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 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 should have 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 5: Research Project Proposal Development.
Draft versions of the research proposal should be submitted throughout Course 5 as per the timetable.
The research proposal and research panel
The research proposal will be developed throughout Course 5. 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 the final chapters of the thesis 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 the thesis
The externally examined portion of the program is the thesis (dissertation).
The examiners shall independently assess the thesis and recommend to the Research Degrees Committee one of the following assessments.
| 1. | Pass forthwith |
| 2. | Pass following minor corrections, certified by the Divisional Research Management Committee |
| 3a. | Pass, following major corrections. I do not need to see the thesis again and I delegate to the University's Research Degree Committee or nominee the responsibility of being satisfied that the corrections have been made, OR |
| 3b. | Pass, following major corrections. I would like to see the thesis again in order to be satisfied that the corrections have been made. |
| 4. | Revise and resubmit after a period of further study for re-examination (by the same examiners where possible). |
| 5. | I consider the thesis is not of PhD standard, but is worthy of the awarding of a Masters by Research degree following any corrections indicated in my report. I delegate to the Research Degree Committee or nominee the responsibility of being satisfied that the corrections have been made. |
| 6. | Fail without prospect of redemption. |
Examination criteria
Examiners shall examine the thesis principally in terms of the following criteria.
-
the candidate's capacity to demonstrate critical analysis and original thought in all aspects of the study
-
the candidate's ability to demonstrate a comprehensive and detailed knowledge of the literature and theoretical understandings relevant to the field of study
-
the candidate's capacity to apply appropriate research methodologies
-
the extent to which the thesis makes a significant original contribution to knowledge and/or the application of knowledge within the field of study
- the quality of the presentation of the thesis, including:
- the clarity of expression
- the accuracy and appropriateness of presentation of results
- the quality and relevance of illustrative material (such as graphs, tables, illustrations)
- the relevance and accuracy of citations, references
- the development of a coherent argument where relevant to the field of study
-
the quality of artefacts, if any, including:
- the conceptual understanding of the relevant field
- the ideas and/or imagination demonstrated
- the technical competence
- the resolution of the artefacts
- the complexity and difficulty demonstrated
-
the worthiness of the thesis for publication in any appropriate form
Examination is conducted by two independent academics external to the University.