Marks are numerical 0-100. All students taking MC courses will receive a provisional letter grade, e.g. Bad Fail (BF), Fail (F), Pass (P), Merit (M), Distinction (D), by the published feedback deadline.
80–100: High Distinction: This is for outstanding work that achieves nearly all that could reasonably be expected of an MSc student, and will feature many if not all of the following characteristics: original argument, creative selection of sources, highly critical appraisal and analysis, excellent integration of theory and evidence, excellent expression, citation and bibliographic norms.
70–79: Distinction: This is for excellent work that achieves most of what could reasonably be expected of an MSc student, and will feature many of the following characteristics: original argument, creative selection of sources, highly critical appraisal and analysis, excellent integration of theory and evidence, excellent expression, citation and bibliographic norms.
60–69: Merit: This is for work of good quality with a well-defined focus. Such work will feature many if not all of the following characteristics: thoughtful argument, well-researched selection of sources, good critical appraisal, well integrated theory and evidence, good, clear expression, accurate citation and bibliography.
50–59: Pass: This is for work that reaches the overall standard required of a MSc student and will feature many if not all of the following characteristics: standard argument and range of sources used, mainly fair synthesis of ideas, adequate presentation and flaws or gaps in citation and bibliography norms.
40–49: Fail: This is for work that does not reach the overall standard required of a MSc student. It will feature many if not all of the following characteristics: weak argument, narrow range of sources used, descriptive account, poor presentation, inaccurate citation and gaps in bibliography.
0–39: Bad Fail (for MC courses only): This is for work that shows a basic lack of knowledge and ability. Such work will feature many if not all of the following characteristics: very weak argument, little use of even standard sources, descriptive, with large gaps, very poor presentation with flawed expression and extensive flaws in citation and bibliography.