In non-language courses, and in the absence of a different rubric provided by the course convenor, the following rubric provides a guide on how these standards will be applied to assessments:
Primary Landing Page
Word count limits
Where a limit on the word or character length of your assessment has been prescribed, penalties apply to any assignment that is returned with a count greater than 110% of the limit specified for that assignment, unless the penalty is explicitly waived in the class summary.
The penalty is 2% for every 5% (or part thereof) by which the assignment exceeds 110% of the specified limit. For example: if the word limit is 3,000 words, then 110% = 3,300 words (x 5% = 165 words), so a 3,400-word essay — which exceeds this number by 100 words — will incur a penalty of 2%, while a 3,500-word essay — which exceeds this number by 200 words — will incur a penalty of 4%, etcetera.
The limit includes all main text, headings, tables, text boxes and footnotes with substantive text. It does not include the cover sheet, bibliography, and bibliographic content in footnotes.
Grading scale
According to the ANU Policy: Student Assessment, the standards that apply to High Distinction, Distinction, Credit and Pass in all coursework courses are as follows:
| Grade | Range | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| HD | 80-100% | Work of exceptional quality, which demonstrates comprehensive understanding of the subject matter, mastery of relevant skills, sophisticated or original critical and conceptual analysis, and outstanding quality in clarity, precision and presentation of work. |
| D | 70-79% | Work of superior quality, which demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of the subject matter, proficiency in relevant skills, and analytical and conceptual ability of a high order. |
| C | 60-69% | Work of good quality, which displays a good understanding of the subject matter and a sound grasp of relevant skills. |
| P | 50-59% | Work of satisfactory quality, which displays an adequate understanding of most of the subject matter and a sufficient grasp of relevant skills. |
| N | 0-49% | Work which is incomplete or displays an inadequate understanding of the subject matter or an inadequate grasp of relevant skills. |
Analysis
Directly answers the question with exceptional originality and clarity. Strikes an excellent balance between description and analysis of key issues. Arguments are backed up by high quality evidence. Acknowledges and refutes possible counter-arguments to the case advanced. Displays an exceptional awareness of relevant concepts/issues/debates and is superbly positioned relative to those.
Originality and persuasive skill is a distinguishing characteristic.
Research
Exceptional research effort that draws upon an excellent number and range of sources and provides extensive evidence. Sources selected are of a uniformly high quality. Quantity, academic quality and style of sources is highly appropriate to the assignment task. The research is up-to-date and shows an exceptional awareness of key texts and arguments.
Structure/ Expression
Superbly organised. Follows a clear and logical structure that supports the answer provided with integrity and impact. Written in a precise and accessible style that is always easy for the reader/listener to follow. Excellent sentence structure. Well written with few if any small errors.
Presentation/ Documentation
Strictly adheres to scholarly and presentation requirements, and in the case of spoken expressive gives listeners an outstanding appreciation for the background of the ideas, and a clear analytic perspective. Where appropriate, referencing and bibliographic technique are impeccable, with all sources consistently and fully documented. Formatting and style is excellent. Word limit, or speaking time, is adhered to. The overall impression is of a piece that is refined and polished to be of a very high standard.
Analysis
Directly answers the question. Strikes an excellent balance between description and analysis of key issues. Arguments are backed up by quality evidence. Acknowledges and refutes possible counter-arguments to the case advanced. Displays an exceptional awareness of relevant concepts/issues/debates and is superbly positioned relative to those. Originality is a distinguishing characteristic.
Research
Draws upon a good number and range of sources. Research effort is wide and goes beyond material listed in the course guide. Quantity and academic quality of sources is appropriate to the assignment task.
Structure/ Expression
Superbly organised. Follows a clear and logical structure that supports the answer provided. Written in a precise and accessible style that is always easy for the reader/listener to follow. Excellent sentence structure. Contains few if any grammatical or spelling errors, or other infelicities.
Presentation/ Documentation
Strictly adheres to scholarly and presentation requirements, and in the case of spoken expressive gives listeners an outstanding appreciation for the background of the ideas. Where appropriate, referencing and bibliographic technique are impeccable, with all sources consistently and fully documented. Formatting and style is excellent. Word limit, or speaking time, is adhered to.
Analysis
Directly answers the question. Strikes an excellent balance between description and analysis of key issues. Arguments are backed up by quality evidence. Acknowledges and refutes possible counter-arguments to the case advanced. Displays an exceptional awareness of relevant concepts/issues/debates and is superbly positioned relative to those. Originality is a distinguishing characteristic.
Research
Draws upon a good number and range of sources. Research effort is wide and goes beyond material listed in the course guide. Quantity and academic quality of sources is appropriate to the assignment task.
Structure/ Expression
Well organised. Follows a clear structure that supports the answer provided for the most part. Written in an accessible style that is generally easy for the reader/listener to follow. Tone is appropriate for formal academic work. Grammatical or spelling errors, or other infelicities, are minimal.
Presentation/ Documentation
Largely adheres to scholarly and presentation requirements, and in the case of spoken expression gives listeners a solid appreciation for the background of the ideas. Referencing and bibliographic technique are sound containing few, if any, errors. Formatting and stylistic lapses are minimal. Word limit, or speaking time, is adhered to.
Analysis
Addresses the question. Balance between description and analysis favours the former. Evidence provided to support arguments is modest. Analysis is generally sound relative to key concepts/issues/debates. A line of argument is advanced, but not always in a particularly clear and consistent fashion.
Research
Shows evidence of a fair research effort, though limited attempt to go beyond material listed in the course guide or that is otherwise easily accessible. Quantity and academic quality of sources is modest for the assignment task.
Structure/ Expression
Adequately organised. An attempt is made to devise a clear structure, but this is not followed consistently. Writing or speaking style is fairly easy for the reader to follow. Grammar and spelling are, for written work, fair.
Presentation/ Documentation
Basic adherence to scholarly and presentation requirements. Referencing and bibliographic technique are basically sound. Formatting is sloppy in places, indicating a lack of attention to detail. Word limit or speaking time is adhered to.
Analysis
Little attempt to address the question or deal with key issues. Overly descriptive and no relevant analysis is provided. Inadequate awareness or understanding of key concepts/issues/debates. Little attempt to advance any line of argument. Evidence provided to support any arguments advanced is poor to nonexistent.
Research
Some evidence of research effort and basic understanding of materials and debates. Limited attempt is made to go beyond material listed in the course guide. Relies too heavily upon media sources and/or non-refereed sources, such as Wikipedia. Quantity and academic quality of sources is insufficient for the assignment task.
Structure/ Expression
Very poor organisation. No structure to support the answer provided. Writing or speaking style is extremely weak and difficult to follow or tone is highly inappropriate for formal academic work. Grammatical and/or spelling errors are evident throughout.
Presentation/ Documentation
Patchy adherence to scholarly and presentation requirements. Referencing and bibliographic technique are inadequate. Formatting is sloppy, indicating a significant lack of attention to detail. Fails to meet or exceeds word limit, and for speaking assignments is either somewhat too long or too short.
Analysis
Little attempt to address the question or deal with key issues. Overly descriptive and no relevant analysis is provided. Inadequate awareness or understanding of key concepts/issues/debates. Little attempt to advance any line of argument. Evidence provided to support any arguments advanced is poor to nonexistent.
Research
Limited evidence of any research effort, and limited or sometimes confused understanding of materials and debates. Very basic bibliography with no evidence that material listed in the course guide has been consulted. Relies upon media sources and less than optimal internet sources, such as Wikipedia. Quantity and academic quality of sources is unacceptable for the assignment task.
Structure/ Expression
Very poor organisation. No structure to support the answer provided. Writing or speaking style is extremely weak and difficult to follow or tone is highly inappropriate for formal academic work. Grammatical and/or spelling errors are evident throughout.
Presentation/ Documentation
Fails to adhere to scholarly and presentation requirements. Referencing and bibliographic technique are either unacceptable or absent altogether. Formatting is sloppy, suggesting a complete absence of attention to detail. Substantially fails to meet or grossly exceeds word limit, or time limit for spoken assessment.