UG marking guidelines for programming assignments

Criteria for marking programming assignments

Class	Mark	Marking guidelines
First		1) Excellent piece of work that could be used as is by a research lab 2) Substantial evidence of originality and flair 3) Excellent appreciation of how to structure experimental and analysis programs 4) Simple, clear and effective documentation
Excellent First	100	Assignment reaches an exceptional level of achievement that significantly exceeds the standards described by the above statements
Good First	90	Assignment exceeds the standards described by the above statements
Solid First	80	Assignment is well described by the above statements
Low First	75	Assignment mostly meets the standards described by the above statements
Upper second		1) Comprehensive, well-organised and well-implemented piece of work 2) Evidence of originality and flair in places 3) Strong appreciation of how to structure experimental and analysis programs 4) Largely simple, clear and effective documentation with a few minor weaknesses
Good 2.1	68	Assignment exceeds the standards described by the above statements but does not meet the standards for a distinction
Solid 2.1	65	Assignment is well described by the above statements
Low 2.1	62	Assignment mostly meets the standards described by the above statements
Lower Second		1) Basic organisation and implementation with some shortcomings 2) Lacks originality and flair 3) Adequate appreciation of how to structure experimental and analysis programs 4) Documentation is limited and/or contains errors
Good 2.2	58	Assignment exceeds the standards described by the above statements but does not meet the standards for a merit
Solid 2.2	55	Assignment is well described by the above statements
Low 2.2	52	Assignment mostly meets the standards described by the above statements
Third		1) Poor organisation and implementation with many shortcomings 2) Appreciation of how to structure experimental and analysis programs fails to meet acceptable standard 3) Documentation is incomplete and contains many errors
Good Third	48	Assignment exceeds the standards described by the above statements but does not meet the standards for a pass
Solid Third	45	Assignment is well described by the above statements
Low Third	42	Assignment falls below the standards described by the above statements
Fail		1) Very deficient organisation and implementation with many substantial shortcomings 2) Serious and substantial errors in documentation
High Marginal Fail	38	Assignment exceeds the standards described by the above statements but does not meet the standards for a marginal fail
Low Marginal Fail	32	Assignment is well described by the above statements
Outright Fail	10	Assignment falls below the standards described by the above statements
Zero Marks	0	1) No code or documentation

Grade assignment decision rules

Note. If an assignment meets some of the descriptive criteria for a degree class (e.g. 2:1), and some of the descriptive criteria for another degree class (e.g. 2:2), it is at the discretion of the marker where to assign the grade (i.e. somewhere in the 2:1 or 2:2 range).