what is Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorders (ADD, ADHD) and what causes it?
Grade Mark Level 6 Criteria for assessment
Relevance of information included and issues discussed
70-100
• Demonstrates a highly proficient understanding and knowledge of the subject in both breadth and depth.
• Evidence of insight into some current issues at the forefront of the discipline.
• Explores routine issues cogently and critically with reference to a wide range of sources maybe with initiative in tackling non-routine issues. Irrelevance avoided
60-69 • Demonstrates a sound, thorough understanding and knowledge of key aspects of the subject underpinned by a good conceptual framework.
• Evidence of grasp of some issues of topical concern.
• Explores routine issues purposefully with reference to a selection of key sources, successfully avoiding irrelevance.
50-59 • Evidence of understanding of lecture material and some other adequate and topical sources incl. (personal) educational experience. Accurate presentation of content of required reading maybe with some misconceptions.
• Explores routine issues, generally avoiding irrelevance. Adequate knowledge and understanding of essential concepts and theory.
40-49 • Fails to demonstrate adequate evidence of reference to source material.
• Inadequate understanding of the fundamental aspects and concepts of the topics or subjects under investigation.
Little application and assimilation of knowledge.
Relies predominantly on dated knowledge and/or contains inaccuracies
0-39
• No evidence of reference to source material.
• Insufficient understanding of the fundamental aspects and concepts of the topics or subjects under investigation.
• No application and assimilation of knowledge.
• Relies on dated knowledge and/or contains inaccuracies
Analyses and explanation
70-100
• Presents a case with carefully selected evidence brought together with critical use of the literature, empirical studies and/or (personal) educational experience to illuminate discussion.
• Shows evidence of insight and original thought in the application of knowledge. Evidence of sustained critical evaluation of arguments, assumptions and/or concepts.
• Analyses and compares material highlighting strengths and limitations in different kinds of evidence.
• Where appropriate, evidence of clear explanation and appropriate application of chosen research methods. Where necessary, identification of weaknesses in design
60-69 • Able to advocate a line of argument with useful illustrative examples and/or assembling different sources of evidence.
• Elements of creative thinking and independence of thought in the application of knowledge.
• Explores routine issues purposefully highlighting relevant technicalities about sources of evidence
50-59 • Attempts to advocate a viewpoint without real grasp of the issues involved or in relation to the question.
• Little development of ideas in the application of knowledge. Some application of ideas to personal and professional experience.
• Limited critical judgement displayed when analyzing routine issues. Predominantly descriptive account demonstrating adequate knowledge and understanding but not questioning alternatives.
• Where appropriate, adequate description and application of methods but limited rationale and critique.
40-49 • Attempts to express an opinion but with little relevance to the field, subject or question.
• Limited interpretation of ideas and/or expression of narrow viewpoints.
• Analysis of material contains serious shortcomings.
Where appropriate, inadequate description of chosen research methods, design and interpretation of data.
0-39 • Fails to express an opinion or does so with no relevance to the field, subject or question.
• Irrelevant (or no) interpretation of ideas and/or expression of narrow viewpoints.
• No attempt to analyze material or does so with serious shortcomings.
• Where appropriate, no description of chosen research methods, design and interpretation of data.
Organization and writing quality
70-100 • Ideas are communicated in an accomplished manner consistent with the conventions of writing for the profession and/or academic discipline.
• Debts to published material are carefully noted and acknowledged.
• High quality of expression and organization of material.
60-69 • Ideas are communicated using an appropriate style for the profession and/or academic discipline.
• Debts to published material are noted and acknowledged.
• Good quality of expression and organization of material
50-59 • Ideas are communicated effectively in an acceptable style, but maybe not fully consistent with the writing conventions of the profession and/or academic discipline.
• Acknowledges debts to published work, this may be inconsistent or with insufficient attention to discipline referencing conventions.
• Acceptable quality of expression and organization of material
40-49 • Ideas are communicated in an inappropriate style for the profession and/or academic discipline.
• Insufficient acknowledgement of debts to published materials.
• Insufficient quality of expression and poor organization of material
0-39 • Inappropriate style of communication.
• Failure to acknowledge debts to published materials.
• Very badly expressed – incomplete sentences, no paragraphs, very many errors of spelling, syntax, grammar etc.
The readings provided and lectures are just an indication, you should conduct your own literature research.
