Part C Mathematics and Philosophy Exam Conventions 2025-26

• 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 work displaying originality, outstanding analytical and argumentative skills, superior command of a wide range of facts and arguments relevant to the question, excellent organisation and presentation, lucid and precise expression. 

Middle: 78, 81

Excellent work offering high-level analysis, independent and rigorous argument, critical understanding of a wide range of relevant material, transparent organisation and presentation, lucid and precise expression. 

Lower: 72, 75

Strong work displaying a high standard of analysis and argument, critical insight, and a thorough command of the relevant material; transparent organisation and presentation; clear and precise expression.

• Class II.1 60-69
  • Upper: 65-69

+ Effective analysis and argumentation, demonstrating thorough command of relevant material; transparent organisation and presentation of material; clarity of expression.
- Occasional  imprecision in argumentation or expression; or lack of depth; or minor omissions; or lapses in focus.

Lower: 60-64

+  Clearly structured and generally coherent discussion, offering a mostly accurate analysis of central arguments and themes, and a justified conclusion.
-  Occasional lapses in argumentation; writing may be somewhat pedestrian or showing unclarity or imprecision of expression; some omissions or infelicity in organisation of material and/or presentation (e.g. missing or incomplete references, misquotations or misattributions).

• Class II.2 50-59
  • Upper: 55-59

+  Adequate, if somewhat basic, analysis and understanding of key concepts and arguments; generally cogent and well-structured treatment of topic.
-  Lacking  in scope, depth or precision; pat or pedestrian representation of thoughts and arguments; important inaccuracies or omissions; some lapses in argumentation and/or presentation.

Lower: 50-54

+  Discussion showing a reasonable grasp of basic material and arguments, and a fair attempt to arrive at a reasoned conclusion.
-  Significant inaccuracies or omissions; major lapses in argumentation (e.g. nonsequiturs, misuse of concepts or evidence affecting overall conclusions); failure to digest material; minor irrelevance; sloppy presentation.

• Third 40-49
  • Upper: 45-49

+ Limited treatment of topic showing some familiarity with relevant material and arguments; recognisable structure.
-  Superficial or incomplete treatment; gaps or mistakes in understanding  of key concepts and arguments; poor focus and organisation; some irrelevance; poor presentation.

Lower: 40-44

+  Significant elements of a basic and relevant answer showing some structure.
-  Muddled argumentation, very superficial discussion with poor focus, significant misunderstanding of key concepts and arguments; considerable irrelevance; incomplete answer; substandard presentation.

• Fail 0-39
  • Upper: 30-39 (would be a Pass in examinations that allow an unclassified Pass)

+  Limited attempt to address question showing a basic grasp of some relevant material.
-  Seriously incomplete answer; fundamental misunderstanding of key arguments or ideas; significant portions of discussion irrelevant or tangential; basic failures of organisation and presentation.

Middle: 15-29

+  Very limited attempt to answer question; some use of relevant material.
-   Wholly inadequate answer, discussion largely irrelevant; unacceptably poor organisation and/or presentation.

Lower:  0-14

- Completely or almost completely irrelevant or ignorant answer. A very short piece of work, providing no or negligible evidence of study.