Feedback

1. PSP3 66-605499
Task 1: Literature Review
Student Name: Dorobantu, Adina
Categorical Mark: Low 1st
Strengths:
 The report is very clearly written with a clear introduction and a summative conclusion.
 A wide range of literature is covered, all of which is predominantly primary research articles and the data is summarized
cohesively.
 Scientific detail is of a very good standard throughout
 Academic writing style and presentation are of a high quality
 Evidence of critical analysis throughout, literature is compared and contrasted well.

Suggestions for Improvement:
 You need to be a bit more critical of the information that you present and there is room to have more of an input on your opinions
of the studies claims- are they valid and backed up by the data or are there different view points from other studies that need to be
taken into consideration? What else needs to be determined before these claims are fully valid? Which studies do you think are
more robust than others and why?
 I may have been tempted to focus solely on either pathogenic mechanisms or therapeutic strategies rather than both allowing you
to go into more detail when summarising and contrasting the available data/ literature sources
 References in the bibliography slightly vary in their presentation with regards to volume and issue number

2. 



Student comments for Feed-forward (how will you use this feedback to improve your future work?):
Assessor: SF
Date: 02/10/23

3. Criteria FAIL Borderline FAIL THIRD Lower 2nd Upper 2nd First Exceptional First
Research
sources
and
reading
Little or no evidence of
use of research sources
limited evidence of use of
research sources, heavy
reliance on non-academic
sources, with little
acknowledgement of the
academic contribution to
the topic
Poor selection of research
resources, may be reliant
on secondary sources such
as text books or web sites
Some academic sources used
but essay also cites a range of
non-academic sources, some
of which may be poor sources
of evidence for academic
review writing
A good attempt to engage
with a range of relevant
academic literature, much of
which is up to date. judicious
use of web sites or other non-
academic sources
engage with a breadth
of relevant academic
literature, good
attempt to engage with
primary sources,
judicious use of non-
academic sources is
justified
wide range of relevant
academic literature
sources used including a
serious attempt to engage
with primary literature
sources, at the forefront
of the field
Scientific
content Little or no scientific
content
Content lacks scientific
focus, Partial answer, with
major omissions. Choice of
content may be limited, or
there may be major errors
Superficial or inconsistent
grasp of material. Evidence
of some understanding of
subject area. Content may
lack scientific focus
Essay displays understanding
of the main concepts
underpinning the issue,
attempts to identify and
describe complexities,
Relevant scientific content
has been included.
Good understanding of the
area gleaned. Range of
relevant content included,
with strong scientific focus,
explains complexities in topic
An excellent choice of
scientific content,
pertinent examples,
chosen, displaying
excellent
understanding of the
concepts, clearly
addresses a range of
complexities.
An excellent -outstanding
answer displaying
excellent understanding
of the concepts, clearly
identifies and objectively
addresses a range of
complexities in the
chosen topic
Argument
and
Analysis
(Very
important)
No analysis Little or no analysis
Descriptive account of topic,
little analysis, may attempt
to develop argument or
express judgments made
but may lack support
Attempts to develop an
academic argument although
with a largely descriptive
focus. Some judgments made,
limited evidence of critical
analysis.
Strands of academic
arguments are made,
judgments well supported by
sound analysis
Evidence of some
independent thinking and
critical analysis.
Good standard of
intelligent, critical
thought and argument.
Clear evidence of
informed, independent
thinking.
Creative analysis of
situation
Outstanding critical
analysis and effective
integration of own ideas
and independent thought.
Essay
Structure Very poor organization,
essay lacks structure or
focus.
Essay may lack focus and
clarity throughout. May
lack effective use of
subsections and structure
Weak structure and
organization, lacks
coherence and clarity in
many areas, May lack
effective use of subsections
and structure
Satisfactory level of
coherence. although in places
ideas may be poorly
organized within paragraphs
or paragraphs poorly grafted
Good structure and planning.
Clear and coherent. Good
introduction and conclusion.
Good use of subsections and
paragraphing
Excellent structure.
Clear and coherent.
Good introduction and
conclusion. Flows well.
Good use of sections
paragraphing to
enhance clarity of
argument
Outstanding structure
and organisation Strong
introduction and
conclusion. Excellent and
effective use of sections
and paragraphing to
clarify argument
Academic
writing style
Very poor style,
leading to substantial
problems in
expression of ideas
and description of
subject material
English may be confused
and inappropriate
Style of written English,
lacks academic rigour or
adherence to scientific
convention
Attempts engagement with an
academic style of written
scientific English and
adoption of scientific
conventions
Demonstrates good
engagement with
academic style of written
English and adherence to
scientific conventions.
Demonstrates excellent
engagement with academic
style of scientific English
and consistent adherence
to scientific conventions.
Accomplished
professional use of
academic English
Presentation
and
Grammar
Major errors and
inaccuracies
Poor presentation,
grammar and spelling.
Various errors and
inaccuracies
Presentation, grammar and
spelling need closer
attention. Frequent errors.
Satisfactory presentation.
standard may be inconsistent
or contain a range of
typographical and grammatical
errors in text
Good standard of
presentation Grammar
satisfactory. May be some
minor errors.
Excellent standard of
presentation, with few
typographical or
grammatical errors
Produced to a professional
standard with no errors
Outstanding grammar
Citation and
Referencing
format
Little or no
engagement with the
academic convention
of citing sources and
Few or no citations in text,
citation style is poor, few
references listed,
formatting style of
There may be a lack of
citation or referencing, lack
of adherence to required
format or inconsistent
formatting
Citation and referencing may
lack adherence to required
format. More citation needed
to support arguments
Good citation, referencing
and citation adhere to
required format. Good
attention to detail
References cited frequently
and appropriately in text,
referencing and citation
consistently adhere to
required format
Sophisticated citation.
Referencing and citation
adhere to required
format in all areas

4. providing a list of
reference sources
references does not adhere
to required format
Level 6 - Generic grade descriptor: relationship of degree classification to Grade Point and equivalent percentage
Class Category Grade
Mark
range
% General Characteristics
1st
Exceptional 1st 16
93 -
100
96
Exceptional breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding of the area of study, significantly beyond what has been taught in all areas; evidence of
extensive and appropriate selection and critical evaluation/synthesis/analysis and of reading/research beyond the prescribed range, in both breadth and
depth, to advance work/direct arguments; excellent communication; performance deemed to be beyond expectation. Work at publishable or commercial
standard. The ability to make decisions and systematically carry out tasks/processes with autonomy in unpredictable situations; exercise of initiative in the
completion of practical tasks; exceptional leadership skills and evidence of personal responsibility in group contexts; creative flair; extremely well-developed
problem-solving skills; the ability to carry out sustained critical reflection on practical work within the wider context of industry/workplace. Exceeds
expectations set by the industry/employment context.
1st
High 1st 15 85 - 92 89
Excellent knowledge and understanding of the area of study as the student is typically able to go beyond what has been taught (particularly for a mid/high
1st); evidence of extensive and appropriate selection and critical evaluation/synthesis/analysis of reading/research beyond the prescribed range, to advance
work/direct arguments; excellent communication; performance deemed beyond expectation of the level. The ability to make decisions and carry out
tasks/processes with a high level of autonomy; creative flair and the ability to (re)interpret predefined rules/conventions to select and justify individual
working practice; excellent problem-solving skills; accuracy and fluency; excellent command of skills appropriate to the task; the ability to reflect critically on
practical work within the wider context of industry/workplace. Meets expectations set by the industry/employment context.
Mid 1st 14 78 - 84 81
Low 1st 13 70 - 77 74
2.1
High 2.1 12 67 - 69 68
Very good knowledge and understanding of the area of study as the student is typically able to relate facts/concepts together with some ability to apply to
known/taught contexts; evidence of appropriate selection and critical evaluation of reading/research, some beyond the prescribed range, may rely on set
sources to advance work/direct arguments; demonstrates autonomy in approach to learning; strong communication skills. Broadly autonomous completion
of practical tasks/processes; ability to adapt in response to change or unexpected experiences; technical/artistic decision making is very highly developed; a
clear command of the skills relevant to the task/process; ability to reflect on practical work and set future goals within the wider context of
industry/workplace. Adherence to standards set by the industry/employment context.
Mid 2.1 11 64 -66 65
Low 2.1 10 60 - 63 62
2.2
High 2.2 9 57 - 59 58
Good knowledge and understanding of the area of study balanced towards the descriptive rather than critical or analytical; evidence of appropriate
selection and evaluation of reading/research, some may be beyond the prescribed range, but generally reliant on set sources to advance work/direct
arguments; communication shows clarity, but structure may not always be coherent. A confident approach to practical tasks; a solid grasp of the related
processes, tools, technology; creativity in the completion of the task; proficiency is demonstrated by an accurate and well-coordinated performance; tasks
are completed with a good level of independent thought and autonomy; an ability to reflect on practical work and set future goals. General adherence to
standards set by the industry/employment context.
Mid 2.2 8 54 - 56 55
Low 2.2 7 50 - 53 52
3rd
High 3rd 6 47 - 49 48
Knowledge and understanding sufficient to deal with terminology, basic facts and concepts but fails to make meaningful synthesis; some ability to select and
evaluate reading/research however work may be more generally descriptive; general reliance on set sources to advance work; arguments may be weak or
poorly constructed; communication/presentation is generally competent but with some weaknesses. Competence in technical/artistic skills; tasks/processes
are completed with a degree of proficiency and confidence; tasks are completed with a sufficient level of independent thought; effective judgements have
been made; evaluation and analysis of performance in practical tasks is evident. Errors in workflow or completion of the task; general adherence to appropriate
rules/conventions set by the industry/employment context.
Mid 3rd 5 44 - 46 45
Low 3rd 4 40 - 43 40
Fail
Borderline Fail 3 30 - 39 35
Insufficient knowledge and understanding of the subject and its underlying concepts; some ability to evaluate given reading/research however work is
more generally descriptive; naively follows or may ignore set material in development of work; given brief may be only tangentially addressed or may
ignore key aspects of the brief; communication shows limited clarity, poor presentation, structure may not be coherent. Practical tasks are attempted; skill
displayed in some areas; there are a significant number of errors; a lack of proficiency in most areas; guidance may be needed to reproduce aspects of the
task and/or apply learned skills. Tasks may be incomplete; failure to adhere to some of the rules/conventions set by the industry/employment context.
Mid Fail 2 20 - 29 25

5. Low Fail 1 6-19 10
No evidence of knowledge or understanding of the subject; no understanding of taught concepts, with facts being reproduced in a disjointed or
decontextualised manner; ignores set material in development of work; fails to address the requirements of the brief; lacks basic communication skills. A
general level of incompetency in practical tasks; an evident lack of practice; set tasks are not completed; few or no skills relating to tasks are evident. No
adherence to rules/conventions set by the industry/employment context.
Zero Zero 0 0-5 0 Work not submitted, work of no merit, penalty in some misconduct cases.