FC301 Statistics: Case study marking checklist
FC301 Statistics: Case study marking checklist
TUTOR 1
Specific criteria being assessed 5 4 3 2 1 0
Use of Research methodology (20%)
Relevant and sufficient secondary sources of data are used
If appropriate, primary method of data collection is clear (e.g. questionnaire uses clear and valid questioning)
Primary research process is representative (e.g. sample is representative) Presentation of data in visual form (20%)
Appropriate graph drawing software used (e.g. Excel)
Relevant and sufficient graphs and diagrams are presented (e.g.scatter diagrams, bar charts etc.)
Graphs and diagrams are clear and labelled
Graphs and diagrams are accurate Use of Mathematical techniques (20%)
Appropriate and relevant mathematical techniques are used in the description and interpretation of data (e.g. r, rvalues, regression equation, percentage differences etc.)
Mathematical calculations are accurate Critical interpretation of results (20%)
Results are described accurately and clearly
Interpretation of results involves identification of key points
Interpretation of results involves discussion of causal links
Discussion of results involves discussion of shortcomings / future predictions etc. Presentation of written data (15%)
Research topic is introduced and discussed clearly (using generally correct spelling, punctuation and grammar)
Research case study is organised and uses a clear structure Academic Integrity (5%)
Information from sources is appropriately paraphrased/summarised rather than relying on quotes
Any direct and indirect quotations are clearly marked and acknowledged with correct citations
References match the citations and are correctly formatted
Data/facts presented are genuine and accurate Weighting Calculation: UoRM x 4 + PoD x 4 + UoMT x 4 + CIoR x 4 + PoWD x 3 + AI
Total Marks: 25 T1 Actual marks: T2 Actual marks: Comment: Agreed Final mark:
Marking guidance:
5 Excellent evidence as comprehensive as could be expected
4 Very good evidence a thorough attempt to represent this aspect with only a few minor errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities
3 Sufficient evidence a good attempt to represent this aspect with all main aspects covered but noticeable errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities
2 Limited and/or inconsistent evidence this aspect is represented reasonably well at times but numerous errors, omissions and/or missed opportunities exist throughout
1 Insufficient evidence the attempt to represent this aspect is inappropriate or too weak to convey anything very meaningful and/or academic.
0 No attempt to represent this aspect
