How relevant is the discussion, and how often is a justification for any new claims introduced? Such justifications may include the presentation of new evidence, examples, or arguments.
– Effectiveness: Objectively, how good (effective) are the relevant justifications?
look no further, Order Now and enjoy an amazing discount!!

PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION MAJOR

2000-LEVEL ESSAY MARKING RUBRIC

Fail (0-29)
Inadequate Pass (50-64)
Basic Credit (65-74)
Sound Dist. (75-84)
Good Hi. Dist. (85-
100)
Very Good
The ultimate criterion in marking an Essay is: How good is the student’s discussion of the question, with reference to their general writing, their understanding of the primary readings, and their discussion of the issue? This is determined by consideration of more specific sub-criteria:
WRITING (30%),
with sub-criteria:
– Referencing, etc
– Presentation
– Structure, etc Inadequate use of general academic standards. Very many mistakes re sub-criteria Basic use of general academic standards. Quite a few mistakes re sub-criteria Sound use of general academic standards.
Some mistakes re sub-criteria Good use of general academic standards. Few mistakes re sub-criteria Excellent use of general academic standards. Very few if any mistakes re
sub-criteria
EXPOSITION
(50%), with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Accuracy
– Active Understand’g Student displays very little if any understanding of the reading, with significant inaccuracies Student displays basic understanding of the reading, but exposition is marred by some inaccuracies Student displays sound understanding of the reading, with very few inaccuracies Student displays good understanding, with a competent mode of exposition. Student displays excellent understanding, with a creative mode of exposition.
DISCUSSION
(20%), based on further readings, or original, with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Relevance
– Effectiveness Student has done very little if any extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes very little if any contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes some contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a competent contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a good contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) very much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes the marker think.

The sub-criteria will be evaluated as follows:

WRITING—NOTE: This refers to the General Presentation of the Essay

– Referencing, etc (quote format, quote page nos., footnotes, bibliography, TURNITIN): How good is the formatting of the quotes (short quotes in text, long quotes in blocks)? Do ALL quote references include page numbers? How relevant are any footnotes? Is there a bibliography, and how well formatted is it? How high is the TURNITIN originality score, and how indicative is this of poor referencing practices?
– Presentation (length, grammar, spelling, punctuation, expression): What is the paper’s word count, and is within 5% of the word limit? On average, how many errors of grammar, spelling and punctuation are there per page?
How good is the essay’s overall expression?
– Structure, etc (introduction; fluency, sectioning, flagging devices; paragraphs): Does the introduction to the essay address the set question, and indicate what the essay will do? How fluent are the transitions between paragraphs? How well does the essay fall into neatly divisible sections? How often does the essay flag to the reader what is happening? How often do paragraphs have topic sentences, and how often does its content focus solely on that topic?

EXPOSITION (of Primary Readings)—NOTE: Exposition of a Primary Reading includes the presentation of a point of view, possibly with examples and justification for that view, and any objections and responses, which that reading itself contains.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to the Exposition of the Primary Readings, ie the one’s marked “•” in the reading list (roughly, at least one-third of the essay)?
– Accuracy: How accurately has the student described the contents of those readings?

School of Humanities and Social Science

7
– Active Understanding: How intellectually active has the student been in re-presenting material from those readings? (NB. Avoid passive description of the readings, by, eg, trying to explain the ideas in your own terms).

DISCUSSION (with Other Readings, or of an Original Nature)—NOTE: Other Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which is sourced from some Non-Primary Reading; Original Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which the student comes up with for themselves.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to critically discussing the issue, based on other Readings, or based on the student’s own ideas?
– Relevance: How relevant is the discussion, and how often is a justification for any new claims introduced? Such justifications may include the presentation of new evidence, examples, or arguments.
– Effectiveness: Objectively, how good (effective) are the relevant justifications?

PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGION MAJOR

2000-LEVEL ESSAY MARKING RUBRIC

Fail (0-29)
Inadequate Pass (50-64)
Basic Credit (65-74)
Sound Dist. (75-84)
Good Hi. Dist. (85-
100)
Very Good
The ultimate criterion in marking an Essay is: How good is the student’s discussion of the question, with reference to their general writing, their understanding of the primary readings, and their discussion of the issue? This is determined by consideration of more specific sub-criteria:
WRITING (30%),
with sub-criteria:
– Referencing, etc
– Presentation
– Structure, etc Inadequate use of general academic standards. Very many mistakes re sub-criteria Basic use of general academic standards. Quite a few mistakes re sub-criteria Sound use of general academic standards.
Some mistakes re sub-criteria Good use of general academic standards. Few mistakes re sub-criteria Excellent use of general academic standards. Very few if any mistakes re
sub-criteria
EXPOSITION
(50%), with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Accuracy
– Active Understand’g Student displays very little if any understanding of the reading, with significant inaccuracies Student displays basic understanding of the reading, but exposition is marred by some inaccuracies Student displays sound understanding of the reading, with very few inaccuracies Student displays good understanding, with a competent mode of exposition. Student displays excellent understanding, with a creative mode of exposition.
DISCUSSION
(20%), based on further readings, or original, with sub- criteria:
– Quantity
– Relevance
– Effectiveness Student has done very little if any extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes very little if any contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes some contribution to the issue Student has done some extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a competent contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes a good contribution to the issue Student has done (given the word limit) very much extra relevant research or original thinking, and what there is makes the marker think.

The sub-criteria will be evaluated as follows:

WRITING—NOTE: This refers to the General Presentation of the Essay

– Referencing, etc (quote format, quote page nos., footnotes, bibliography, TURNITIN): How good is the formatting of the quotes (short quotes in text, long quotes in blocks)? Do ALL quote references include page numbers? How relevant are any footnotes? Is there a bibliography, and how well formatted is it? How high is the TURNITIN originality score, and how indicative is this of poor referencing practices?
– Presentation (length, grammar, spelling, punctuation, expression): What is the paper’s word count, and is within 5% of the word limit? On average, how many errors of grammar, spelling and punctuation are there per page?
How good is the essay’s overall expression?
– Structure, etc (introduction; fluency, sectioning, flagging devices; paragraphs): Does the introduction to the essay address the set question, and indicate what the essay will do? How fluent are the transitions between paragraphs? How well does the essay fall into neatly divisible sections? How often does the essay flag to the reader what is happening? How often do paragraphs have topic sentences, and how often does its content focus solely on that topic?

EXPOSITION (of Primary Readings)—NOTE: Exposition of a Primary Reading includes the presentation of a point of view, possibly with examples and justification for that view, and any objections and responses, which that reading itself contains.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to the Exposition of the Primary Readings, ie the one’s marked “•” in the reading list (roughly, at least one-third of the essay)?
– Accuracy: How accurately has the student described the contents of those readings?

School of Humanities and Social Science

7
– Active Understanding: How intellectually active has the student been in re-presenting material from those readings? (NB. Avoid passive description of the readings, by, eg, trying to explain the ideas in your own terms).

DISCUSSION (with Other Readings, or of an Original Nature)—NOTE: Other Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which is sourced from some Non-Primary Reading; Original Discussion of an issue includes critical discussion of any readings which the student comes up with for themselves.

– Quantity: How much space is devoted to critically discussing the issue, based on other Readings, or based on the student’s own ideas?
– Relevance: How relevant is the discussion, and how often is a justification for any new claims introduced? Such justifications may include the presentation of new evidence, examples, or arguments.
– Effectiveness: Objectively, how good (effective) are the relevant justifications?