UG & PG-Marking Standardisation- RI July 2022_ Final Version1.pptx

Marking guidance

1. Marking Standardisation School of Leadership and Management Alfred Mensah Link Coordinator Sara Ramzani Level 6 Senior Lecturer UG Dissertation MLs Anjana Basnet Negroes Dube Juston Mubwandarikwa PG Dissertation ML Keith Wong

2. Introduction to the session UG and PG-Process of marking and moderation of dissertations UG and PG- Dissertation Marking Criteria Generic Level 6 & 7 Assessment criteria Before you start the marking procedure Exemplar Feedback Question /Answer Agenda

3. UG and PG- Management of marking and moderation of dissertations

4. The Marking Team will inform 1 st marker (supervisor) and the second markers (Arden) once the dissertations are available for marking. iSystem will block the marking once the 1 st marker (supervisor) and 2nd marker have completed their marking.  Once marking has been completed and both markers have provided feedback on iSystem , they will need to discuss and agree a grade (in the Discussion tab). 1 st and 2 nd markers are required to update iSystem on how they reached the final grade. If the first and second markers cannot agree a grade, then the PTL/SL will intervene and review both marker’s grades. If the PTL agrees with one of these grades, then they’ll confirm that grade and the first marker will release the final confirmed grade and feedback. If the PTL/SL does not agree with either grade, a third marker will be allocated (either the PTL or SL). The third marker will provide the final grade. The final mark and feedback will then be released by 1 st marker (supervisor) to the student. 1st marker will get instructions from AU Marking on this. If a student does not pass, the Supervisor will reach out to the student and continue their supervision of the student and act as first marker for the resubmitted dissertation as per the preceding point UG and PG-Process of marking and moderation of dissertations

5. Example- First and second marking and the discussion ( iSystem ) First marker feedback (65 ) Second marker feedback (55 )

6. Example- When third marker’s involved( iSystem ) First marker feedback (55 ) Third marker feedback (48) Second marker feedback (46 )

7. UG and PG- Dissertation Marking Criteria

8. Dissertation Assessment Criteria Introduction 20% Literature Review   20% Methodology and Method   20% Results and Discussion   20% Conclusion and recommendations   20% Word count for UG Dissertation- 10,000 words Word count for PG Dissertation- 15,000 words We will introduce Rubrics assessment matrix for marking in near future.

9. 1. Introduction- 20% UG- Expected word count: 1,000 words   PG-Expected word count: 2,500 words A clear statement of the purpose of the Dissertation : The objectives of the research should be clearly stated and explained where appropriate. The rationale for the investigation is justified in terms of academic/ organisational importance Background – an overview of the topic and its merit as a research topic Rationale – justification for the study Case study – if relevant, an overview of the organisation or study context Objectives and research questions Dissertation structure

10. 2. Literature Review- 20% UG- Expected word count: 2,000 words   PG-Expected word count: 3000 words Critical review of the literature : Student must provide an evaluation and interpretation of relevant earlier work and where appropriate develop a conceptual framework that draws together the key literature(s) / ideas Introduction – a brief introduction to state what is contained within the chapter Topics – the number of titles of these will vary depending on the student’s area of study Summary – the chapter needs summarising to conclude where the research fits within the existing literature Questions – what question(s) the student aims to answer or explore in their Dissertation

11. 3. Methodology and Method- 20% UG- Expected word count: 2500 words   PG-Expected word count: 3000 words Methodology is the study of undertaking research. An engagement with the philosophy of research and the associated approaches is important to demonstrate student’s understanding of research at a fundamental level. Crucially, this is not just a review of different methods, it is where the selected philosophies, ontology and approaches are identified and justified. Introduction – a brief introduction to state what is contained within the chapter Philosophical assumptions – an appreciation of research philosophy. Crucially, the selected approach should be identified and justified. Research questions – each question should be used as a subheading. In each case the methods selected should be critiqued and justified. The information relevant to populations, sampling methods, deployment plans, the design of instruments and limitations can be included on a question by question basis. Validity and Reliability – this can be considered on a question by question basis or in a section on its own. A consideration is made of how the method addresses the needs of the question and how replicable they are. Data Selection and Collection – a detailed breakdown of how and why data was collected and the associated practical challenges. Ethics and Bias – a consideration of the relevant ethical issues and any bias that may be inherent within the study or the subsequent analysis with thought given to validity, reliability and generalisability. Again, this can be considered on a question by question basis or in a section on its own. Limitations – discuss any relevant limitations to the methods selected.

12. 4. Results and Discussion-20% UG- Expected word count: 2500 words   PG-Expected word count: 3500 words Data presentation & Discussion : Detailed and logical presentation and analysis of the data Introduction – a brief introduction to state what is contained within the chapter. Signposts to where the research questions are addressed by the primary research should be included. Response rates – overview the rate of response from primary research methods. Demographic information can be included here. Importantly, the results must be linked to information about the population under study to show that the results are representative. Results – the findings are presented with suitable discussion and analysis with links to established literature. Ensure student clarifies why statistical analysis is inferential or descriptive in this context characterising trends which have arisen. When using qualitative data ensure that quotes are presented with appropriate contextual analysis. Summary – summarise the chapter with key findings and link to the research question.

13. 5. Conclusions- 20% UG- Expected word count: 2000 words   PG-Expected word count: 3000 words The conclusion chapter is essential in tying together the threads that have been woven throughout the work bridging the literature review with the results and discussions section. It relates directly to the beginning of the Dissertation and shows what was found in the process of addressing the objectives and answering the questions that were initially set. This chapter also provides the opportunity to reflect on process as well as look forward to where the work could be taken next with appropriate insight (e.g. costings for implementation of recommended actions). Introduction – a brief introduction to state what is contained within the chapter General conclusions – overview the key findings and their implications Research question conclusions – taking each research question separately clearly demonstrate what has been found in answering them. It is also important to point out what was not found. Recommendations – based upon the findings, recommend courses of action to provide direct benefit. If linked to a specific case study these could be organisational recommendations. If considering a topic in a more abstract way these could be generalised recommendations that have a wider scope. Wider application beyond the confines of the original research focus could also be made here. Errors and limitations – a final opportunity to recognise the things that may have limited the work undertaken. These build upon those discussed in the methodology as they may include practical limitations encountered along the way or flaws in approaches that only became apparent later on. Recommendations for further study – themes may emerge from the study that warrant further investigation. Outline what these are and how they may be addressed in the future.

14. Generic Level 6 & 7 Assessment Criteria

15. Arden University Generic Level 6 Assessment Criteria Level 6 study represents the student’s increasing autonomy and independence in relation to their knowledge, understanding and skills. At Level 6, students are expected to demonstrate problem solving skills in both practical and theoretical contexts. This should be supported by an understanding of appropriate theory, creativity in expression and thought based on independent but informed judgments. Students should demonstrate the ability to seek out, invoke, analyse and evaluate competing theories and claims to knowledge and work in a critically constructive manner. Work at this level is articulate, coherent and skilled. Grade Mark Bands Generic Assessment Criteria First (1) 80%+   An exceptional knowledge base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. The work demonstrates extraordinary independence of thought and originality. There is exceptional management of learning resources and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated which goes above and beyond the brief. The work demonstrates intellectual originality and creativity. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and with some additional effort could be considered for internal publication. 70-79%   An excellent information base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is considerable originality in the approach and the work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed with exceptional confidence and the work exceeds the assessment brief. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of professional skills are demonstrated and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills. Upper second (2:1) 60-69%   A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is clear evidence of self-directed research. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are good, expression is accurate overall and the work is consistently referenced throughout. Lower second (2:2) 50-59%   A satisfactory understanding of the discipline which supports some analysis, evaluation and problem-solving within the discipline. There may be reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials. Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall and the work is planned and structured with some thought. Professional skills are satisfactory (where appropriate). The work may lack originality but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The work is referenced throughout. Third (3) 40-49%   Basic level of performance in which there are some omissions in the understanding of the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work. Marginal Fail 30-39%   A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and intellectual skills are weak and there are errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought and is largely imitative.   29% and below A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The work is imitative.

16. Arden University Generic Level 7 Assessment Criteria

17. Before you start the marking procedure

18. Before you start the marking procedure Please check if you have access to Dissertation Marking in iSystem . 'Tutor' drop down menu-'Mark Dissertations-"Assessment period’- Click on a student's submission Marking template Feedback should be provided for headings that match the recommended structure in the Dissertation Handbook Headings are: Introduction, Literature Review, Methodology, Results and Discussion and Conclusion All projects are marked by two people As supervisor – you will be the 'first marker’ A 'second marker' will also be assigned You each mark independently

19. When you mark check/review that you have provided sufficient feedback under five headings use full sentences (limited use of bullet points) check/edit your own written feedback for grammar, spelling, and syntax errors check/review for consistency of feedback and marks - use key words within marking assessment criteria placed at the end of every assignment brief to match the mark/s awarded, (e.g. 70%/excellent, 60%/very good, 50%/good, 40%/basic-just meets learning outcomes, 30%/limited-poor does not meet learning outcomes – avoid stating a student’s work is excellent when the mark you award is 40%) avoid describing what the student has done – be evaluative instead include 'developmental comments’ where necessary comments should be included on: writing style, referencing, acknowledgment of sources. report on Turnitin in your feedback . Do not suggest to students an acceptable % of Turnitin, only report on how to improve the originality of students work When YOU MARK…….

20. Once marking is finished (Supervisors) Once you have finished marking you and the second marker will have a 'discussion' where you agree on a mark. It is important to have a transparent discussion on the final mark. When agreed, you will be prompted to approve a mark. You will be required to update iSystem on how you reached the final grade. Please make sure you finalise the feedback for the student as well. As a member of the team, you may also be allocated as the second marker for another student's submission.  Dissertation Module Leaders do not manage the dissertation marking. Please contact the [email protected] for any queries regarding the allocation of marking.

21. UG-Exemplar Feedback

22. Please let us know the grades you provide for UG dissertation samples we provided. Standardisation Marking A ctivity Sample 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A 68% 72% B 72% C

23. Please let us know the grades you provide for UG dissertation samples we provided. Standardisation Marking A ctivity Sample Final agreed grade A 58% B 74% C 35%

24. Exemplar feedback ( Mid –Level) Sample A

25. The exemplar feedback – Higher Level Sample B

26. The exemplar feedback– ( LOWER Level) Sample C

27. Any Questions?

28. Thank you!