University of Derby Grading

By | 19th May 2017

University of Derby logo

University of Derby Grading

University of Derby Grading, Undergraduate marking scale

This scale applies to Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 in the University Credit Framework. The descriptors are typical characteristics of the standard of work associated with each range of marks. The descriptors are illustrative and for guidance only. They are not comprehensive. A mark of 40% is regarded as a minimum pass. See Section B3.2 for level descriptors.

% mark Mark Descriptors


s Clas


 70-100% Excellent    
   Outstanding; high to very high standard; a high level of critical analysis andFirst
   evaluation, incisive original thinking; commendable originality; exceptionally well
   researched; high quality presentation; exceptional clarity of ideas; excellent
   coherence and logic. Trivial or very minor errors. For the highest marks (90 –
   100%): an exceptional standard of work illustrating thorough and in-depth   
   understanding, communicated with exceptional authority.   
 60-69% Very good SecondDiv1
   A very good standard; a very good level of critical analysis and evaluation; significant
   originality; well researched; a very good standard of presentation; commendable
   clarity of ideas; thoughtful and effective presentation; very good sense of coherence
   and logic; minor errors only.
 50-59% Good SecondDiv2
  A good standard; a fairly good level of critical analysis and evaluation; some
   evidence of original thinking or originality; quite well researched; a good standard of
   presentation; ideas generally clear and coherent, some evidence of
   misunderstandings; some deficiencies in presentation.
 40-49% Satisfactory    
  A sound standard of work; a fair level of critical analysis and evaluation; littleThird
   evidence of original thinking or originality; adequately researched; a sound standard
   of presentation; ideas fairly clear and coherent, some significant misunderstandings
   and errors; some weakness in style or presentation but satisfactory overall.   
 35-39% Unsatisfactory  MarginalFail 
   Overall marginally unsatisfactory; some sound aspects but some of the following  
   weaknesses are evident; inadequate critical analysis and evaluation; little evidence of  
   originality; not well researched; standard of presentation unacceptable; ideas unclear  
   and incoherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings. Marginal fail.  
 21-34% Poor    
   Below the pass standard; a poor critical analysis and evaluation; virtually no   
   evidence of originality; poorly researched; presentation unacceptable and not up   
   to  graduate  standard;  ideas  confused  and  incoherent,  some  serious   
   misunderstandings and errors. A clear fail, short of pass standard.   
 1-20% Very poor    
   Well below the passstandard, with many serious errors. Standard of presentation   
   totally unacceptable,incoherent and may be severely under- length. No evidence   
   of evaluation or application. A very clear fail, well short of the pass standard.   
 NS Non-submission 
   No work has been submitted.   
 Z Academic offence notation   
   Applies to proven instances of academic offence.   



*programme leader = Programme Leader, Academic Lead or Workforce Development Fellow

Part F  Assessment Regulations for Undergraduate Programmes

3Rs for Students on Taught Programmes September 2014

IMPORTANT: An assignment may show the characteristics of two or more marks. The examiner should give careful consideration to the relative importance of the applicable descriptors as indicated by the assessment criteria in deciding the overall standard of the work and the appropriate mark to be awarded.

F3.3 Assessment component marks

  • The Undergraduate marking scale applies to individual assessment components undertaken by students of modules at Levels 3, 4, 5 and 6 in undergraduate programmes. The examiner identifies the mark descriptor which most closely reflects the quality of the work and awards and records the mark.
  • If the module involves two or more assessment components, a mathematical weighting is applied to reflect the relative importance of each component. These weightings will be used to compute the overall mark for the module.
  • Overall module marks will be rounded to the nearest whole percentage point. Calculations of level averages will be to 2 decimal places.
  • In the case of Honours degree, Integrated Master’s degree, Foundation degree & HND/C programmes, classifications are applied to the final award (F14), and are indicative only at module level.

The relative weightings are applied to the marks achieved in each component of assessment in order to calculate the overall module mark.

To pass a module, and therefore be awarded credit, the average of the marks for the assessment components must be at least 40% and at least a mark of 35% must be achieved in each assessment component (see Section F3.2 for available marks). Where this has not been achieved, credits are not awarded and the referral regulations apply (see Section F7.2).

For some Professional Practice modules, where there is an external requirement to fully satisfy the entire set of learning outcomes, the minimum standard of performance is set at 40% for each component. Professional Practice modules must be designated as such at the time of validation.

At level 6 only those modules marked 40% or above can be used to satisfy the minimum credit requirements at level 6 (Section B4.4).

Students are entitled to feedback on assignments and this may be verbal, or in written or electronic form. Feedback on examinations is available on request from the marking tutor.

F4 Passing Modules

F4.1 If a student passes a module, by achieving an average mark of at least 40%, the credit is awarded by the Assessment Board. It is not possible to retake a module that has been passed, unless there is allowance made by an external body associated with the programme, explicitly stated in the programme specification.