Original Pharmacy task 7 CSA233 and CSA235 (Written Assignment) 2009.
Criteria / High Distinction (HD) / Distinction (D) / Credit (CR) / Pass (PP) / Fail (NN)1. Critical evaluation of literature relevant to the topic; integration and presentation of information from literature research.
Weighting 50% / Provided in-depth evaluation of advance information obtained from the literature research; demonstrated cohesive presentation and planning skills in the written assignment, with logical and integrated ideas which clearly convey meanings and discussion; the writing is concise, easy to read and free of factual error in relation to pharmacological knowledge. / Provided some in-depth evaluation of advance information obtained from the literature research; demonstrated cohesive presentation and planning skills in the written assignment, with logical and integrated ideas which clearly convey meanings and discussion; the writing is concise, easy to read butcontains minor factual errors in relation to pharmacological knowledge. / Provided some in-depth evaluation of advance information obtained from the literature research; some fragmentary presentation and planning skills which require further development; integrated ideas is sometimes confusing; the writing contains some factual errors in relation to pharmacological knowledge. / Provided limited in-depth evaluation of advance information obtained from the literature research; some fragmentary presentation and planning skills which require further development; integrated ideas is sometimes confusing; the writing contains a significant number of factual errors in relation to pharmacological knowledge. / Lack of in-depth evaluation of advance information obtained from the literature research; demonstrated fragmentary presentation and planning skills; the written assignment is without logical and integrated ideas to clearly convey meanings and discussion; demonstrated a serious lack of pharmacological knowledge.
2. Selection of literatures relevant to the topic.
Weighting 20% / Extensive selection including many currentpeer-reviewed articles from a variety of scientific journals. / Extensive selection including some current peer-reviewed articles from scientific journals;a small number of non peer-reviewed articles from the internet or textbooks. / Limited selection with a small number of current peer-reviewed articles from scientific journals; some outdated journal articles and non peer-reviewed articles from the internet or textbooks. / Heavy reliance on non peer-reviewed internet articles and textbooks; a small number of peer-reviewed articles from scientific journals. / Use only non peer-reviewed internet articles and textbooks.
3. Adherence to English conventions including punctuation, sentence structure, grammar, and ability to writeusing professional scientific terminologies.
Weighting 20% / Writing is free from typographical, grammatical and punctuation errors. The use of scientific terminologies is also free from error. / Minor typographical, grammatical and punctuation errors in the writing; and minor errors in the use of scientific terminologies. / There are some typographical, grammatical and punctuation errors in the writing and the use of scientific terminologies. / There are significant numbers of typographical, grammatical and punctuation errors in the writing, with some errors in the use of scientific terminologies. / English writing conventions are not adhered to. Extensive errors in the use of scientific terminologies.
4. Adherence to presentation conventions of a review article and following strictly the referencing style of the British Journal of Pharmacology(BJP)as specified in the unit outline.
Weighting 10% / Presentation conventions and the BJP referencing style are adhered to without any error. / Minor errors in the presentation conventions and the BJP referencing style. / There are some errors in the presentation conventions and the BJP referencing style. / There are significant errors in the presentation conventions and the BJP referencing style. / Written presentation conventions and BJP referencing style are not adhered to.
Additional comment:
Final awards are calculated using the following algorithm:
(criterion 1 x 50%) + (criterion 2 x 20%) + (criterion 3 x 20%) + (criterion 4 x 10%)
Mark Awarded: