Analyzing, Managing, and Evaluating Projects

Distinction (70% - 100%)

Merit (60%-69%)

Pass (50% - 59%)

Refer (<50%)

Coherent and detailed knowledge and understanding of the subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline

Excellent systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing sophisticated depth, breadth, detail and clarity

An effective, systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge mostly at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing good depth, breadth, detail and clarity

A sufficient but limited level of systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at times at or informed by the forefront of the field of study but showing adequate depth, breadth, detail and clarity

Limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter shown. Work is not sufficiently informed by scholarship within the field of study and is insufficient in depth, breadth, detail or clarity

Cognitive and intellectual skills

Sophisticated critical evaluation and awareness of current problems, and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates a very high level of originality and

creativity in the student’s

approaches to synthesising current research and

An effective level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates some effective originality and creativity in synthesising current research and

A sufficient but limited level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates, with some reference to new insights or perspectives within the field. Limited evidence of originality and creativity in synthesising current research and

Insufficient evidence of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. Insufficient reference to new insights or perspectives within the field and lacking

in originality and

advanced scholarship within the subject area

scholarship within the subject area.

scholarship within the subject area

creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within

the subject area

Application of theory to practice

An excellent level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice within the discipline.

Demonstration of excellent critical awareness and evaluation and the ability to effectively critique and employ current academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level

A good level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice. Demonstration of consistently good critical awareness and evaluation and reasonable ability to use the academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level

A reasonable but limited level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice within the discipline.

Demonstration of some good critical awareness and evaluation and some ability to use the academic literature in developing judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level

Little evidence of originality and innovation and a significant lack of application of knowledge and theory to professional practice demonstrating little critical awareness and evaluation and a lack of ability to use the academic literature to make judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a

professional level

Reading and referencing

A very high level of critical engagement across an extensive range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and

practice-related literature

A good level of critical engagement across a good range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and

practice-related literature

Sufficient critical engagement with a reasonable range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and

practice-related literature

Little evidence of critical engagement with relevant and current literature. Poor use of

appropriate sources

demonstrating deep and appropriate reading and initiative along with highly consistent accurate referencing

demonstrating appropriate reading and some initiative along with consistent accurate referencing.

demonstrating mainly appropriate reading but limited initiative and/or some minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in

referencing.

and/or inconsistent and inaccurate referencing

Presentation, style and structure

Outstanding presentation of work that is logically and coherently structured with a strong or original central argument(s), conveyed with a high level of fluency and eloquently communicates compelling, coherent conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences

High quality presentation of work that is largely logically and coherently structured with a generally strong central argument conveyed with a clarity of expression and which communicates clear conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences

Generally good presentation of work that is sufficiently logical and coherent in structure with a discernible central argument. May present limited originality and lack some clarity of expression, but an identifiable conclusion reasonably communicated to specialist and non- specialist audiences

Often poorly presented work that is disorganised, has an ill-formed central argument, and lacks a logical and coherent structure. A lack of clarity of expression or fails to communicate effective conclusions to

specialist or non- specialist audiences