Description of the marking scale

Assessment and grading

 

 Course grades are awarded on a descending scale using alphabetic grades from A to E for passes and F for fail. A three-day home essay is the basis of the evaluation. In general, the following three criteria will be decisive.

 

Knowledge

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability

Below these three criteria are related to the main components of the study program, Theorising Gender Equality, at each of the six levels of the marking scale.

 


A – excellent

Best mark. An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgment and a high degree of independent thinking.

 

Knowledge:

  • The student demonstrates an excellent command of the relevant parts of the syllabus which need to be taken into account to answer the questions of the exam.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

  • The student is able to apply this knowledge in a remarkable and critical way when presenting, analyzing and discussing gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories.
  • The essay documents advanced analytical skills, excellent understanding of different concepts and theories and a high degree of independent and critical thinking.

 

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

  • The student shows a remarkable ability to formulate her/his knowledge and analytical insights in a precise and stringent manner.
  • The student has a profound understanding of the significance of the tasks she/he faces and submits a product that is relevant in relation to the course of study as well as the tasks in question.
  • References and sources are frequently identified as part of the student’s discourse.
  • The essay is well-argued and well written.

 

B – very good

The second best mark. A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgment and a very good degree of independent thinking.


Knowledge:

  • The student demonstrates a comprehensive command of the relevant parts of the syllabus which need to be taken into account to answer the questions of the exam set.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

  • The student is able to apply this knowledge in a competent and critical way when presenting, analyzing and discussing gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories.
  • The essay documents analytical skills above average, very good understanding of different concepts and theories and independent and critical thinking.

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

  • The student shows a very good ability to formulate her/his knowledge and analytical insights in a precise and stringent manner.
  • The student has a very good understanding of the significance of the tasks she/he faces and submits a product that is relevant in relation to the course of study as well as the tasks in question.

 

  • References and sources are frequently identified as part of the student’s discourse.
  • The essay is well-argued and well written.

 

 

C – good

An average mark.  A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgment and independent thinking in the most important areas.

 

Knowledge:

  • The student demonstrates a good command of most of the relevant parts of the syllabus which need to be taken into account to answer the questions of the exam set.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

 

  • The student is able to apply this knowledge in a competent and critical way when presenting, analyzing and discussing gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories.
  • The essay documents analytical skills, good understanding of different concepts and theories and a reasonable degree of independent thinking on the most important topics in the paper.

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

 

  • The student shows a good ability to formulate her/his knowledge and analytical insights in a precise and stringent manner.
  • The student has a good understanding of the significance of the tasks she/he faces and submits a product that is relevant in relation to the course of study as well as the tasks in question.

 

  • The most important references and sources are identified as part of the student’s discourse.
  • As a text the essay communicates effectively.

 


D –satisfactory

A below-average mark. A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgment and independent thinking.

 

Knowledge:

  • The student demonstrates a rather superficial knowledge of the relevant parts of the syllabus which need to be taken into account to answer the questions of the essay, but lacks the necessary overview and in-depth-understanding.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

  • The student is able to apply this knowledge when presenting, analyzing and discussing gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories.
  • The essay documents below average analytical skills, understanding of different concepts and theories, and independent thinking.

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

  • The student shows a adequate ability to formulate her/his knowledge and analytical insights.
  • The student has an adequate understanding of the significance of the tasks she/he faces and submits a product that is relevant in relation to the course of study as well as the tasks in question.
  • Important references and sources are sometimes identified as part of the student’s discourse.
  • As a text the essay communicates below average.

 

E – sufficient

Lowest passing mark.  A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgment and independent thinking.

 

Knowledge:

  • The student demonstrates some knowledge of the relevant parts of the syllabus which need to be taken into account to answer the questions of the exam set, but seems to lack overview and familiarity with basic themes and topics of the course.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

  • The student is, to some degree, able to apply this knowledge when presenting and discussing gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories.
  • The essay documents some understanding of different concepts and theories. The argumentation is superficial and allows for misunderstandings and/or inconsistencies.

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

  • The student shows some ability to formulate her/his knowledge and opinions.
  • The student has some understanding of the significance of the tasks she/he faces and submits a product that has some relevance in relation to the course of study as well as the tasks in question.
  • References and sources are seldom or never identified as part of the student’s discourse.
  • The text is understandable, but has sequences of muddled and/or confused reasoning with little internal consistency.

 

F – fail

A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgment and independent thinking.

 

Knowledge:

  • The student does not document sufficient knowledge of the syllabus of the course, nor a minimum of familiarity with its basic themes and topics.

 

Understanding, analytical ability and critical reflection:

  • The student does not document sufficient ability to present and discuss gender equality concepts, perspectives and theories
  • The student shows poor or no ability when it comes to critical reflection about different concepts, theories and positions which can be found in the course readings.

 

 

Professional communicative ability, relevance and reliability:

•  The student does not document sufficient ability to formulate her/his knowledge and opinions

•  The student’s response is often completely incomprehensible or confusing.

• The student’s answer can show a complete lack of relevance in relation to the task presented.

• References and source identification are worthless or missing entirely.

 

 

Published Oct. 11, 2013 1:53 PM - Last modified Oct. 11, 2013 1:54 PM