Assessment
Principal considerations in assessment
In marking assessment items, course facilitators appointed by the University of South Australia use the following principles to guide their marking:
-
Critical use and interpretation of course materials and examples based on the student's own experience will be more highly valued than a straight recapitulation of notes.
-
The length of an assignment is less important than evidence of clear understanding, and a focused and analytical response that is well organised.
-
Originality of thought and critical analysis are more important than a catalogue of facts. Originality is what distinguishes a Distinction from a Credit.
-
Structure and content of the assignment are more important than excellent use of the English language, though a poor standard of English will hinder the intelligibility of the paper, thus affecting the grade.
-
Knowledge of the topics in question should be demonstrated by defining and describing the appropriate theories, concepts, principles or practices.
-
Wide reading on the subject should be evident in the assignment content; and the student has been able to refer to appropriate books, journals, papers, authors and/or other authorities.
-
Application of knowledge should be demonstrated by the analysis of organisational situations and/or problems.
-
Selective and critical use of authoritative sources is essential.
Assignment assessment criteria
The IGSB requires all assignment criteria to be properly communicated to students. Details will be provided in the Course Information Booklet that you will receive at the commencement of each course. There will also be an opportunity to discuss and clarify assessment requirements for each course at the seminar.
Course facilitators will use the criteria listed in the following table when evaluating and grading assessment items.
| Grade | Description |
|---|---|
|
HD |
Exceptional performance indicating complete and comprehensive understanding of the subject matter; genuine mastery of relevant skills; demonstration of an extremely high level of interpretative and analytical ability and intellectual initiative; and achievement of all learning objectives of the course. |
|
D |
Excellent performance indicating a very high level of understanding of the subject matter; development of relevant skills to a very high level; demonstration of a very high level of interpretive and analytical ability and intellectual initiative; and achievement of all learning objectives of the course. |
|
C |
Good performance indicating a high level of understanding of subject matter; development of relevant skills to a high level; demonstration of a high level of interpretive and analytical ability and achievement of most key learning objectives of the course. |
|
P1 |
Satisfactory performance indicating an adequate understanding of most of the basic subject matter; partial development of relevant skills; adequate interpretive and analytical ability and achievement of the majority of key learning objectives of the course. |
|
P2 |
Satisfactory performance indicating partial understanding of basic subject matter; partial development of relevant skills; some evidence of interpretive and analytical ability; achievement of no less than 50% of the learning objectives of the course. |
|
F1 |
Unsatisfactory performance indicating an inadequate understanding of the basic subject matter; failure to develop relevant skills; insufficient evidence of interpretive and analytical ability; and failure to achieve more than 50% of the learning objectives of the course |
|
F2 |
Unsatisfactory performance indicating no understanding of the basic subject matter; failure to develop relevant skills; no evidence of interpretive and analytical ability; and failure to achieve any learning objectives of the course. |
Research proposal submission and approval
Requirements
Candidates are required to submit a research proposal of at least 4,000 words incorporating literature reviews and detailed research plans for the entire research project.
Candidates will receive instruction and guidance for the preparation of the research proposal in Course 7: Research Project Proposal Development.
Draft versions of the research proposal should be submitted throughout Course 7 as per the timetable.
The research proposal and research panel
The research proposal will be developed throughout Course 7. The research proposal should address all aspects of the intended research project, although it is recognised that the components of the research proposal that address papers 2 or 3, or the equivalent chapters of the dissertation, may be modified by candidates throughout the research.
The proposal will be presented to and assessed by a research panel normally comprising two University of South Australia academics.
Examination of thesis/project
The externally examined portion of the program is the portfolio of three papers (or one paper plus a dissertation, or a dissertation) combined with an integrating paper, all of which are the result of the research component of the program.
The examiners shall independently assess the research portfolio and recommend to the University one of the following assessments:
-
The portfolio / dissertation should be passed.
-
The portfolio / dissertation should be passed, subject to specified amendments being made to the satisfaction of the IGSB Doctoral Examination Board.
-
The result should be deferred pending the candidate passing an oral examination.
-
The portfolio / dissertation should be resubmitted for re-examination after major revision.
-
The portfolio / dissertation should be failed.