On the use and abuse of Technology and its Management from the perspective of an academic at UCL specialising in Project Management, Systems Engineering and Space Science/Technology.

Friday, August 26, 2016

Coursework Marking

Two pieces of work arrived somewhat randomly in my inbox. This tends to happen at this time of year, and I am too nice to refuse to deal with them. The precise aims for the assignment were not clear, but I have been asked to rank them. Therefore I followed my usual criteria.

  • Jeremy: 52%. Bare pass, but I would like to refer.
  • Owen: 48%. Fail (condonable or may re-submit). 
Jeremy's piece was well-written, if a little over-wrought. His enthusiasm comes across well. Lacks detail and credibility in many areas. Does not address the parliamentary dimension in a satisfactory way, nor his weakness in managing resources.  I would normally suggest a meeting with colleagues, but I understand the candidate is rarely on campus.
Grammar 3/5, Logical Flow 4/5, Strategy 5/10, Sources 1/5. Total 13/25 

Owen. We are grateful for this late submission. However, it seems ill-prepared, and the style is dominated by isolated phrases rather than complete sentences. I suspect the author is relying on rushed notes (which might work in the context of an oral exam) instead of a deep study of the subject matter. The strategy is adequate, in that it specifically mentions the next general election, as opposed to a distant future. It is lacking in details.
Please see me before the final deadline for a list of minor amendments.
Grammar 2/5, Logical Flow 3/5, Strategy 6/10, Sources 1/5. Total 12/25

Neither piece is compelling, and I would have expected better at this stage of the course. Both candidates seem to be concentrating on building up their own enthusiasm, and that of their respective community rather than working out any strategic policy details or implementation tactics.

(Note: MW received emails from the UK Labour Party leadership candidates in August).