I. This Grading System may be applied to courses undertaken in the context of taught programs or otherwise, but shall not apply to research masters degrees or doctoral degrees by research or published work.
II. This Grading System may be replaced by an alternative acceptable system used by a partner institution in the case of Joint Awards. It may also be decided by the Senate that a particular award or group of awards are exempt from the use of the grading system.
III. The overall grades awarded by the University are based on the traditional Anglophone academic system. These grades will be shown on transcripts and used to calculate overall results for modules.
IV. The grades awarded are as follows:
A – EXCELLENT (70 and above)
Keen understanding and sound analysis of the material demonstrated by the writing of a well-structured paper. Extensive and appropriate use of source texts and relevant literature. Awareness of where and how issues could receive further treatment. The student is aware of learning something new in the process of completing the paper, and has made a creative contribution to the understanding of the material rather than merely absorbing and rehearsing existing work. Well presented, with a good writing style, with references well done.
B – GOOD (60-69)
The student is on top of the material and has a good grasp of what is at issue. Good use of source texts and relevant literature. Sound assessment of the reading material with the knowledge gained being articulated in an entirely satisfactory way, but not so as to raise new issues or find especially significant insights. The student has performed competently, falling a little way short of making a personal creative contribution to the understanding of the material. Well presented, with a good writing style.
C – AVERAGE (50-59)
Appreciates generally what is at issue. Incorporates the standard key responses in a routine way. Fair use of source texts and relevant literature, but probably does not use sources and literature as fully as possible to understand and articulate a clear exposition. Not much evidence of insight. Adequate writing style. Fair presentation.
D – PASS (40-49)
Somewhat weak understanding of what is at issue. Not an especially good capacity to use source material and relevant literature. Quotations are not properly integrated with a clear exposition. Only a very basic use of sources and literature, indicating a rather poor understanding, articulated in a very basic exposition showing little evidence of insight. Some faults in writing style. Indifferent presentation.
R – FAIL/RETURN (30-39)
Has not really understood what is at issue. Little if any use of source texts and relevant literature. No evidence of learning. Exposition muddled. Weak description and no analysis. Problems with writing style and some grammatical errors. Very poor presentation.
F – BAD FAIL (less than 30)
No evidence whatever of trying to understand what is at issue. Serious errors in presenting topics and themes from source texts and secondary literature. Exposition very muddled and largely irrelevant. Distinct problems with writing style including grammatical errors. Exceptionally poor presentation. (Plagiarism not necessarily present: but plagiarism results automatically in paper receiving zero marks).
VI. Additional codes may be indicated on a transcript for an award using the grading system as follows:
CR = Credit for courses that are transferred or otherwise challenged
S = Satisfactory – applied to certain components of a course where a grade or transfer credit is not awarded.
NG = No Grade (unsatisfactory performance)
P(Pass) or F(Fail) – applied to certain components of a course where a grade or transfer credit is not awarded.
W = Withdrawn, indicating that the student has officially withdrawn from a course.