Detailed Marking Guide (NB: the notes listed are not prescriptive and are a guide only)
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 9 – 10 | 6 – 8 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Abstract | • The abstract clearly and succinctly summarises the essay, providing an excellent overview • Includes a clear introduction, summary of the main points/discussion, and a short conclusion • Is within the word limit (250 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar is correct throughout |
• The abstract provides a good overview of the essay • Includes an introduction, summary of the main points/discussion, and a short conclusion • Is within the word limit (250 words + 10% leeway) • Minor errors with spelling and grammar |
• The abstract is on the same topic, but does not summarise the essay well • Contains an introduction, summary of the main points/discussion, and a short conclusion, but these are unclear and/or some sections are missing • Slightly exceeds the word limit (250 words + 10% leeway) • Regular spelling and grammar errors |
• The abstract is poorly written/constructed, or is unrelated to the essay content and topic • The abstract lacks structure and does not have a clear introduction, summary of the main points/discussion, or short conclusion • Exceeds the word limit (250 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar is consistently poor throughout |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 10 – 12 | 6 – 9 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Criterion: Overall content |
• The topic is clearly & well introduced • The progression of ideas is clear and logical throughout • The text is informative and would be readily understood by an educated audience • All content is correct, relevant, and current • An excellent and thorough understanding of the pathophysiology and related pharmacology of the disorder is demonstrated |
• The introduction is clear • The progression of ideas is mostly logical • The essay covers most of the aspects required • The content overall is correct, relevant, and current, with just a few exceptions • A good understanding of the pathophysiology and related pharmacology of the disorder is apparent |
• The topic is poorly introduced • The progression of ideas is generally good, but is disjointed and/or confusing in places • The essay covers most aspects required but is missing important sections • The content is mostly relevant, but contains some errors and/or some is out-dated • A reasonable understanding of the disorder and related pharmacology is demonstrated |
• There is no clear introduction • The progression of ideas is haphazard and confusing throughout • The essay poorly covers the topic • The content is not relevant, incorrect, and/or is out-dated • A poor understanding of the disorder and related pharmacology is shown |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 9 – 10 | 6 – 8 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Criterion: Normal physiology |
• A clear and concise overview of the normal physiology is provided • The normal physiology described is clearly and directly relevant to the disorder/disease being presented |
• An overview of the normal physiology is provided • The normal physiology described is relevant to the disorder/disease being presented |
• The normal physiology is provided, but is overly short or excessively long • The normal physiology described is only broadly or indirectly related to the disorder/disease being presented |
• A description of the normal physiology is not provided, • Any normal physiology presented is not relevant to the disorder/disease being presented |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 16 – 20 | 11 – 15 | 6 – 10 | 0 – 5 |
| Criterion: Pathophys. |
• The pathophysiology of the disease/disorder presented is comprehensive and is directly relevant to the specific topic • The underlying mechanisms responsible for the disease/disorder are clearly presented |
• The pathophysiology of the disease/disorder is described and is relevant to the topic • Underlying mechanisms responsible for the disease/disorder are briefly presented |
• The pathophysiology of the disease/disorder is briefly outlined but is lacking detail and depth • Any underlying mechanisms are only briefly mentioned and/or lack detail |
• The pathophysiology of the disease/disorder presented is not related to the topic, and/or • The pathophysiology is poorly described or is incorrect • Underlying mechanisms responsible for the disease/disorder are not correct or are not presented |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 13 – 16 | 9 – 12 | 5 – 8 | 0 – 4 |
| Criterion: Pharmacol. |
• The related pharmacology used to treat the disease/disorder is as specified in the topic and is comprehensively outlined • At least one specific drug example is presented, and the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties are all well and thoroughly discussed • All other aspects of the pharmacology of at least one drug example are clearly and thoroughly noted (class, naming, indications, contraindications, precautions and side-effects) |
• The related pharmacology used to treat the disease/disorder is as specified in the topic and is generally well presented • At least one specific drug example is presented, and the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties are generally well discussed • Most other aspects of the pharmacology of the example are noted (class, naming, indications, contraindications, precautions and side-effects) |
• The related pharmacology used to treat the disease/disorder is presented, but is limited in detail • An example drug is provided, but the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties only have limited detail • Only a few of the other pharmacological aspects of the example are mentioned (class, naming, indications, contraindications, precautions and side-effects) |
• The pharmacology used to treat the disease/disorder is poorly covered • There is no drug example provided • The pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetic, and other pharmacological properties are poorly covered (if at all) |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 10 – 12 | 6 – 9 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Criterion: Relevance to practice |
• Clearly and thoughtfully considers and describes the relevance of the topic/disorder in a discrete practical setting • Clearly and thoroughly considers the relevance of the related pharmacology in this setting |
• Considers and describes some aspects of the topic/disorder in a practical setting • Outlines some details of the relevance of the related pharmacology in this setting |
• Only briefly considers the relevance of the topic/disorder in a practical setting and/or considers this too broadly • The related pharmacology in this setting are only briefly mentioned |
• Does not consider or describe the relevance of the topic/disorder in a practical setting • Does not consider the related pharmacology in this setting |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 9 – 10 | 6 – 8 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Criterion: Literacy and Format |
• The essay is well structed and clear. • Text is clear and well written throughout. • Subheadings (if used) are clear, not excessive, and aid in delineating discrete sections of the essay • The essay is within the word-limit (1500 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar are correct throughout • Figures and images (if used) are relevant and well used to support the text. Where used, figures and images are referred to in the text. |
• The essay is well structured, clear and mostly well written • Subheadings (if used) are clear, not excessive, and help to separate sections of the essay • The essay is within the word limit (1500 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar are correct throughout, with only a few exceptions • Figures and images (if used) are appropriate and support the text, but these may not be referred to in the text. |
• The essay is mostly clear but is lacking structure • Subheadings (if used) are either unclear or are used excessively. • The essay is in excess of the word-limit (1500 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar are poor throughout • Figures and images (if used) are unclear, or are of questionable relevance. Figures/images are mostly not referred to within the text. |
• The essay is unclear and is poorly written. Structure is poor and the text is difficult to follow. • Subheadings (if used) are unclear and/or are used excessively. These do not help to identify specific sections of the essay • The essay is significantly in excess of the word-limit (1500 words + 10% leeway) • Spelling and grammar are poor throughout with multiple consistent errors • Figures and images (if used) are unclear, irrelevant, and do not support the text. Figures/images are not referred to within the text. |
| Category: Excellent | Category: Good | Category: Fair | Category: Poor | |
| MARKS | 9 – 10 | 6 – 8 | 3 – 5 | 0 – 2 |
| Referencing (intext and reference list) |
• All references are appropriate and relevant to the presented material • Most references used are recent and current (from within the past 5 years) • A good number of references are provided (minimum 5) • All references are consistently in the correct style and format (APA or Harvard AGPS). Reference formatting is consistently correct throughout |
• Most of the references are appropriate and relevant • At least half of the references used are recent and current (from within the past 5 years) • A good number of references are provided (minimum 3) • All references are in the correct format (APA or Harvard AGPS). Reference formatting is mostly correct throughout |
• Some of the references are appropriate and relevant to the presented material • The majority of references used are old/dated • A small number of references are provided (minimum 2) • All references are in the correct format (APA or Harvard AGPS). Reference formatting contains frequent errors |
• Appropriate references are not provided or the articles are not related to the topic • Few or no references are provided (maximum 1) • References are not in the correct format (APA or Harvard AGPS) and is very poorly formatted |
Tags: assignmentexpert, assignmenthelp, assignmenthelpaustralia, assignmenthelper, assignmenthelpuk, assignmenthelpusa, assignmentwriting, bestpriceguaranteed, bestqualityguaranteed, london🇬🇧, myassignmenthelp, plagiarismfreework