Criteria for evaluating examinations papers used within the programme

A paper should be evaluated in three separate respects.

1) A formal and linguistic respect. Regarding the contents: We look at the treatment of (the English) language and the general ability of the student to make clear and intelligible formulations. We look at the general structure and disposition of the paper. We inquire whether the fundamental questions are formulated clearly and whether there is a correspondence between the purpose, contents and conclusions of the paper. Here is also included traditional formalia respects (e.g. how references, footnotes, literature are handled).

2) A respect connected to the student's knowledge of the subject. Regarding the contents: Does the student show real insight into the problem chosen? Has she/he understood relevant ethical theories and concepts? Does the paper show that the student is familiar with the relevant literature? We ask questions about correctness (or appropriateness) of terminology and the relevance and correctness of facts, presentations of theories and theses described in the paper. We look at the argumentation. Is anything important missing?

3) A respect of creativity. Regarding the contents:: How independent is the student's discussion, argumentation and conclusion? Are there things that are really the student's own inventions? A new original argument? A new conclusion? Or a new distinction (which really can be an important thing) or a new theoretical approach?

Even if all of these three respects in themselves are complex it is possible for an experienced teacher to obtain a fairly general idea of how far the student has succeeded in each respect. In each respect a student can succeed to a (a) high degree or to an (b) acceptable degree. Or the student can be (c) lacking success, failing, i. e. fulfilling the criteria in an unacceptable degree.

The ECTS grades are A (excellent), B (very good), C (good), D (satisfactory), E (sufficient), FX (fail - some more work required) and F (fail).

These grades can be transferred to the following evaluations using the three respects "formalia", "knowledge" and"creativity" and the three levels "high", "acceptable" and "lacking" above.

A High degree in all respects

B High degree in two respects and acceptable in the third

C High degree in one respect and acceptable in the other two.

D Acceptable in all three respects.

E Acceptable in "formalia" and "knowledge" but lacking in "creativity".

FX Lacking in "formalia" or "knowledge" (one of)

F Lacking in "formalia" and "knowledge" (both)

In a system of this kind we can make clear the differences for instance between what is a C and a D or a E and a FX (etc) can easily be clarified. Why we in the "formal respect" evaluate one paper as "high" and another one as "acceptable" should not be difficult to explain to students. Nor is it difficult to clarify differences in the "knowledge-respect" or the "creativity-respect". There is no need trying to spell out in detail these latter criteria within this system.

We have certain responsibilities, both to the students and to our Masters Programme, to stick to the highest standards, when using the grade A, excellent. In the “knowledge-respect” we can distinguish between a knowledge element and an argumentative element. It is important that the A-students reach the high level in both these respects. A perfect paper should also include some reflections on the authors own assumptions and arguments.

This system seems to correspond to our "intuitions" concerning evaluation, for instance that a high creativity is something needed for an extraordinary good paper or that a student can pass as "sufficient", i.e. E, with just ordinary and decent work and without really showing creativity. It is also reasonable that a paper lacking in structure and disposition or written in an unreadable language cannot pass without further work, nor can a paper failing in "knowledge-respect".

To take away some possible uncertainties some principles can be formulated and added as guides:

1) To get an A the paper must be ranked high in all respects.
2) If the paper fails in ”formal-respect” or ”knowledge-respect”, the evaluation will be FX (one of them) or F (both), irrespective of how creative the paper is.
3) To get a D it is not enough to be ranked acceptable in the formal and the knowledge-respect. Some own minor contributions and some minor ideas that are the student’s own, are required (i.e. for an acceptable creativity). But concerning this respect it seems most important that we are generous at this level. Still, the student’s paper cannot be totally lacking in creativity if the mark will be a D.
4) To get an evaluation above D the paper must be ranked high in at least one respect.
5) If the paper totally fails in creativity but has acceptable (or high) qualities in formal-respects and knowledge-respects the paper is evaluated ”sufficient”, E.