What can lower a first class dissertation into a second class dissertation?
Hello
I know i am stressing i am not having good sleep because of it
I handed my dissertation last week and i want to know what mistakes can have a drastic impact: I checked mine again i know I wasn’t supposed to after being handed in.
These are my mistakes:
- italics in proteins when you supposed to only put italic in genes
- my aims were different from introduction to discussion
- one mislabel
-one to two spelling errors
- spacing errors
-maybe one argument wrong in the discussion section
- three numbers were bold in reference
Btw i do biomed :
This is the mark scheme:
This is the marking criteria: First Class 70- 79%*
Student motivated and was able to work independently on all aspects of project work i.e., collation, recognition and
discussion of appropriate project material, design & execution of project report. Student needed some assistance
with project. Student communicated well with supervisor and appropriate colleagues. Student displayed good drive,
time management & record keeping skills. Very good Student. Student occasionally required assistance in the
execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 70-79% supervisor must provide substantial evidence to
justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range must have worked independently i.e., with minimal PI, RA,
PhD student input/help in the design/execution of the project & analysis/interpretation of their data.
Second Class Division 1 60-69%*
Student motivated and was able to work independently on all aspects of project work i.e., collation, recognition, and
discussion of appropriate project material; design & execution of project report but with appropriate amount of help
(with time student worked independently requiring less assistance). Student communicated well with supervisor and
appropriate colleagues. Student displayed good drive, time management & record keeping skills. Good student.
Student required assistance in the execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 60-69% supervisor
must provide substantial evidence to justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range will have required
guidance and help from PI/RA/PhD students in the design/execution of the project & analysis/interpretation of
their data. It is predicted that a significant cohort of students will fit this marking band.
Second Class Division 2 50-59%*
Student less motivated and was unable to perform project work without frequent assistance though as time
progressed amount of help decreased. Student communicated satisfactorily with supervisor and appropriate
colleagues. Student displayed moderate time-management & record keeping skills though some room for
improvement. Student less considerate towards colleagues. Satisfactory Student. Student required frequent
assistance in the execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 50-59% supervisor must provide
substantial evidence to justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range will have required frequent
guidance and help in the design/execution of their project & analysis/interpretation of their data. It is predicted
that a significant cohort of students will fit this marking band.
I know i am stressing i am not having good sleep because of it
I handed my dissertation last week and i want to know what mistakes can have a drastic impact: I checked mine again i know I wasn’t supposed to after being handed in.
These are my mistakes:
- italics in proteins when you supposed to only put italic in genes
- my aims were different from introduction to discussion
- one mislabel
-one to two spelling errors
- spacing errors
-maybe one argument wrong in the discussion section
- three numbers were bold in reference
Btw i do biomed :
This is the mark scheme:
This is the marking criteria: First Class 70- 79%*
Student motivated and was able to work independently on all aspects of project work i.e., collation, recognition and
discussion of appropriate project material, design & execution of project report. Student needed some assistance
with project. Student communicated well with supervisor and appropriate colleagues. Student displayed good drive,
time management & record keeping skills. Very good Student. Student occasionally required assistance in the
execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 70-79% supervisor must provide substantial evidence to
justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range must have worked independently i.e., with minimal PI, RA,
PhD student input/help in the design/execution of the project & analysis/interpretation of their data.
Second Class Division 1 60-69%*
Student motivated and was able to work independently on all aspects of project work i.e., collation, recognition, and
discussion of appropriate project material; design & execution of project report but with appropriate amount of help
(with time student worked independently requiring less assistance). Student communicated well with supervisor and
appropriate colleagues. Student displayed good drive, time management & record keeping skills. Good student.
Student required assistance in the execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 60-69% supervisor
must provide substantial evidence to justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range will have required
guidance and help from PI/RA/PhD students in the design/execution of the project & analysis/interpretation of
their data. It is predicted that a significant cohort of students will fit this marking band.
Second Class Division 2 50-59%*
Student less motivated and was unable to perform project work without frequent assistance though as time
progressed amount of help decreased. Student communicated satisfactorily with supervisor and appropriate
colleagues. Student displayed moderate time-management & record keeping skills though some room for
improvement. Student less considerate towards colleagues. Satisfactory Student. Student required frequent
assistance in the execution of their project. *If student awarded a mark of 50-59% supervisor must provide
substantial evidence to justify the mark. Students awarded marks in this range will have required frequent
guidance and help in the design/execution of their project & analysis/interpretation of their data. It is predicted
that a significant cohort of students will fit this marking band.
Was it i sent the wrong one: here is the correct one: First Class 80-100%* Outstanding/Excellent – no better report conceivable at undergraduate level produced
independently i.e., with NO/MINIMAL supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with extensive evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of
help given). Evidence of extensive research of the literature. Logical structure very well written & presented. Clear
evidence of integration of material, critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
*Needs to be highlighted/justified in Examiners report.
First Class 70- 79% Very Good content without any major flaws and produced independently i.e., with
NO/MINIMAL supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of help given).
Evidence of extensive research of the literature. Logical structure very well written & presented. Clear evidence of
integration of material, some critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
Second Class Division 1 60-69% Good content with minor flaws and produced either independently i.e., with
no/minimal supervisor input or with supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with lesser evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of help
given). Evidence of literature research. Logical structure well written & presented. Some evidence of integration of
material, some critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
Second Class Division 1 50-59% Satisfactory – A sound project but with flaws and produced either independently
or with supervisor input.
A generally sound project which indicates some level of understanding. Project lacks important study material;
Evidence of integration of material, critical thought and scientific argument weak or missing (supervisor to use
discretion re level of help given). Report structure & presentation satisfactory. Referencing satisfactory.
Third Class 40-49% Poor project with superficial approach
Poor project which indicates basic/superficial level of understanding. Project lacks study material and/or contains
irrelevant information; no/little evidence of integration of material, critical thought and/or scientific argument
(supervisor to use discretion re level of help given). Report structure & presentation satisfactory/poor with
significant errors and/or deficiencies. Referencing satisfactory/poor.
Fail ≤39% Inadequate project
Inadequate project which indicates superficial/deficient level of understanding. Project lacks study material and/or
contains irrelevant information; no evidence of, integration of material, critical thought and/or scientific argument.
Report structure & presentation poor with significant errors and/or deficiencies. Referencing poor.
30–39: Inadequate
but showing some knowledge and understanding of the research area with omissions and/or basic factual errors
Irrelevant material. Poorly structured and written.
20–29: Major factual and/or conceptual errors and/or omissions indicating lack of understanding and/or
knowledge
Seriously inadequate attempt to address the question.
10–19: Small amount of correct, relevant knowledge, maybe no attempt to address the research area directly
0-9: Minimally/doubtfully relevant and/or basic facts all incorrect
independently i.e., with NO/MINIMAL supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with extensive evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of
help given). Evidence of extensive research of the literature. Logical structure very well written & presented. Clear
evidence of integration of material, critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
*Needs to be highlighted/justified in Examiners report.
First Class 70- 79% Very Good content without any major flaws and produced independently i.e., with
NO/MINIMAL supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of help given).
Evidence of extensive research of the literature. Logical structure very well written & presented. Clear evidence of
integration of material, some critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
Second Class Division 1 60-69% Good content with minor flaws and produced either independently i.e., with
no/minimal supervisor input or with supervisor input.
Factually correct and complete, with lesser evidence of critical thinking (supervisor to use discretion re level of help
given). Evidence of literature research. Logical structure well written & presented. Some evidence of integration of
material, some critical thought and logical scientific argument. Correctly and clearly referenced.
Second Class Division 1 50-59% Satisfactory – A sound project but with flaws and produced either independently
or with supervisor input.
A generally sound project which indicates some level of understanding. Project lacks important study material;
Evidence of integration of material, critical thought and scientific argument weak or missing (supervisor to use
discretion re level of help given). Report structure & presentation satisfactory. Referencing satisfactory.
Third Class 40-49% Poor project with superficial approach
Poor project which indicates basic/superficial level of understanding. Project lacks study material and/or contains
irrelevant information; no/little evidence of integration of material, critical thought and/or scientific argument
(supervisor to use discretion re level of help given). Report structure & presentation satisfactory/poor with
significant errors and/or deficiencies. Referencing satisfactory/poor.
Fail ≤39% Inadequate project
Inadequate project which indicates superficial/deficient level of understanding. Project lacks study material and/or
contains irrelevant information; no evidence of, integration of material, critical thought and/or scientific argument.
Report structure & presentation poor with significant errors and/or deficiencies. Referencing poor.
30–39: Inadequate
but showing some knowledge and understanding of the research area with omissions and/or basic factual errors
Irrelevant material. Poorly structured and written.
20–29: Major factual and/or conceptual errors and/or omissions indicating lack of understanding and/or
knowledge
Seriously inadequate attempt to address the question.
10–19: Small amount of correct, relevant knowledge, maybe no attempt to address the research area directly
0-9: Minimally/doubtfully relevant and/or basic facts all incorrect
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Is an average of 64.4 okay for third year?
- Will my dissertation grade stop me from getting onto a masters
- Degree
- How to get a First Class Degree?
- Application for failed dissertation module
- Grading system
- Northampton university indicative classification
- I’m I still able to graduate with a 2:1?
- Lancaster university degree classification
- A Week In The Life of a KSA Student
- Hills Road Sixth Form - any thoughts or experiences?
- Please help me. Essays.
- Applying to Oxford MPhil Comparative Government
- Anyone have any tips for achieving a first class in accounting and finance?
- Uni of Liverpool diagnostic radiography MSc January start
- After messing up 3 semesters, I need to average 67% percent in mech eng to get a 2.1.
- How to get a first class degree in pharmacy?
- Portsmouth Degree Classification Help
- Dissertation Advice
- Strathclyde University, Degree Classification?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 weeks ago
1st Years: what's been the biggest surprise about university life so far?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Does anyone else feel they're constantly making the wrong decision/FOMO?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Can i use AI NOT to write but to assist with essay writing? Reasons are....
