There are 5 criteria. Each one has a weight in marks. The weights add up to 100.
For each criterion, your work is placed in one of five bands. Each band shows the marks for that criterion and what the lecturer is looking for.
Excellent (70–100%)Excels in this area.
Very Good (60–69%)Performs in a consistently competent and confident way.
Satisfactory (50–59%)Performs at an adequate level but has scope for development.
Needs further work (40–49%)Performs somewhat less than adequately and needs development.
Unsatisfactory (20–39%)Performs considerably less than adequately and needs development.
Criterion 1
Quality of insight and awareness
Weight: 20 marks
Excellent
70–100%
14–20 marks
Shows excellent quality of insights and awareness and uses the journal to explore these insights. Shows excellent depth in exploring personal patterns and behaviours.
Very Good
60–69%
12–13.8 marks
Shows good quality of self-awareness and insight and uses the journal to explore these. Shows good depth of exploration of personal patterns and behaviours.
Satisfactory
50–59%
10–11.8 marks
Occasionally struggles with self-awareness and quality of insight. Some explorations of patterns and behaviours.
Needs further work
40–49%
8–9.8 marks
Frequently struggles with maintaining levels of self-awareness and insights. Limited personal insights and limited exploration of patterns and behaviours.
Unsatisfactory
20–39%
4–7.8 marks
Unable to maintain self-awareness or any quality of insights. Insufficient exploration of patterns and behaviours.
Criterion 2
Using the group experience to build and reflect on in journal entries
Weight: 20 marks
Excellent
70–100%
14–20 marks
Excellent critical use of group dynamics to track personal growth and group experience consistently.
Very Good
60–69%
12–13.8 marks
Shows good ability to critically reflect on group experience and build on entries.
Satisfactory
50–59%
10–11.8 marks
Basic analysis of group dynamics. Struggles to reflect consistently.
Needs further work
40–49%
8–9.8 marks
Limited analysis of dynamics. Basic understanding of patterns.
Unsatisfactory
20–39%
4–7.8 marks
Poor analysis of group dynamics. Inadequate examples. Poor awareness.
Criterion 3
Using the journals to reflect on experience in group and be able to link it to elements of theory, particularly group process concepts, dynamics and defence mechanisms
Weight: 30 marks
Excellent
70–100%
21–30 marks
Demonstrates strong awareness of self-experiences. Shows consistent ability to integrate learnings from theory. Shows a deep understanding of how theory illuminates personal patterns.
Very Good
60–69%
18–20.7 marks
Shows awareness of self-experiences in group. Shows good ability to integrate learnings from theory.
Satisfactory
50–59%
15–17.7 marks
Aware of some self-experiences but struggles to connect elements of theory.
Needs further work
40–49%
12–14.7 marks
Limited self-awareness and little theory integration.
Unsatisfactory
20–39%
6–11.7 marks
Lacks self-awareness and lack of or poor theoretical connections.
Criterion 4
Using their learning journal to reflect and critically review their experience and link to readiness for client work
Weight: 20 marks
Excellent
70–100%
14–20 marks
Makes profound [not given in source] between learning and broader life experiences. Demonstrates excellent understanding of patterns across different settings. Shows solid awareness of impact.B
Very Good
60–69%
12–13.8 marks
Makes clear connections to broader life, shows understanding of patterns, shows awareness of impact.
Satisfactory
50–59%
10–11.8 marks
Makes some broader connections, shows some patterns of recognition.
Needs further work
40–49%
8–9.8 marks
Limited application of insights, makes few broader connections.