9. How USMs are determined in Philosophy

9.3. Qualitative description of commentary work performance in Philosophy

  • Class I 70-85 (NB: marks above 85 are not awarded for translation work)
    • Upper: 80-100:

+ a commentary displaying in-depth knowledge of the passage, excellent analysis and criticism of the argument(s), distinction(s), or concept(s) found in the passage, a lucid and concise account of the relation of the passage to the wider context, or/and the whole work, or/and the author's general thought, or/and some problem in modern philosophy.

Lower: 70-79

+ a commentary showing a good understanding of the immediate and wider context of the passage, lucid and concise analysis of the ideas and/or arguments involved, and clear and precise language.

  • Class II.1 60-69
    • Upper: 65-69

+ a commentary displaying a good understanding of the context and a clear and concise analysis of arguments, distinctions and/or concepts in the passage.
- limited command of some aspects of the passage, or context; minor lapses in the analysis of the argument, occasional unclarity in expression or use of concepts.

Lower: 60 to 64

+ a generally clear and satisfactory commentary, offering a mostly correct specification of the argumentative context and a reasonable analysis of the argument, distinction(s), or/and concepts of the passage.
- some lapses in argumentation and/or invoking evidence from the passage; some inaccuracy in identification of context; somewhat pedestrian, unclear, or imprecise expression.

  • Class II.2 50-59
    • + a competent if basic commentary showing familiarity with the passage and its context; mostly clear and relevant analysis of passage; some attempt to offer a critical perspective.
      - gives an incomplete account of the context of the passage; significant inaccuracies or gaps in analysing or criticising the argument of the passage; marred by lapses in concision, relevance, and lucidity of expression.
  • Class III 40-49
    • + a commentary that contains evidence of some knowledge of relevant facts and analytical skill.
      - generally weak, with confused or little specification of the context, or discussion and criticism of the argument of the passage; some irrelevance; muddled and unclear language. This class does qualify for an Honours degree.
  • Pass 30-39
    • + some attempt to specify the argumentative context or/and content of the passage; occasionally relevant material.
      - extremely limited and inadequate commentary; comments largely (but not entirely) irrelevant.
  • Fail 0-29
    • Completely, or almost completely, irrelevant or ignorant commentary; nothing, or almost nothing, written.

NB: Candidates should note that one of the commonest reasons for commentaries receiving poor marks is irrelevance.