Order Grade A+ Academic Papers Instantly!

Physical activity using Health Survey England 2016 data. Dissertation title to be discussed.

The College of Life and Environmental Sciences

 

CLES Generic Notched Marking Criteria (for the Majority of Assessments)

 

 

Mark (%) Corresponding UG classification Corresponding PGT classification Description
100, 95 First class Distinction Outstanding

The work is unique, outstanding and original and attains the highest standards of scholarship expected for the discipline at the appropriate level without the need for revision. It would be difficult to recommend improvements in any way. The work goes far beyond that expected of a good output at the appropriate level, with the higher mark demonstrating even greater comprehension, insight and originality at this level. The work is of publishable quality and would be likely to receive that judgement if submitted to a peer-reviewed journal, or attains the professional standards expected for the discipline without need for revision. The lower mark effectively represents the need for very minor revision to achieve publishable standard.

88, 85, 82 First class Distinction Exceptional

The work is exceptional. It shows originality, a critical awareness of the principles and practices of the discipline, thorough comprehension of the assessment’s requirements and the subject matter, exceptional ability, insightfulness, and fully realises learning outcomes for the assessment and develops them far beyond normal expectations. It shows excellent evidence of outside reading and synthesis of the primary literature. It would be difficult to recommend more than minor improvements. The work goes well beyond that expected of a good output at the appropriate level, with the higher mark demonstrating even greater comprehension, insight and originality at this level.

78 First class Distinction Excellent

The work is excellent. It shows real insight and originality, is articulate with a clear logical structure, and demonstrates a comprehensive understanding and coverage of the subject, engagement with scholarship and research, very good analytical ability, and contains no major flaws. It shows very good evidence of outside reading. It would be possible to recommend some improvements. The work goes beyond that expected of a good output at the appropriate level.

75 First class Distinction Excellent

The work is excellent but shows minor deficiencies in either comprehension, insight or originality.

72 First class Distinction Excellent

The work is excellent but shows minor deficiencies in two or more aspects from among comprehension, insight and originality.

68 Upper second class Merit Very Good

The work is very good. It demonstrates a very good comprehension of all of the assessment’s requirements and presents a good selection of relevant examples. It is sound and well thought out, and well expressed with a clear logical structure, demonstrating an organised knowledge of the subject, very good evidence of outside reading, and use of critical references. It realises the intended learning outcomes, and demonstrates very good analytical skills. The work is slightly above the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level (see benchmark statement). The higher mark indicates that more critical evaluation of theory and empirical evidence has been demonstrated.

65 Upper second class Merit Good

The work is good. It demonstrates a good comprehension of all of the assessment’s important requirements and presents a good selection of relevant examples. It demonstrates a secure knowledge of the subject, with some evidence of outside reading, and appropriate use of references. It broadly realises the intended learning outcomes, and demonstrates good analytical skills. The work is at the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level (see benchmark statement). The work may show some limitations in writing style or presentation.

62 Upper second class Merit Fairly Good

The work is fairly good. It demonstrates a fairly good comprehension of the assessment’s important requirements and presents a selection of relevant examples. It shows some knowledge of the subject, is generally sound but is in parts unclear or lacking structure, with limited evidence of outside reading. It generally realises the intended learning outcomes, and demonstrates satisfactory analytical skills. The work is slightly below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level (see benchmark statement). The work tends to be more descriptive, lacks depth, contains some flaws or errors or demonstrates limitations in writing style or presentation.

58 Lower second class Pass Competent

The work is competent. It demonstrates comprehension of some of the assessment’s important requirements and presents a selection of relevant examples. The work is descriptive, showing an adequate or routine knowledge of the subject, with some limitations in understanding or writing style. It lacks a clear structure or shows weaknesses in presentation, analysis or interpretation of results. The work is below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. It makes a reasonable attempt to realise the intended learning outcomes.

55 Lower second class Pass Fairly Competent

The work is fairly competent. It demonstrates comprehension of some of the assessment’s requirements and presents an adequate selection of relevant examples. It makes a reasonable attempt at achieving learning outcomes but does not cover all the necessary material and lacks depth. The work is largely descriptive, confused in places with limitations in understanding or writing style. The work is below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. It lacks a clear structure with incorrect or poor interpretation or analysis of data.

52 Lower second class Pass Adequate

The work is adequate. It demonstrates some comprehension of the assessment’s requirements and presents some relevant examples. It makes a reasonable attempt at achieving learning outcomes but does not cover all the necessary material and lacks depth. The work is clearly below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. The work is descriptive, contains  inaccuracies and false statements, is poorly organised and/or is illogical.

48 Third class Fail Weak

The work is weak. It demonstrates some comprehension of some of the assessment’s requirements and presents few relevant examples. It shows some evidence that the learning outcomes have been achieved, but is muddled, poorly argued, and lacks focus and depth of understanding. Some critical elements are missing, there are errors, and the work reveals some deficiencies in presentation, analysis or interpretation. Marks at the upper end indicate a fair attempt at answering the question. The work is well below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level.

45 Third class Fail Very Weak

The work is very weak. The work contains deficiencies as described above, but also contains significant errors, or significant deficiencies.

42 Third class Fail Extremely Weak

The work is extremely weak. The work contains deficiencies as described above, but also contains significant errors and serious deficiencies.

38, 35, 32 Fail Fail Fail

The work is poor. There is little or no evidence of the subject that is relevant to the assessment. There is little or no evidence that the learning outcomes of the assessment have been achieved. The work is marred, although at the upper end of the mark range there may be brief signs of comprehension. The work shows basic misunderstandings or misinterpretations, and demonstrates little ability to meet the requirements of the assessment. The work is significantly below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. Work at the lower end is incomplete, irrelevant and does not meet the requirements of the assessment.

 

Or

 

The work demonstrates evidence of fairly detailed, module-derived knowledge, but the work is based on an identifiable misinterpretation of the assessment’s requirements.

 

Marks at the lower end of this scale are for work whose poor attributes are significant and/or serious.

25 Fail Fail Very Poor Fail

The work is very poor. The intended learning outcomes for the assessment have not been realised. The work is irrelevant, confused, and incomplete. The work demonstrates an unacceptable and minimal understanding at the appropriate level of the requirements of the assessment. The work is significantly below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. The work shows some knowledge and understanding at the appropriate level of material relevant to the general area of the topic, but not directly relevant to the specific question or assignment.

 

Or

 

The work demonstrates evidence of fairly detailed, module-derived knowledge, but the work is based on a major, identifiable misinterpretation of the assessment’s requirements.

15 Fail Fail Extremely Poor Fail

The work is extremely poor. The intended learning outcomes for the assessment have not been realised. The work is irrelevant, confused, and incomplete. The work demonstrates an unacceptable and minimal understanding at the appropriate level of the requirements of the assessment. The work is significantly below the standard expected from a good output at the appropriate level. The work shows some knowledge and understanding at the appropriate level of material relevant to the general area of the topic, but not directly relevant to the specific assessment.

5 Fail Fail Incompetent fail

There is virtually no evidence that the assessment’s requirements have been understood. Relevant content is virtually absent.

0 Fail Fail Complete fail

There is a total misunderstanding of the requirements of the assessment with no relevant content whatsoever, even to the general area of the topic, or a non-submission or blank script with no evidence of mitigating circumstances.

 

When moderating an individual piece of work that has been marked using the notched marking scheme, the following principles should apply:

 

  1. In the case of disagreement between two markers and where the marks are within two notches, the two separate marks can be averaged to produce a final mark that may or may not be on the scale above. For the purposes of determining whether individual marks are within two notches, please refer to the table below:

 

Notch 1 Notch 2
100 88
95 85
88 82
85 78
82 75
78 72
75 68
72 65
68 62
65 58
62 55
58 52
55 48
52 45
48 42
45 38
42 35
38 32
35 25
32 15
25 5
15 0

 

  1. Where two markers cannot agree a mark to within two notches (see table above), a third marker should be used to adjudicate a final agreed mark which does not have to be on the scale above.

 

find the cost of your paper

The post Physical activity using Health Survey England 2016 data. Dissertation title to be discussed. appeared first on Best Custom Essay Writing Services |Essaytreatise.com.

Solution:

15% off for this assignment.

Our Prices Start at $11.99. As Our First Client, Use Coupon Code GET15 to claim 15% Discount This Month!!

Why US?

100% Confidentiality

Information about customers is confidential and never disclosed to third parties.

Timely Delivery

No missed deadlines – 97% of assignments are completed in time.

Original Writing

We complete all papers from scratch. You can get a plagiarism report.

Money Back

If you are convinced that our writer has not followed your requirements, feel free to ask for a refund.