MARKING SCHEME ASSIGNMENT – HMEF5033

MAY SEMESTER 2014HMEF5033 - COMPARATIVE EDUCATION

MARKING SCHEME (60%)

PART A: (20 Marks)Read the assigned article and answer the question below: Vidalakis, Sun & Papa (2013). The Quality and Value of Higher Education Facilities: A Comparative Study. Facilities, Vol 31. No. 11/12, p. 489-504.

Question 1 (20 Marks)Using your own words, write a critical review of the article. You Article Review should comprise the following aspects:

A summary of the article A critique of the article [i.e. the strengths and limitations ( if any) ] A personal response on the issue. Conclusion

Marking Scheme

Aspect Total marksA summary of the article – The summary should include the aim/ purpose, research methodology employed and main findings 6 marksA critique of the article [i.e. the strengths and limitations ( if any) ] – At least 5 points (2-3 strengths and 2-3 limitations) with evidence and support from textStrengths – e.g. relevant literature review, sound methodology, accurate statistical analysisLimitations – Validation of Questionnaire / Pilot study/ Limited sample size/ etc.

10 marks

A personal response on the issue 4 marksTotal 20 marks

1

MARKING SCHEME ASSIGNMENT – HMEF5033

Marking scheme: Part A- Question 1 – Article Review (20 Marks)

Weak / Limited Partially meets standards Meets standards Exceed standards

Summarya) aim / purposeb) research methodologyc) main findings

1 mark 2-3 marks 4-5 marks 5-6marks

Weak summary of article in relation to all the three aspects required – missing and inaccurate items

Satisfactory summary of article in relation to all the three aspects required – one missing or inaccurate item

Good summary of article in relation to all the three aspects required

Excellent summary of article in relation to all the three aspects required

CritiqueHighlight 5 main points2-3 strengths2-3 limitations

1-2 marks 3-4 marks 5-7 marks 8-10 marks

Limited critique of article highlighting few (1-2) strengths and limitations with poor / no evidence from article.

Satisfactory critique of article highlighting few (3-4) strengths and limitations with insufficient / inaccurate evidence from article.

Good critique of article highlighting (5) strengths and limitations with evidence from article.

Excellent critique of article highlighting (5) strengths and limitations with evidence from article.

Personal Response1mark 2 marks 3 marks 4 marks

Limited / Weak personal response to the article and poor / no attempt to address the issue at hand with no conclusion

Satisfactory personal response to the article and some attempt to address the issue at hand with weak conclusion

Good personal response to the article and issue at hand with suitable conclusion

Excellent personal response to the article and issue at hand with suitable conclusion

TOTAL 20 marks

2

MARKING SCHEME ASSIGNMENT – HMEF5033Dimension Weak

1

Partially meets standards

2

Meets standards

3

Exceed standards

4

Weightage Performance standards

Introduction Introduction does not preview the structure and objectives of the paper.

Introduction does not adequately preview the structure of the paper but clearly states its objectives

Introduction previews the structure and objectives of the paper clearly.

Introduction previews the structure and objectives of the paper clearly. It is interesting to read

4 x 0.5 Minimum=0Maximum=2

Country A Only a limited analysis of the issues.

Analysis is adequate. Analysis is detailed. Analysis is in-depth and critical. It is supported by relevant data. ,

4 x 1.5 Minimum=0Maximum=6

Country B Only a limited analysis of the issues.

Analysis is adequate. Analysis is detailed. Analysis is in-depth and critical. It is supported by relevant data. ,

4 x 1.5 Minimum=0Maximum=6

Comparative Analysis

There is no / limited effort to compare.

Weak opinion.

Comparison is adequate.

Adequate opinion.

A detailed comparison is made.

In-depth comparison is made.Students give their own viewpoint based on experience.

4 x 4.5 Minimum=0Maximum=18

Conclusion Conclusion is made. It does not tie up the issues in a clear manner.

The conclusion partially ties up the issues among the two countries.

The conclusion is well summarized.

The conclusion is strong. It is well summarized.

4 x 1 Minimum=0Maximum=4

Organization

Substantial errors in grammar and spelling.

The paper is presented in an adequate manner.

The details are in logical manner. Minimal grammar and spelling errors.

The presentation is clear and systematic in logical manner. References conform to the APA style. The paper is interesting.

4 x 1 Minimum=0Maximum=4

Total 40 marks

Marking Scheme: Part B -Question 2 Writing a Comparative Study Report (40 Marks)

3