MSc Neuroscience header image

MSc Neuroscience

at The Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London

 

Generic Marking Guidelines

These are the marking guidelines covering Distinction, Merit, Pass and Fail grades for assessed work .

DISTINCTION ≥ 70%
An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Advanced, in-depth, authoritative, full understanding of key issues with evidence of originality Complex work and key issues analysed Wide range of sources used selectively to support argument/discussion.

Strong evidence of critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments
Coherent and compelling work logically presented A++ (90-100) Insightful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project publishable quality, outstanding research potential, originality and/or independent thought, ability to make informed judgments. Highest standards of presentation.
A+ (80-90) Insightful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project publishable quality, outstanding research potential, originality and/or independent thought, ability to make informed judgments. High standards of presentation.
A (70-79) Thoughtful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project good research potential, evidence of independent thought, ability to make informed judgements. High standards of presentation.
MERIT 60 - 69%
A coherent answer that demonstrates critical evaluation
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
In-depth understanding of key issues with evidence of some originality Key issues analysed. Relevant sources used effectively to support argument/discussion.

Clear evidence of critical approach to key issues and some ability to evaluate arguments.
Coherent work logically presented B+ (65-69) Thoughtful work displaying good knowledge and accuracy. For research dissertation/project some evidence of research potential, clear thinking and/or ability to make informed judgements. Good standards of presentation.
B (60-64)Well developed relevant argument, good degree of accuracy and technical competence
PASS 50 - 59%
A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Understanding of some key issues with evidence of ability to reflect critically. Some key issues addressed. Relevant sources used to support argument/discussion.

Some evidence of critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments.
Competent work in places but lacks fluency/coherence C+ (55-59) Work displays knowledge and understanding in most areas but the standard of work is variable. For research dissertation/project evidence of clear thinking in places but lacks insight. Satisfactory standards of presentation.
C (50-54) Work displays knowledge and understanding in some areas but some key issues are not addressed. For research dissertation/project some evidence of clear thinking but lacks insight and fluency. Satisfactory standards of presentation.
FAIL 40 - 49%
A superficial answer with limited knowledge of core material and limited critical ability. Note that a mark in this range may be condonable.
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Superficial understanding of some key issues, lack of focus Key issues not always understood or addressed, gaps in the use of relevant sources used to support work.

Limited evidence of a critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments
Weaknesses in stricture, fluency and/or coherence F+ (40-49) Work displays patchy knowledge and understandingand some key issues are not addressed. For the research dissertation/project: limited evidence of clear thinking, insight and/or fluency. Presentational weaknesses.
FAIL 0 - 39%
An answer almost entirely lacking in evidence of knowledge and understanding
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Lack of understanding of, or focus on key issues Key issues misunderstood or not addressed. Limited or no use of relevant sources to support work

No evidence of a critical approach to key issues or ability to evaluate arguments
Work is confused and incoherent F (33-39) Incomplete answers with only peripheral knowledge relevant to the questions. Displays poor, disorganized presentation.
FF (20-32) Some attempt to write something relevant but with many flaws, nothing of substance
FFF (0-19) Serious errors, largely irrelevant material or unacceptably brief