6.2 How USMs are determined in Philosophy

Marking of FHS Examinations in Philosophy

All Philosophy scripts and submitted work in Finals are marked independently by two markers.  The two markers discuss any difference between their marks, and endeavour to agree a mark.  Since USMs are always whole numbers, the agreed mark cannot in general be reached by `splitting the difference' between the two initial marks, e.g. two Philosophy markers whose marks for a given script are 67 and 68, cannot submit a mark of 67.5, but rather must determine an agreed mark that is either 67 or 68. A third marker marks the script or submitted work if the two original markers cannot agree a mark

Qualitative description of examination performance in Philosophy

The standard of work for the various classes is specified in the following terms.

These terms employ positive criteria (marked by “+”) and negative criteria (marked by “-”) as a basis for assigning marks. Written work is taken to meet the criteria set out below if for the most part it satisfies the relevant descriptions. These descriptions are to be interpreted in light of what would be expected at the relevant undergraduate level rather than in absolute terms.

  • Class I 70-100

In order to encourage use of  a wider range of First Class marks, markers are asked to give First Class marks divisible by 3 as initial marks.  Agreed marks can be any marks within the First Class range, e.g. initial marks of 72 and 75 might result in an agreed mark of 74.

Upper: 84+

Exceptional answer displaying originality, outstanding analytical and argumentative skills, superior command of the facts and arguments relevant to the question, excellent organisation, and lucid and precise expression.

Middle: 78, 81

Excellent answer offering high-level analysis, independent and rigorous argument,  skilled handling of the facts and arguments relevant to the question, transparent organisation, and lucid and precise expression.

Lower: 72, 75

Strong answer displaying a high standard of analysis and argument, a thorough command of the facts and/or arguments relevant to the question, transparent organisation and clear language.

  • Class II.1 60-69

Upper: 65-69

+  Effective analysis and argumentation, thorough command of evidence, clarity of expression, transparent organisation of material.

- Occasional  imprecision in argumentation or expression; or lack of depth; or minor omissions; or lapses in focus.

Lower: 60-64

+  Well-structured answer offering a generally accurate analysis of central arguments and themes, and a well-reasoned conclusion.

- Occasional lapses in argumentation; writing may be somewhat pedestrian or unclear or imprecise; some omissions or infelicity in organisation of material.

  • Class II.2 50-59

Upper: 55-59

+ Adequate, if somewhat basic, analysis and understanding of key concepts and arguments.

-  Significantly lacking  in scope, depth or precision; pat or pedestrian representation of thoughts and arguments; important inaccuracies or omissions; some lapses in argumentation.

Lower: 50-54

+ Answer showing a basic grasp of relevant material and arguments, and a fair attempt to arrive at a reasoned conclusion.

- Serious inaccuracies or omissions; significant lapses in argumentation (e.g. nonsequiturs, misuse of concepts or evidence); failure to digest material; minor irrelevance.

  • Class III 40-49

Upper: 45-49

+  Limited answer to the question; constructs a rudimentary argument; some evidence of relevant study.

- Superficial or incomplete treatment; some gaps or mistakes in understanding  of key concepts and arguments; poor focus and organisation; some irrelevance.

Lower: 40-44

+ Significant elements of a basic and relevant answer.

-  Muddled argumentation, very superficial discussion with poor focus, significant misunderstanding of key concepts and arguments; considerable irrelevance; seriously incomplete answer.

  • Pass 30-39

+ Limited attempt to address question showing a rudimentary grasp of some relevant information.

-  Very incomplete, brief, or poorly organised answer; fundamentalmisunderstanding of key arguments or ideas; large portions of discussionirrelevant or tangential.

  • Fail 0-29

 Upper: 15-29

+ Some slight evidence of a proper attempt to answer question; glimpse of relevant material.

-  Extremely limited and inadequate answer, for instance in note form; discussion mostly irrelevant.

 Lower: 0-14

- Completely or almost completely irrelevant or ignorant answer. Nothing or almost nothing written.