Marking Criteria

This form is used as a guide for examiners for grading courses at Department of Criminology and Sociology of Law. 

All criteria are to be included in the overall assessment. Each candidate is assessed individually with regards to the course's learning requirements; the active normal distribution curve is not implemented.

Marking Criteria Guide

Course information

Course code and name  KRIM2958 – Migration Control, Borders and Citizenship
Syllabus/achievement requirements  Spring 2019
Formal prerequisite knowledge

Bachelorlevel. No obligatory prerequisites beyond the minimum requirements for entrance to higher education in Norway.

Examination Students are graded on the basis of a 5-day take-home exam (Maximum 2400 Words).
Last updatet  02.03.2019

Assessment criteria form

Grade   Overall guidelines for setting grades 

Førsteinntrykk, lesbarhetFørsteinntrykk, lesbarhetFørsteinntrykk, lesbarhetOverall impression and readability, knowledge and content, reflection and Independence.

Førsteinntrykk, lesbarhetFørsteinntrykk, lesbarhet

 

Formal skills ans structure

A: Excellent

 

A: An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgement and a high degree of independent thinking.

 

Kandidaten viser meget god vurderingsevne og selvstendighet

 

The exam paper gives clear and precise answers to the examination question(s).

The candidate shows high levels of knowledge, an exceptionally good overview of relevant literature (syllabus) and a very good understanding of criminological questions in the field.

Concepts, theories and empirical knowledge are used confidently and in an  independent manner, which is reflected in the discussions required by the exam question and in the studies conducted for the home exam. The quality of discussion is carried by an analytical approach to the problem at hand. The reasoning is clear and well-argued. Correct  referencing and use of sources.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • excellent command of central concepts, exposition skills and level of precision
  • excellent ability to dimension the answer sensibly.
     
B: Very good   B: A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a very good degree of independent thinking.

The exam answer gives very good answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).

The candidate shows high levels of knowledge, a very good overview of relevant literature (syllabus) and a  good understanding of criminological questions in the field.

Concepts, theories and empirical knowledge are used in an independent manner, which is reflected in the discussions required by the exam question and in the studies conducted for the home exam. The reasoning is clear and well-argued. Correct referencing and use of sources.
 

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • very good command of central concepts, exposition skills and level of precision
  • very good ability to dimension the answer sensibly.
C: Good C: A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas.

Eksamensbesvarelsen gir klare og presise svar på spørsmålene som stilles i oppgaven(e).The exam essay gives clear and precise answers  to the examination question(s).

The candidate shows a tidy and good overview of relevant literature (syllabus) and quite understanding of criminological questions in the field.

Relevant concepts, theories and empirical knowledge are used in the discussions required by the exam question and in the studies conducted for the home exam.  The answers show some deficiencies in terms of precision in the use of concepts and the ability to analytically apply the knowledge, the clarity of reasoning and the quality of arguments. 

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • good command of central concepts, exposition skills and level of Precision

  • good ability to dimension the answer sensibly.

D: Satisfactory

 

D: A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

 

 

The exam answer gives inadequate answers to the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).

The candidate can account for parts of the relevant literature (syllabus), but shows uncertain understanding of  criminological questions in the field. Answers tend to summarize existing theories and to a lesser extend manage to discuss theories and empirical knowledge. Imprecise and at times incorrect use of concepts.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • satisfactory command of relevant concepts, exposition skills and level of precision
  • moderate ability to dimension the answer sensibly.
E: Sufficient E: A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.

The exam answer gives vague answers to the examination question(s).

The candidate shows some knowledge, but quite limited overview of the relevant literature (syllabus), as well as poor understanding of  criminological questions in the field.

Concepts and theories are partly wrongly accounted for. No relevant discussions of the given problems.

The exam answer demonstrates:

  • relatively poor command of central concepts, exposition skills and level of precision
  • little ability to dimension the answer sensibly.
F: Fail   F: A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking.

The exam answer does not answer the questions posed in the examination question paper(s).

The candidate has only superficial overview of the relevant literature (syllabus), and shows big insufficiencies in the understanding of criminological questions in the field.

A performance which does not meet the minimum criteria in terms of course learning requirements. A performance which does not meet the discipline’s minimum theoretical, empirical and(or ethical standards.
 

The exam answer: demonstrates:

  • poor command of central concepts, exposition skills and level of precision
  • an inability to dimension the answer sensibly.

 

 

Published Mar. 2, 2019 2:28 PM - Last modified Mar. 2, 2019 2:28 PM