knowledge and systematic understanding of the subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.)
|
matter. Substantial inaccuracies. No awareness of knowledge of the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.
|
Some significant inaccuracies and/or irrelevant material. No awareness of knowledge of the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.
|
concepts and principles within the subject area which to some limited extent, is informed by current research and scholarship.
|
understanding of the field of study and to some extent, current research and scholarship.
|
Exhibits very good understanding of the breadth and depth of established views, and the work is, at least in part, well-informed by current research and scholarship.
|
understanding of the principles and theories of current research and scholarship. Clear awareness of challenges to established views and the limitations of the knowledge base.
|
understanding of the principles and theories of the subject, well-informed by current research and scholarship. A critical, sophisticated and nuanced awareness of the ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.
|
Cognitive and intellectual skills
(Conceptual and critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation of research, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete); logic, argument and judgement.)
|
Wholly or almost wholly descriptive work. Little or no analysis, synthesis or evaluation.
Failure to develop arguments, leading to illogical or invalid judgements.
Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any credible evidence.
|
Largely descriptive work, with superficial use of critical evaluation.
Weak development of arguments and judgements.
Information accepted uncritically, uses generalised statements made with scant evidence and unsubstantiated opinions. Ideas sometimes illogical and contradictory.
|
Limited attempt at critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation, tending towards description.
Some evidence to support emerging arguments and judgements but these may be underdeveloped or with a little inconsistency / misinterpretation.
Asserts rather than argues a case. Understand critically intercultural communication theories
|
Some critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Can analyse new and/or abstract concepts and data without guidance.
An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence (that may be incomplete) to support the argument.
Mostly valid arguments and logical judgements.
Some tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on
|
Sound critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation demonstrating critical thinking. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity and significance of evidence (that may be incomplete) to make mostly appropriate and valid judgements.
|
Excellent critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation.
Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated judgements.
Some evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’, suggesting a grasp of the broader field and wider concepts.
|
Exceptional critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation based on judiciously selected evidence.
Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated, nuanced, judgements.
Evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’, suggesting an
outstanding
|