|
Exceptionally comprehensive knowledge base. Ability to discriminate and justify key issues and relate them to the wider context. Lines of thought are innovative and transparent, and the arguments are confidently expressed to develop and synthesise compelling and novel conclusions.
Conclusions drawn make a new contribution to the knowledge base of the discipline and there is clear evidence of originality in the work innovative thinker.
|
Excellent, comprehensive knowledge base. Ability to discriminate and justify key issues and relate them to the wider context. Lines of thought are transparent, and the arguments are confidently expressed to develop and synthesise compelling conclusions.
|
Substantial knowledge base. Ability to discriminate key issues and establish some links to the wider context. Arguments are confidently expressed through clear, logical lines of thought. Conclusions are firmly articulated, comprehensive, relevant and arise directly from the premised arguments.
|
Sound knowledge base. Ability to discriminate key issues. Arguments are confidently expressed through clear, logical lines of thought. Conclusions are firmly articulated, relevant and arise directly from the premised arguments.
|
Some defended knowledge of current, relevant issues. Limited development of arguments where lines of thought are discernible. Limited conclusions arising from premises.
|
Some evidence of relevant knowledge base but little argument and lines of thought are poorly expressed and often demonstrate confused thinking. Conclusions drawn but often not related to discussion.
|
Student has failed to meet the majority of the LOs of the assessment.
|
|
Exceptional critical analysis of the interface between theory and practice, which evaluates and challenges theoretical adequacy and synthesises the development of professional practice. Exceptional evidence of self- understanding which leads to creative and novel use of multiple frameworks for evaluation and synthesis and challenges current practice inthe professional context.
|
Rigorous critical analysis of the interface between theory and practice, clearly elaborated to evaluate theoretical adequacy and synthesise the development of professional practice.
Excellent, creative use of multiple frameworks for evaluation and synthesis of own stance. Critically evaluate theories and practices in risk management
|
Excellent critical analysis/evaluation of the relationship between theory and practice.
Substantial use of multiple theoretical frameworks to evaluate professional practice with wide ranging synthesis to show how each is informing the other.
Clear, critical evaluation of their usefulness.
|
Good, critical analysis/evaluation of the relationship between theory and practice. Some use of multiple theoretical frameworks to evaluate professional practice. Demonstrable synthesis to show how each is informing the other.
Some evaluation of their usefulness.
|
Some articulation of the relationship between and critical analysis/evaluation of the significance of relevant theory to specific professional practice with some awareness of how each may be informed by the other.
|
Some use of relevant theory but lack of awareness of relationship to practice. Little integration of the articulation between theory and practice.
|
Student has failed to meet the majority of the LOs of the assessment.
|
