The document provides an assessment criteria grid for evaluating student portfolios. It outlines nine criteria grouped into three categories: appearance and style of portfolio, presentation, and reflective practice. For each criterion, descriptive standards are provided for scores ranging from over 70% to fail. The criteria examine aspects like portfolio organization, writing style, referencing, identification of challenges, critical reasoning, conclusions, and critical reflection. The document concludes by equating the score ranges to degree classifications, such as over 70% equivalent to a first class degree.

1. Understanding the Assessment
Criteria Grid
by Victoria Ellis

2. Assessment Criteria Grid
CRITERION +70% 69%-60% 59%-50% 49%-40% 39%-0% (Refer/Fail)
Appearance & Style of Portfolio (LO1, LO2, LO3)
1 Appearance of Portfolio Polished and professionally
presented. Work has been submitted
within prescribed parameters.
Carefully and logically
organised. Work has been submitted
within prescribed parameters.
Shows organisation and
coherence. Work has been
submitted within prescribed
parameters.
Shows some attempt to organise
in a logical manner. Deviates
slightly from the required
parameters.
Disorganised/
Incoherent. Deviates
significantly from the
required parameters.
2 Clarity of expression (incl.
accuracy, spelling,
grammar, punctuation,
terminology)
Fluent writing style appropriate to
document. Grammar and spelling
accurate. Uses appropriate academic
and industry specific terminology.
Language fluent. Grammar and
spelling accurate. Uses appropriate
academic and industry specific
terminology.
Language mainly fluent. Grammar
and spelling mainly accurate. Uses
appropriate academic and
industry specific terminology.
Meaning apparent, but language
not always fluent. Grammar
and/or spelling contain errors.
Uses some appropriate academic
and industry specific terminology.
Meaning unclear and/or
grammar and/or spelling
contain frequent errors. Uses
unsuitable/misuses academic
and industry specific
terminology.
3 Referencing Referencing is consistently accurate. Referencing is generally accurate
some mistakes and/or
inconsistencies.
Referencing is inconsistent. Some attempt at referencing. Referencing is absent/
unsystematic.
Presentation (LO1, LO2)
4 Identify and explain
current challenges facing
the branch
Challenges are appropriate and
succinctly defined. Challenges
addressed comprehensively and
imaginatively. Takes account of
complex contexts.
Challenges are appropriate, clearly
defined and are addressed
coherently. Many attempts to
demonstrate imagination. Takes
account of context.
Broad challenges proposed and
addressed coherently. Some
attempts to demonstrate
imagination. Recognises
generalised context.
Has provided generalised
challenges and focused the work
on the topic area. Context
acknowledged but not really
taken into account.
No information provided.
Context not recognised as
relevant.
5 Critical reasoning Critically reviews evidence supporting
conclusions/
recommendations including its
reliability, validity and significance.
Justified own ideas based on a wide
range of sources.
Identifies a range of evidence and
can evaluate its reliability, relevance
and significance. Justified own ideas
based on a reasonable range of
sources.
Identifies a limited range of
evidence. Some attempts to
evaluate its reliability, relevance
and significance. Clear evidence
of readings relevant to the
subject.
Limited and only partially
accurate evaluation of evidence.
Literature is presented
uncritically.
Fails to evaluate or
acknowledge reliability,
relevance and significance of
evidence and/or evaluations
are totally invalid. No
evidence of literature being
consulted.
6 Conclusions Analytical and clear conclusions well-
grounded in academic and industry
literature showing development of
new concepts for practice.
Conclusions demonstrated in a
summary of arguments based in
academic and industry literature
showing development of new
concepts for practice.
Evidence of findings and
conclusions grounded in academic
and industry literature. Some
development of new concepts for
practice.
Limited evidence of findings and
conclusions supported by
academic and industry literature.
Limited development of new
concepts for practice.
Unsubstantiated/invalid
conclusions based on
anecdote and generalisation
only, or no conclusions at all.
Reflective Practice (LO1, LO2, LO3)
7 Critical Reflection Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
Description of existing and
projected situation.
Reflection based on
anecdote.
8 Informing Practice Practice informed by a
comprehensive range of academic
and industry literature.
Practice informed by a reasonable
range of academic and industry
literature.
Practice informed by a narrow
range of academic and industry
literature.
Practice informed by an limited
range of academic and industry
literature.
No academic and industry
literature referred to.
9 Action Planning Informed and thorough
demonstration of learning.
Informed and frequent
demonstration of learning.
Some informed attempts to
demonstrate learning.
Partially informed and limited
attempts to demonstrate
learning.
No attempt to demonstrate
learning.

3. Assessment Grade Boundaries
If a full degree was being undertaken, it would equate to;
• 70 and above is considered a 1st class degree
• 60-69 is considered a 2:1 Degree
• 50-59 is considered a 2:2 Degree
• 40-49 is considered a 3rd class Degree
Therefore the assessment criteria follows these grade
boundaries.

4. • Adhered to all layout requirements stated in the study guide
• All aspects of the portfolio are present
• Falls within the word count parameters
• The final assignment could be considered a professional document
Appearance of Portfolio
Polished and professionally
presented. Work has been
submitted within prescribed
parameters.
+70

5. Appearance of Portfolio
Carefully and logically
organised. Work has been
submitted within prescribed
parameters.
69-60
• Adhered to all layout requirements stated in the study guide
• All aspects of the portfolio are present
• Falls within the word count parameters
• Neatly presented

6. Appearance of Portfolio
Shows organisation and
coherence. Work has been
submitted within prescribed
parameters.
59-50
• Adhered to most layout requirements stated in the study guide
• All aspects of the portfolio are present
• Falls within the word count parameters
• Work is organised but layout is inconsistent

7. Appearance of Portfolio
Shows some attempt to
organise in a logical manner.
Deviates slightly from the
required parameters.
49-40
• Adhered to most layout requirements stated in the study guide
• All aspects of the portfolio are present
• Falls outside of word count parameters
• Work organisation is approximate

8. Appearance of Portfolio
Disorganised/
Incoherent. Deviates
significantly from the required
parameters.
Fail
39-0
• Adhered to few layout requirements stated in the study guide
• Aspects of the portfolio are missing
• Falls outside of word count parameters
• Work is disorganised and hard to follow

9. Clarity of Expression
Fluent writing style
appropriate to document.
Grammar and spelling
accurate. Uses appropriate
academic and industry
specific terminology.
+70
• Well organised and easy to follow structure
• Correct narrative throughout (e.g. 1st person, 3rd person)
• Grammar and spelling correct throughout
• Appropriate academic terminology for the subject
• Appropriate industry terminology for the context

10. Clarity of Expression
Language fluent. Grammar
and spelling accurate. Uses
appropriate academic and
industry specific terminology.
69-60
• Well organised structure
• Correct narrative throughout (e.g. 1st person, 3rd person)
• Grammar and spelling correct although with the occasional mistake
• Appropriate academic terminology for the subject
• Appropriate industry terminology for the context

11. Clarity of Expression
Language mainly fluent.
Grammar and spelling mainly
accurate. Uses appropriate
academic and industry
specific terminology.
59-50
• Structure is mostly organised
• Mainly uses the correct narrative but with occasional confusions
• Grammar and spelling correct although with the occasional mistake
• Appropriate academic terminology for the subject
• Appropriate industry terminology for the context

12. Clarity of Expression
Meaning apparent, but
language not always fluent.
Grammar and/or spelling
contain errors. Uses some
appropriate academic and
industry specific terminology.
49-40
• Structure is mainly disorganised but has some elements of coherence
• Consistently confuses narrative
• Grammar and spelling have consistent mistakes
• Some appropriate academic terminology for the subject
• Some appropriate industry terminology for the context

13. Clarity of Expression
Meaning unclear and/or
grammar and/or spelling
contain frequent errors. Uses
unsuitable/misuses academic
and industry specific
terminology.
Fail
39-0
• Structure is disorganised and difficult to follow
• Incorrect application of narrative
• Grammar and spelling frequently incorrect
• Inappropriate and incorrect use of academic terminology for the subject
• Inappropriate and incorrect use of industry terminology for the context

14. Referencing
Referencing is consistently
accurate.
+70
• Correct In-text citations as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Correct reference list and bibliography as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Appropriate sourcing of literature
• Strong and convincing management of the literature

15. Referencing
Referencing is generally
accurate some mistakes
and/or inconsistencies.
69-60
• Correct In-text citations as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Correct reference list and bibliography as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Appropriate sourcing of literature
• Good management of the literature
• Occasional inconsistencies throughout

16. Referencing
Referencing is inconsistent.
59-50
• Inconsistent in-text citations as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Inconsistent reference list and bibliography as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Appropriate sourcing of literature with occasional inappropriate sources
• Inconsistent management of the literature

17. Referencing
Some attempt at referencing.
49-40
• Inconsistent in-text citations as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Inconsistent reference list and bibliography as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Inappropriate sourcing of literature with occasional appropriate source
• Limited management of the literature

18. Referencing
Referencing is absent/
unsystematic.
Fail
39-0
• Incorrect in-text citations as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Incorrect reference list and bibliography as per the Harvard referencing guide
• Inappropriate sourcing of literature
• Absent/unsystematic management of the literature

19. Identify and explain current challenges facing the branch
Challenges are appropriate
and succinctly defined.
Challenges addressed
comprehensively and
imaginatively. Takes account
of complex contexts.
+70
• Appropriate challenge(s) identified
• Succinctly defined scope of the challenge(s)
• Identified challenge(s) central to the literary discussion
• Clear development of ideas and opinions informed by literary discussion
• Complex contexts unique to the branch considered and explored in relation to
the literature

20. Identify and explain current challenges facing the branch
Challenges are appropriate,
clearly defined and are
addressed coherently. Many
attempts to demonstrate
imagination. Takes account of
context.
69-60
• Appropriate challenge(s) identified
• Clearly defined scope of the challenge(s)
• Identified challenge(s) central to the literary discussion
• Evidence of idea and opinion development informed by literary discussion
• Branch context considered and explored in relation to the literature

21. Identify and explain current challenges facing the branch
Broad challenges proposed
and addressed coherently.
Some attempts to
demonstrate imagination.
Recognises generalised
context.
59-50
• Broad challenge(s) identified
• Outline of scope of the challenge(s)
• Broad challenge(s) of the branch central to the literary discussion
• Some evidence of idea and opinion development informed by literary discussion
• Generalised branch context considered in relation to the literature

22. Identify and explain current challenges facing the branch
Has provided generalised
challenges and focused the
work on the topic area.
Context acknowledged but
not really taken into account.
49-40
• Broad challenge(s) identified
• Generalised scope of the challenge(s) stated
• General approach to challenge(s) evidenced in literary discussion
• Idea and opinion development informed by anecdote
• Generalised branch context acknowledged but not considered in relation to the
literature

23. Identify and explain current challenges facing the branch
No information provided.
Context not recognised as
relevant.
Fail
39-0
• Generalised challenge(s) identified
• No scope of the challenge stated
• Generalised discussion on topic area
• Idea and opinion development informed by anecdote
• No branch context acknowledged

24. Critical Reasoning
Critically reviews evidence
supporting conclusions/
recommendations including
its reliability, validity and
significance. Justified own
ideas based on a wide range
of sources.
+70
• Assesses the merits and faults of various academic opinion
• Comments on the reliability, validity and significance of academic opinion in
relation to complex branch contexts
• Relationships between academic opinion explored
• Contradictory academic opinions explored and possible reasons attributed
• Relationships between academic and professional/statutory/institutional
opinion explored

25. Critical Reasoning
Identifies a range of evidence
and can evaluate its reliability,
relevance and significance.
Justified own ideas based on a
reasonable range of sources.
69-60
• Assesses the merits and faults of various academic opinion
• Comments on the reliability, validity and significance of academic opinion in
relation to the branch context
• Relationships between academic opinion explored
• Contradictory academic opinions explored and possible reasons attributed
• Relationship between academic and professional/statutory/institutional opinion
explored

26. Critical Reasoning
Identifies a limited range of
evidence. Some attempts to
evaluate its reliability,
relevance and significance.
Clear evidence of readings
relevant to the subject.
59-50
• Identifies a limited range of academic opinion
• Some attempts at evaluating the reliability, validity and significance of academic
opinion in relation to branch context
• Relationships between academic opinion occasionally explored
• No mention of the relationship between academic and
professional/statutory/institutional opinion

27. Critical Reasoning
Limited and only partially
accurate evaluation of
evidence. Literature is
presented uncritically.
49-40
• Identifies a limited range of academic opinion
• Partially accurate evaluation of academic opinion
• Occasional attempts at evaluating the reliability, validity and significance of
academic opinion in relation to the branch context
• No mention of the relationship between academic opinion
• No mention of the relationship between academic and
professional/statutory/institutional opinion

28. Critical Reasoning
Fails to evaluate or
acknowledge reliability,
relevance and significance of
evidence and/or evaluations
are totally invalid. No
evidence of literature being
consulted.
Fail
39-0
• Identifies a little to zero academic opinion
• Inaccurate evaluation of academic opinion
• No attempt at evaluating the reliability, validity and significance of academic
opinion in relation to the branch context
• No mention of the relationship between academic opinion
• No mention of the relationship between academic and
professional/statutory/institutional opinion

29. Conclusions
Analytical and clear
conclusions well-grounded in
academic and industry
literature showing
development of new concepts
for practice.
+70
• Based on the evidence presented in the main discussion
• Brings together the evidence & uses their interrelationships to draw conclusions
• Identifies the literature/theory/industry opinion that provides the main evidence
• Applies the literature/theory/industry opinion to practice to identify possible
implications for the branch

30. Conclusions
Conclusions demonstrated in
a summary of arguments
based in academic and
industry literature showing
development of new concepts
for practice.
69-60
• Based on the evidence presented in the main discussion
• Summarises the evidence to support final conclusions
• Identifies the literature/theory/industry opinion that provides the main evidence
• Applies the literature/theory/industry opinion to practice to identify possible
implications for the branch

31. Conclusions
Evidence of findings and
conclusions grounded in
academic and industry
literature. Some development
of new concepts for practice.
59-50
• Based on the evidence presented in the main discussion
• Some evidence identified and used to support final conclusions
• Identifies the literature/theory/industry opinion that provides the main evidence
• Some attempts at applying the literature/theory/industry opinion to practice to
identify possible implications for the branch

32. Conclusions
Limited evidence of findings
and conclusions supported by
academic and industry
literature. Limited
development of new concepts
for practice.
49-40
• Based on the evidence presented in the main discussion
• Limited evidence identified and used to support final conclusions
• Limited literature/theory/industry opinion that provides the main evidence
identified
• Limited attempts at applying the literature/theory/industry opinion to practice
to identify possible implications for the branch

33. Conclusions
Unsubstantiated/invalid
conclusions based on
anecdote and generalisation
only, or no conclusions at all.
Fail
39-0
• Loosely based/unrelated to the evidence presented in the main discussion
• Anecdotal evidence identified to support final conclusions
• No literature/theory/industry opinion that provides the main evidence identified
• No attempt at applying the literature/theory/industry opinion to practice to
identify possible implications for the branch

34. Critical reflection
Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
+70
• The merits and faults of the existing situation in relation to personal opinion
• The merits and faults of the projected situation in relation to personal opinion
• The benchmark these comments are made from

35. Critical Reflection
Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
69-60
• The merits and faults of the existing situation in relation to personal opinion
• The merits and faults of the projected situation in relation to personal opinion
• The benchmark comments are made from

36. Critical Reflection
Critical analysis of existing and
projected situation.
59-50
• The merits and faults of the existing situation in relation to personal opinion
• The merits and faults of the projected situation in relation to personal opinion
• The benchmark comments are made from

37. Critical Reflection
Description of existing and
projected situation.
49-40
• A description of the existing situation in relation to personal opinion
• A description of the projected situation in relation to personal opinion
• Some deviation from the focus of the reflection

38. Critical Reflection
Reflection based on anecdote.
Fail
39-0
• A description of the existing situation in relation to personal opinion
• A description of the projected situation in relation to personal opinion
• Significant deviation from the focus of the reflection

39. Informing Practice
Practice informed by a
comprehensive range of
academic and industry
literature.
+70
• Reference to a comprehensive range of academic and industry literature to
support and underpin the critical analysis of the existing and current situation
• Uses a comprehensive range of academic and industry literature to inform how
practice can be developed and improved

40. Informing Practice
Practice informed by a
reasonable range of academic
and industry literature.
69-60
• Reference to a reasonable range of academic and industry literature to support
and underpin the critical analysis of the existing and current situation
• Uses a reasonable range of academic and industry literature to inform how
practice can be developed and improved

41. Informing Practice
Practice informed by a narrow
range of academic and
industry literature.
59-50
• Reference to a narrow range of academic and industry literature to support and
underpin the critical analysis of the existing and current situation
• Uses a narrow range of academic and industry literature to inform how practice
can be developed and improved

42. Informing Practice
Practice informed by an
limited range of academic and
industry literature.
49-40
• Reference to a limited range of academic and industry literature to support and
underpin the critical analysis of the existing and current situation
• Uses a limited range of academic and industry literature to inform how practice
can be developed and improved

43. Informing Practice
No academic and industry
literature referred to.
Fail
39-0
• Very little to no academic and industry literature used to support and underpin
the analysis of the existing and current situation
• Very little to no academic and industry literature used to inform how practice
can be developed and improved

44. Action Planning
Informed and thorough
demonstration of learning.
+70
• Gaps in practice identified between exiting and projected situation using a
comprehensive range of academic and industry literature
• Precise action plan to develop practice for each gap identified

45. Action Planning
Informed and frequent
demonstration of learning.
69-60
• Gaps in practice identified between exiting and projected situation using a
reasonable range of academic and industry literature
• Precise action plan to develop practice for most gaps identified

46. Action Planning
59-50
Some informed attempts to
demonstrate learning.
• Gaps in practice identified between exiting and projected situation using a
narrow range of academic and industry literature
• Generalised action plan to develop practice for most gaps identified

47. Action Planning
Partially informed and limited
attempts to demonstrate
learning.
49-40
• Gaps in practice identified between exiting and projected situation using a
limited range of academic and industry literature
• Vague action plan to develop practice for some gaps identified

48. Action Planning
No attempt to demonstrate
learning.
Fail
39-0
• Gaps in practice identified between exiting and projected situation using little to
no academic and industry literature
• No action plan to develop practice