Child pages
  • UG Marking Guidelines - Programming Assignments

Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Guidelines 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).