High Distinction 
85-100% 

Distinction 
75-84%

Credit 
65-74%

Pass 
50-64%

Fail 
0-49% 

Professional competency:  
Knowledge of a relevant a topic

25%

Excellent understanding demonstrated, superior grasp of the information, totally comfortable with the information presented. 

85-100%

Very good understanding demonstrated, a strong understanding of information.

75-84%

Good understanding demonstrated, a good grasp of the information.

65-74%

Limited but adequate understanding demonstrated, developing grasp of the information.

50-64%

Little or no understanding demonstrated, uncomfortable with the information presented.

0-49% 

Research skills:  
Research is undertaken on a relevant topic

25%

A range of existing and new information is effectively presented.

85-100%

Effective use of existing and new information.

75-84%

Good use of existing and/or new information.

65-74%

Some use of existing and/or new information.

50-64%

Little or no recognition of existing or new information.

0-49% 

The organisation of material: 
Logical development of a discussion

20%

Complex information is presented in a logical and seamless way to facilitate understanding, easy to follow.

85-100%

Information is presented in a logical sequence and is easy to follow.

75-84%

Contains a reasonable introduction, body and conclusion and is quite easy to follow.

65-74%

The organisation is loose and it is just possible to follow the presentation.

50-64%

No structure or sequence of information, hard to follow the presentation.

0-49% 

Communication:  
Clear delivery

22%

Well-paced, effective and interesting, the speaker is entertaining or stimulating, confident and in control. 

85-100%

Well-paced, good use of voice (tone, diction) and pausing throughout.

75-84%

Consistently audible and clear voice, well-paced speech, some good use of pausing.

65-74%

Mostly audible, mostly reasonably well-paced speech, some unnecessary pausing.

50-64%

Inaudible and spoken too quickly or too slowly, many unnecessary pauses.

0-49% 

Communication:  
Handling of questions

8%

Anticipates questions, elaborates and explains when answering, responds confidently and in a friendly manner.

85-100%

Can anticipate and answer all questions (including challenging ones) with ease, elaborates where appropriate.

75-84%

Can anticipate and answer most questions with ease but needs to elaborate.

65-74%

Can anticipate and/or answer rudimentary questions from the audience.

50-64%

Unable to anticipate or answer questions from the audience about the subject.

0-49% 

High Distinction +

100%

High Distinction 

92%

Distinction 

79%

Credit 

69%

Pass 

57%

Fail 

25% 

Absent Fail

0%

Thought 

50%

A clear, concise argument. Excellent critical thinking skills. Superior ability to define and apply concepts relevant to your argument. 

Well-supported argument. Well-developed critical thinking skills. Sophisticated ability to define and apply concepts relevant to your argument. 

Competent argument. Good critical thinking skills. Solid ability to define and apply concepts relevant to your argument. 

Adequate argument. Basic critical thinking skills. Fair ability to define and apply concepts relevant to your argument. 

Poor argument and critical thinking skills. Little or no evidence of your ability to define and apply concepts relevant to your argument. 

Research 

30%

Excellent engagement with the question or topic. Outstanding selection and use of relevant evidence. Sources skillfully integrated into the essay. 

Very good engagement with the question or topic. Comprehensive selection and use of relevant evidence. Sources are capably integrated into the essay. 

Good engagement with the question or topic. Competent selection and use of relevant evidence. Sources well integrated into the essay. 

Good engagement with the question or topic. Adequate selection and use of relevant evidence. Few sources are integrated into the essay. 

Basic or poor engagement with the question or topic. Little selection or use of relevant evidence. Sources barely integrated into the essay. 

Presentation 

10%

Outstandingly structured essay with a succinct, clear introduction and a strong conclusion. Paragraphs in a logical sequence. 

Well-structured essay with a clear introduction and solid conclusion. Paragraphs in a logical sequence. 

Competently structured essay with a clear introduction and reasonable conclusion. Paragraphs in a logical sequence. 

Adequate essay with good introduction and fair conclusion. The paragraph sequence could be more logical. 

Poorly structured essay with unclear introduction and weak conclusion. 

Writing 

10%

Clear, coherent style with outstanding attention to spelling, punctuation and grammar. 

Clear, coherent style with comprehensive attention to spelling, punctuation and grammar. 

Coherent style with competent attention to spelling, punctuation and grammar. A few grammatical errors. 

Coherent style with adequate attention to spelling, punctuation and grammar. Grammatical errors. 

Poor style with little attention to spelling and punctuation. A pattern of ungrammatical writing. 

Criteria 

High Distinction

85-100%

Distinction

75-84%

Credit

65-74%

Pass

50-64%

Fail

0-49%

Definition

Explicitness for the problem description

5% 

Aim outlines the purpose of the investigation specifically, explicitly, and relevantly.

85-100%

Aim outlines the purpose of the investigation with a minor lapse in explicitness, specificity or relevance. 

75-84%

Aim outlines the purpose of the investigation with some lapse in explicitness, specificity or relevance. 

65-74%

Aim outlines the purpose of the investigation with a substantial lapse in explicitness, specificity or relevance. 

50-64%

Aim not given or does not satisfactorily outline the purpose of the investigation. 

0-49%

Methods

Clarity and correctness of methods

35% 

An innovative and correct method of solution to the problem. 

85-100%

Above average and substantially correct method of solution to the problem. 

75-84%

An average and mostly correct and complete method of solution to the problem. 

65-74%

Sound but partially incomplete or incorrect method of solution to the problem. 

50-64%

A solution to the problem is not described, or not correct. 

0-49%

Accuracy

Correctness of mathematics

40% 

All calculations/ algebra/ graphs complete and correct. 

85-100%

Only minor errors or omissions in calculations/ algebra/ graphs. 

75-84%

Calculations/ algebra/ graphs partially correct or complete. 

65-74%

Calculations/ algebra/ graphs half correct or complete. 

50-64%

Calculations/ algebra/ graphs incorrect or not present. 

0-49%

Conclusion

Logical and connected conclusion

10% 

The conclusion is explicit, logically and mathematically correct and consistent with the aim, method and results. 

85-100%

The conclusion has a minor lapse in explicitness, logical and mathematical correctness or consistency with the aim, method and results. 

75-84%

The conclusion has some lapse in explicitness, logical and mathematical correctness or consistency with the aim, method and results. 

65-74%

The conclusion has a substantial lapse in explicitness, logical and mathematical correctness or consistency with the aim, method and results. 

50-64%

The conclusion is not present or not explicit, not logically and mathematically correct, or not consistent with the aim, method and results. 

0-49%

Communication

Written mathematical communication

10% 

The written expression uses sophisticated mathematical language. 

85-100%

The written expression uses appropriate mathematical language. 

75-84%

The written expression uses some appropriate mathematical language. 

65-74%

The written expression shows little use of appropriate mathematical language. 

50-64%

Written expression is not included or does not use mathematical language. 

0-49%

High Distinction +

100%

High Distinction

92%

Distinction

79%

Credit

69%

Pass

57%

Fail

25%

Absent Fail

0%

Patient assessment

25% 

Concise patient assessment includes a comprehensive identification and analysis of all client issues relevant to the patient’s functional limitations effectively structured for clarity. 

Clearly written patient assessment,  with a well-developed analysis and assessment of all issues relevant to the patient’s functional limitations. 

The patient's assessment includes a considered analysis and assessment of most issues relevant to the client’s functional limitations. 

Patient assessment conveys a basic analysis and assessment of some issues relevant to the patient’s functional limitations. 

Patient assessment is unclear and does not address the analysis and assessment of issues relevant to the patient’s functional limitations. 

Prescription 

30% 

Prescription comprehensively and correctly identifies and justifies all components, including required measurements. 

Prescription is thorough and correctly identifies and justifies all components, including required measurements with one or two minor errors or omissions. 

Prescription identifies and justifies most required components, including required measurements with one or two major errors or omissions. 

Prescription identifies most of the required components and demonstrates an adequate attempt at justification. There are several excluded or incorrect measurements. 

Inadequate or incorrect prescription. Insufficient identification of components. Incorrect or absent measurements. 

Training and education

10% 

All training and education components are identified and discussed in a comprehensive, creative and clearly articulated program that effectively meets the patient’s needs. 

All training and education components and needs are identified and discussed in a thorough and well thought out program that meets the patient’s needs. 

Most training and education components and needs are considered in a program that addresses the patient’s needs. 

Adequate training and education components and needs are included in a plan that meets some patient needs. 

Inadequately identifies and discusses training and education needs. Justification is inadequate or absent. 

Scholarly evidence and clinical reasoning

25% 

Integrates at least 10 references (70% are highly relevant, current academic/scientific evidence); to support a comprehensive and professional clinical reasoning approach. 

Includes at least 10 references (60% are reliable and current academic/scientific references); all highly relevant and provide clear evidence to support thorough clinical reasoning. 

Includes at least 8 references (50% are reliable academic/scientific references); all relevant and provide clear evidence to support clinical reasoning 

Includes less than 6 references somewhat relevant; provides evidence to support some clinical reasoning. 

Few if any appropriate references. Little or no evidence to support clinical reasoning. 

Professional standard of written communication

10% 

Professional report structure that adheres to the template and word limit. Uses formal, academic language and consistently adheres to grammatical conventions. 

Accurate and consistent use of the APA 7th referencing conventions, both in the text and the references list. 

Professional report that closely follows the template and word limit. Uses clear language and mostly adheres to grammatical conventions. APA 7th referencing conventions followed in the text and the references list but with a few minor errors.  

Well-written report with occasional minor errors.  Follows grammatical conventions and the template with minor mistakes. Follows the word limit, and APA 7th referencing conventions but with some errors.  

Report writing conventions used but missing elements of the template. Some informal language including contains grammatical errors. Follows the APA 7th referencing conventions in places but not consistently and with some errors. Does not adhere to the task word limit. 

The report did not comply with standard report writing conventions. Informal Language is used with many grammatical errors. References and sources acknowledged occasionally and/or with significant errors. The report requires considerable further development.