A (70%+)

It demonstrates an
appropriate level of selfcritical reflection on the
students own ability to
listen, to contribute, and to
lead effectively, within a
group context. It provides
appropriate examples.

B (60-69%)
It demonstrates an
appropriate level of selfcritical reflection on the
students own ability to
listen, contribute, and/or
lead effectively, within a
group context, but not all.
It provides examples.

C (50-59%)
It demonstrates an
inconsistent level of selfcritical reflection on the
students own ability to
listen, contribute, and/or
lead effectively, within a
group context, and doesnt
address all. It occasionally
provides examples.

D (40-49%)
It demonstrates an poor
level of self-critical
reflection on the students
own ability to listen,
contribute, and/or lead
effectively, within a group
context, and doesnt
address all. It rarely
provides examples.

E (0-39%)
It does not demonstrate
an appropriate level of
self-critical reflection on
the students own ability to
listen, to contribute, or to
lead effectively, within a
group context. It provides
no examples.

Breadth and depth of

reflection (40%)

It provides a clear
overview of the project,
reflecting critically on a
range of different aspects
of the project. There is an
appropriate level of depth
to the personal reflection.
There is evidence of
broader ethical,
professional, industrial
and theoretical
perspectives having been
considered and applied.

It provides a clear
overview of the project,
reflecting critically on the
project. There is an
appropriate level of depth
to the personal reflection.
There is some evidence of
broader ethical,
professional, industrial
and theoretical
perspectives having been
considered and/or applied.

It provides a clear
overview of the project,
reflecting on the project,
albeit not critically. There
is inconsistent depth to the
personal reflection. There
is inconsistent evidence of
broader ethical,
professional, industrial or
theoretical perspectives
having been considered
and/or applied.

It provides an overview of
the project, reflecting on
the project, albeit not
critically. There is little
depth to the personal
reflection. There is little
evidence of broader
ethical, professional,
industrial or theoretical
perspectives having been
considered and/or applied.

It provides no clear
overview of the project.
There is not an
appropriate level of depth
to the personal reflection.
There is no evidence of
broader ethical,
professional, industrial
and theoretical
perspectives having been
considered or applied.

Insight into the projects

success (30%)

There has been an

attempt to road-test, or
evaluate their own project
in an appropriate way. It
demonstrates critical
reflection on the
completed project,
examining its strengths
and weaknesses, and
suggesting ways in which
the work might be
extended or improved
upon.

There has been an

attempt to road-test, or
evaluate their own project,
albeit inappropriately. It
demonstrates critical
reflection on the
completed project,
examining its strengths
and weaknesses, but does
not suggest meaningful
ways in which the work
might be extended or
improved upon.

There has been some

attempt to road-test, or
evaluate their own project,
albeit inappropriately. It
demonstrates inconsistent
critical reflection on the
completed project,
examining its strengths
and/or weaknesses, but
does not suggest ways in
which the work might be
extended or improved
upon.

There has been little

attempt to road-test, or
evaluate their own project.
It demonstrates poor
critical reflection on the
completed project, not
meaningfully examining its
strengths or weaknesses,
and does not suggest
ways in which the work
might be extended or
improved upon.

There has been no

attempt to road-test, or
evaluate their own project
in an appropriate way. It
does not demonstrate
critical reflection on the
completed project,
examining its strengths or
weaknesses, and does not
suggest ways in which the
work might be extended or
improved upon.

Communication
(10%)

The essay is well written,

properly presented and
referenced.

The essay is satisfactorily

written, but still properly
presented and referenced.

The essay is satisfactorily

written but improperly
presented or incorrectly
referenced, but not both

The essay is poorly

written and improperly
presented or incorrectly
referenced, but not both.

The essay is poorly

written, improperly
presented and not
referenced.

Teamwork (20%)