Skip to main content

Practice - Assessment Criteria/Grade Descriptors

 Generic Assessment Criteria for Practice within Theatre/Performance Studies

Practice is assessed in an evaluation of processes and projects. The underlying principle, as with all assessment of theatre practice within the School, is that you are assessed on the demonstration of your understanding through practice. Key criteria of assessment are:

  • Good practice. Your response to the basic disciplines and demands of project-based, group work: attendance, punctuality, a commitment and willingness to share responsibility with other members of the group.
  • The initiation, negotiation and realisation of ideas in a collaborative group process. In this context there may also be an assessment of the execution of specific responsibilities allocated by the tutor or agreed between the tutor and the group.
  • Your demonstration, through your practice, of an understanding of the specific concepts, issues and/or practices towards which the module directs and focuses your attention.


Practical Grade Descriptors

Whilst practical work takes many forms its general grading subscribes to the following criteria. These are divided into two basic categories whose functioning interlocks in practice.

1. Initiation, negotiation and realisation of performance material

Practice will be evaluated on the basis of:

the understanding shown of performance convention and form
the appropriate and imaginative use of performance techniques as a means by which to explore source material
the ability to select and synthesise material arising out of a practical working process
the ability to select appropriate means of communicating performance material to specified audiences
the ability to produce a performance ‘text’ suitable for its context
evidence of an engagement with relevant theoretical concepts and issues
2. Engagement with process and performance

Participants in practical work will be assessed on the basis of:

individual initiative and contribution within a group process
commitment to the development and articulation of ideas offered by other group members
the ability, within a group situation, to offer and respond to constructive criticism and analysis of the work in progress
the ability to contribute to the development of the overall discipline of the work, in particular to allocate appropriate time and resources
the ability to review practice critically and to provide appropriate documentation where required
Classification of practice is premised on the greater or lesser qualitative fulfilment of the listed criteria. Individual modules (or, indeed, practical tasks set within modules) may also have their own specific criteria, to which participants will be alerted by tutors as required. The grade descriptors should be read, then, as variables of the criteria outlined.

96 (excellent 1st)
Exceptional command of subject-matter, concepts and techniques, including material which ranges well beyond that covered in practical sessions. Work of exceptional insight, bringing new perspectives to bear on the material in question, or developing new knowledge or techniques. A very high level of achievement commensurate with the given practical brief will be evident. The work will also reveal a highly effective interaction of practice and theory.

74, 81, 89 (low, mid, high 1st)
Very high quality work, with full understanding of subject-matter, concepts and techniques. Work that demonstrates high practical intelligence and maturity, and is perceptive with highly developed organisation. An ambitious project carried out successfully, with sophisticated handling of primary and secondary material. Some degree of originality, independent research, thought and practical ability.

62, 65, 68 (low, mid, high 2.1)
Highly competent in organisation and presentation, evidence of originality and independence of thought and practice may be in evidence, as well as a sound interaction of theory and practice. Appropriate and intelligent practical use of primary and secondary material, good understanding of subject-matter allied with perceptive practical analysis and highly adept application of concepts and techniques.

52, 55, 58 (low, mid, high 2.2)
Conscientious work, attentive to subject-matter and practical tasks set; a focused response to tasks, demonstrating good levels of knowledge, balanced more towards the application of predictable rather than innovative and practically astute concepts and techniques. Some indication of theory and practice interacting successfully will be evident.

42, 45, 48 (low, mid, high 3rd)
Some relevant knowledge, some accurate re-presentation of work undertaken in practical classes. Competence in the fulfilment of key criteria will reveal significant inadequacies. Understanding of the practical brief is likely to be misconceived in some way, leading to an unsatisfactory outcome. Levels of engagement and commitment to the work will be low.

38 (high fail)
Work does not meet standards required for the appropriate stage of an honours degree, albeit with some basic understanding of relevant concepts and techniques.

12, 25 (fail, low fail)
The work fails to address and fulfil the criteria outlined. Little or no sign of understanding, engagement or commitment to the task in hand. Ineptitude in knowledge, structure, academic/professional practice. No evidence of basic understanding of relevant concepts and techniques.

0 (zero)
Work of no merit. OR Absent, work not submitted, penalty in some misconduct cases.