Marking Criteria

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Poor

Introduction (4 marks)

Outlines a clear theme / topic for the essay

Argument - whether your experiences are supported in the literature

Outline of what will be presented in the essay

Part 1 (16 marks) Personal reflection

Describes and analyses your experiences within the course or during the course

Links reflections to the research literature on leadership and values

Part 2 (16 marks) Future directions

Established a clear future direction based on your reflection

Links these new directions to the research literature on leadership and values

Technical issues (4 marks)

Complete and correct reference list

Consistent and accurate use of citations

Clear and accurate English expression

(spelling, grammar, syntax)

Criteria

100%

Excellent

85%+

Very Good

75%-84%

Good

65%-74%

Satisfactory

50%-64%

Unsatisfactory

0-49%

1) Content knowledge (35%)

Demonstrates a balanced and very high level of detailed knowledge of core concepts by providing a very high level of analysis. Student provides significant insight into the area of interest.

Demonstrates a balanced and high level of knowledge of core concepts by providing a high level of analysis. Student provides good insight into the area of interest.

Demonstrates a good level of knowledge of some of the core concepts by providing some level of analysis. Student provides some insight into the area of interest.

Demonstrates limited knowledge of core concepts by providing a limited level of analysis. Student provides few insights into the area of interest.

Demonstrates little, if any, knowledge of the core concepts with extremely limited, if any, analysis. Student provides misinformed/misguided insight into the area of interest.

2) Reflection (35%)

Demonstrates highly developed reflective thinking skills by linking theory to self-assessment survey results and their practical implications, with longer term developmental issues considered.

Demonstrates well developed reflective thinking skills by linking theory to self-assessment survey results and their short-term practical implications

Demonstrates reflective thinking skills by linking theory to self -assessment survey results and their short-term practical implications. Answers what but not, or only in a limited way, why.

Demonstrates limited reflective thinking skills by making some simple surface links between theory, self-assessment results, and their short term practical implications.

Demonstrates little if any reflective thinking skills by not linking theory to the self-assessment results, and not considering their practical implications

3) Use of research to support arguments (20%)

Utilises current, appropriate and credible sources which strongly support the students argument throughout.

Utilises mostly current, appropriate and credible sources which mostly support the students argument throughout.

Utilises some current, appropriate and credible sources which at times support the students argument throughout.

Utilises few current, appropriate and credible sources which provide limited support to the students argument throughout.

Utilises little, if any, current, appropriate and credible sources which provide little, if any, support to the students argument throughout.

4) Presentation mechanics (10%)

Quality of writing at a very high standard (i.e., use of a clear and well thought-out introduction providing clear guidance to the document including linked and cohesive paragraphs and a clear and concise concluding summary of the area of interest). Correct grammar, spelling and punctuation.

Quality of writing is of a high standard (i.e., a mostly well thought-out introduction although some minor inconsistencies from the actual document, providing mostly clear guidance through linked and cohesive paragraphs and a mostly clear and concise concluding summary of the area of interest). Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes.

Quality of writing is of a good standard (i.e., an introduction is provided however some areas omitted which are included in the document, providing guidance to the document however some minor inconsistencies in relation to linked paragraphs, a mostly clear and concise concluding summary of the area of interest). Few grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes.

Some problems with sentence structure and presentation (i.e., an introduction is included however brief and at times irrelevant to the subject matter, frequent inconsistencies from one paragraph to the next, a summary provided although lacks detail and/or reflects information irrelevant to the actual document). Frequent grammar, punctuation and spelling mistakes. Use of inappropriate language.

Quality of writing is at a very poor standard so barely understandable (i.e., limited or no introduction included, paragraphs not linked or are poorly structured). Many spelling mistakes. Little or no evidence of proof reading.