L7 (CRN 20016) Global Debates in Education Module Handbook 2025/26 Semester 1 | LBU

Total Notional Hours  (Minimum Total Contact Hours  + Guided  Independent Study) 

100 - 86
Distinction 

85 - 70  Distinction 

69 - 60
Merit 

59 - 50 
Pass 

49 - 40
Fail 

39 – 30
Fail 

29 – 15
Fail 

14 – 0
Fail 

Organisation and planning 

[From taxonomy: Set, negotiate and meet own objectives and deadlines, collaborating effectively with others to work towards identified objectives and standards] 

Individual and/ or group objectives identified, negotiated, and met.  

Excellent, comprehensive planning evidenced either individually or collaboratively, leading to a full outcome which could not be improved at this level.    

Excellent detailed evidence of structure, organisation and planning that acknowledges, adapts, and acts sensitively upon the skills and abilities of diverse team members to achieve the objectives to a high standard to the identified deadlines. 

Individual and/ or group objectives identified, negotiated, and met.  

Very good planning evidenced, either individually or collaboratively leading to a full outcome.  

Very good evidence of structure, organisation and planning that acknowledges, adapts, and acts upon the skills and abilities of diverse team members to consistently achieve the objectives to a high standard to the identified deadlines. 

Good planning evidenced, either individually or collaboratively leading to a full outcome.  

Evidence of structure, organisation and planning that acknowledges, adapts, and acts upon the skills and abilities of diverse team members to achieve the objectives to a high standard to the identified deadlines 

Adequate planning evidenced either individually or collaboratively leading to a satisfactory identified outcome.  

Adequate evidence of structure organisation and planning that acknowledges, adapts, and acts upon the skills and abilities of diverse team members to achieve the identified outcomes to identified deadlines. 

Communication 

[From taxonomy: Select, use, and modify appropriate styles and modes of communication for a wide range of tasks and purposes taking account of the audience/fellow participants.]

Communication 
(continued) 

Mode(s) of communication: 

Excellent selection and use of different styles and appropriate modes of communication to suit audience. 

Content fully, succinctly & clearly explained. Tightly and consistently focused on all elements of the assessment’s aim/ scope/ title/ outcomes throughout 

Presentation: Presentation is polished and applied creatively to the topic 

Excellent use of visual aids (if applicable), that appropriately strengthen the presentation and could not be improved upon at this le vel 

Academic expression:  

A fluent academic writing style is evident with accurate spelling and syntax.  

Thoughts and ideas clearly and tightly expressed. Appropriate, complete, and accurately cited referencing to the required style.  

References drawn from a diverse range of sources 

Excellent, high quality consistent communication with engaging & high-quality academic expression that addresses all reasonable nuances and implications and could not be improved upon at this level. 

Mode(s) of communication:

Very good, selection and use of different styles and appropriate modes of communication to suit audience. 

Content fully, succinctly & clearly explained. Consistently focused on all elements of the assessment’s aim/ scope/ title/ outcomes  

Presentation: very good with an imaginative approach to the topic. 

Very good use of visual aids (if applicable) that complement the presentation, are attractive and engaging 

Academic expression: Engaging and accomplished. Very high-quality, fluent academic writing style with accurate spelling and syntax.  

Thoughts and ideas expressed clearly.  

Appropriate, accurately cited, and complete references from a range of sources*

Mode(s) of communication: 

Good, appropriate selection and use of different styles and modes of communication to suit the audience. 

Communicates effectively by being directly relevant to the title, scope and learning outcomes of the assessment.

Presentation:  is logically structured. 

Well written, with correct spelling and syntax.  

Style is lucid with appropriate format.  

Good use of visual aids (if applicable). However, some minor improvements could be made to enhance these 

Academic expression:  

Effective, good quality academic expression, and clarity. Stays on  

topic and addresses most implications and assumptions of the title. 

Appropriate, complete, and consistent references which may only have minor inaccuracies. 

Mode(s) of communication:

Appropriate selection for the chosen audience. Satisfactory communication of material which is mainly focused on the assessment title and learning outcomes but occasionally wanders from the point. 

Presentation: is adequate and the meaning is apparent, but language and style are not always consistently fluent. 

Some adequate use of visual aids (if applicable) however, these require improvement to enhance attractiveness and clarity. 

Spelling and syntax of academic writing is satisfactory. Some minor in-consistencies and gaps in referencing. 

Academic expression: Satisfactory quality of academic expression, meaning, sand clarity demonstrated with only minor areas identified for improvement. 

Mode(s) of communication:

Not suitable for the audience.   

Focus on the assessment title and outcomes demonstrated intermittently with the topic only superficially addressed and terms only sporadically fully explained. 

Presentation:  is logical but has minor lapses from standard syntax and spelling.  

Basic use of visual aids (if applicable) that require improvement to strengthen the clarity and attractiveness of the presentation. 

Academic expression:  

Meaning is not always clear and lucid. Style is not consistently fluid. 

Some inconsistencies and gaps in referencing. 

needs some improvement to improve the quality of the writing in some areas 

Mode(s) of communication:

Not suitable for the audience.  Inconsistent Minimal focus on the assessment title and outcomes demonstrated. The topic is only superficially addressed, and terms are not fully explained. 

Presentation: disorganised in some areas.  

Very basic use of visual aids (if applicable) that require significant improvement to enhance attractiveness, effectiveness, and clarity. 

Some errors, omissions, and inconsistencies in the referencing.  

Academic expression: Rather poorly written in parts with deficiencies in flow, coherence, clarity, and expression,  

Mode(s) of communication:

Not appropriate for the task and/ or audience. 

Only intermittent connection to the assessment title and outcomes, 

with the assessment topic/focus only superficially addressed. Terms not fully or clearly explained. 

Communication is confused,  

Presentation: disorganised. 

Poor use of visual aids (if applicable) that require comprehensive changes and development to support the presentation effectively 

Academic expression: Poor quality writing with significant deficiencies in expression, flow, style, and format.

Significant errors in the referencing,  

Minimal coherence with a lack of clarity & academic expression throughout. 

Mode(s) of communication:

Not appropriate to the task or audience.  

The nature of the audience is not considered. Poor connection to title and assessment outcomes with little or no consideration of the topic and terms not fully explained. 

Presentation: very disorganised. No or almost no use of visual aids (if applicable)  

Academic expression: Very significant deficiencies in expression and format. Very poor quality of academic writing. 

References incomplete, inaccurate and   unacceptable 

No coherence or clarity & failure to meet academic level of expression. 

Technical capabilities 

[From taxonomy: Select and effectively apply a range of complex tools and techniques to novel situations to achieve innovative solutions]

Demonstrates a limited awareness understanding or selection of the tools or techniques which can be used to generate develop solutions. 

Makes only a limited attempt to use the tools and techniques to find solutions 

Demonstrates an extremely limited awareness or understanding of the tools or techniques which can be used to generate solutions. 

Makes only a very limited attempt to use the tools and techniques to find solutions 

Theory and principles  

[From taxonomy: Select, critique, and apply relevant theory and /or strategies and methodologies for investigating/solving complex issues and research questions]. 

Demonstrates a limited awareness and selection of   practice knowledge, key concepts, theoretical approaches, and key debates. 

The lack of knowledge base means it is not always applied/ used consistently or appropriately  

Demonstrates a very limited awareness and application of practice knowledge, key concepts, theoretical approaches, and key debates. 

The lack of knowledge base means it cannot be applied/ used appropriately. 

The lack of knowledge base means it cannot be applied /used appropriately. 

Information/ data collection 

[From taxonomy: Work autonomously to select, devise, apply and critically evaluate appropriate methods and tools for data and information collection for an extended piece of research] 

Demonstrates good depth of engagement with use of source material/literature, methods and research tools and shows independent thought but may have a few omissions. 

Where original data are provided its collection, presentation and analysis are consistently appropriate and well presented 

Demonstrates satisfactory understanding and engagement with appropriate literature, methods, and tools. Shows some independent thought but may have some omissions. 

Where original data are provided its collection, presentation and analysis are appropriately presented. Some evidence of independent thought or reasoning demonstrated. 

Demonstrates insufficient evidence of engagement with the selection and critical evaluation of source material/literature, methods, and research tools. Insufficient appropriate research tools selected.  

Where original data are provided, its collection, presentation and analysis show some omissions. Insufficient evidence of independent thought or reasoning 

Lacks consistent evidence as to the appropriate use and critical evaluation of source material, methods, and research tools. 

Where original data are provided, its collection, presentation and analysis are inconsistent. 

Limited evidence of independent thought or reasoning 

Poor selection of source material, methods, and tools. Some inappropriate research tools selected.  

Lacks evidence as to the appropriate use and critical evaluation of source material, methods, and research tools. 

Where original data are provided, its collection, presentation and analysis are poor 

Some minimal evidence of independent thought or reasoning with significant development required. 

Poor, inappropriate, and inaccurate selection of source material, methods, and research tools. No evidence of engagement with the critical evaluation of source material, methods, and research tools. 

Where original data are provided, its collection, presentation and analysis are poor.  No evidence of independent thought or reasoning with substantial development required. 

Group/ interpersonal 

[From Taxonomy: Interact effectively and ethically with individuals and groups in varied settings and with sensitivity to equality, diversity and  culture, to achieve an identified research activity. 

Clearly delineate negotiate and subscribe to agreed parameters of responsibility in group/ team settings and ventures.] 

Shows excellent evidence of making sound decisions readily in complex situations; demonstrable evidence of operating both autonomously, sensitively, self critically, inclusively, and collaboratively as a professional; a consistently strong contributor to any team, in any role. 

Complete synthesis of arguments with all team members working in full collaboration. Evidence of acknowledging and acting upon the skills and abilities of diverse team members to achieve the outcome.

Shows very good initiative and personal responsibility in actions.  

Shows evidence of strong coordination and teamwork between all team members to produce a coherent and unified piece of work.   

Able to consistently work effectively in diverse teams in a range of roles  

Shows good self-direction in tackling and solving problems in professional/ subject area 

Able to demonstrate working consistently, sensitively, and collaboratively and effectively in diverse teams. 

Evidence of constructive collaboration and coordination between team members with minor improvements identified in synthesising individual work for a collective output. 

Shows some self-direction in tackling and solving problems in professional/ subject area and the requirements of team working. 

Satisfactory evidence of coordination of individual efforts for a unified output. Some improvement needed to develop a more unified collective output through more constructive and sensitive collaboration in diverse teams.

Inconsistent demonstration of working in a consistent sustained and collaborative manner in a group/ team. 

Some evidence of coordination of individual effort, although this needs substantial improvement to produce a more developed, unified collective output 

Minimal evidence of autonomous self-critical working.  

Reluctant collaborator with others. 

Little evidence of collective work, with either a disproportionate amount of work done by a single person or little coordination of individual outputs resulting in a weak, underdeveloped collective effort  

Minimal evidence of autonomous self-critical working or collaboration with others. 

Reluctant collaborator with others and may at times show evidence of being unsupportive to others.  

Fails to evidence collective work. Extremely limited evidence of coordination or collaboration with other team members

Is unproductive working alone with minimal insight into indicators for collaboration.  

Reluctant collaborator with others and may show evidence of being unsupportive to others. 

No evidence demonstrated of collective work nor coordination of individual inputs  

Analysis and interpretation  

[From taxonomy: Examine problems and issues critically and in detail using the main theoretical perspectives of the cognate area and the appropriate research methods and strategies, seeking evidence to offer and support valid interpretations] 

Excellent deep, detailed, and critical analysis and interpretation of the material resulting in illuminating, and elegant conclusions that extend the sum of knowledge in the area. A range of appropriate theoretical perspectives and research methods used to support robust and detailed interpretation. 

The consideration of complex ideas is robust and sustained throughout. Creatively demonstrates new concepts, ideas, or theories.  

Very good, deep, detailed, systematic critical analysis and interpretation of the material resulting in well-reasoned conclusions that extend the sum of knowledge in the area. Theoretical perspectives and research methods used to support robust interpretation Creatively demonstrates new concepts, ideas and/ or theories.  

Demonstrates good evidence of systematic critical analysis and interpretation of the material resulting in reasoned conclusions. 

Consistent consideration of complex ideas evidenced.  

 Good use of the theoretical perspectives and research methods to support interpretation. Demonstrates evidence of some new concepts, ideas and/ or theories.

Demonstrates adequate evidence of systematic critical analysis and interpretation of the material resulting in some measured conclusions. 

Some consideration of complex ideas evidenced. Adequate evidence of use of some appropriate theoretical perspectives and research methods to support interpretation. 

Demonstrates some basic evidence of systematic critical analysis and interpretation of the material resulting in some weak conclusions. 

Reliance on description rather than critique. Inconsistent use of theoretical perspectives and research methods to support any interpretation. Minimal demonstration of new concepts, ideas, or theories.  

Over reliance on description at the expense of critical analysis and interpretation. 

Minimal basic evidence of systematic critical analysis and interpretation resulting in simplistic conclusions that need significant development. Incomplete use of theoretical perspectives and research methods to support the interpretation. 

Application 

[From taxonomy: Use theories, methodology, techniques, and strategies in new situations in informed and valid ways, demonstrating empirical/experimental rigour in the identification of solutions to new situations/ problems] 

Demonstrates inadequate application of conceptual frameworks, principles, and theories to practice with minimal 

evidence of a coherent, insightful, argument. 

Solutions and insights evidenced need development in argument. 

Demonstrates unsatisfactory, poorly informed, and inadequate application of conceptual frameworks, principles, and theories to practice with minimal 

evidence of a coherent, focused   argument. Few insights/ solutions demonstrated in argument. 

Demonstrates unsatisfactory, invalid, and inadequate application of conceptual frameworks, principles, and theories to practice. 

Very limited insights /solutions demonstrated in argument.  

Little or no evidence of application of knowledge, conceptual frameworks, principles, and theories to practice.  

No insights or solutions demonstrated in unreasoned argument 

Synthesis and evaluation 

[From taxonomy: Critically evaluate and justify existing information and methodologies. Create new connections between theoretical perspectives, methods and the strategies applied.] 

Very good

demonstration of independent thought, new connections between ideas and critical, well-reasoned engagement with a range of consistently, well justified alternative views. 

Good  

demonstration of independent thought with good evidence showing the combining of ideas and critical engagement. Consistent reasoned, justification of alternative views and perspectives. 

Contains some independent thinking. Rather sporadic attempt to develop, justify and synthesise ideas and engage with the weighing up of alternative views from credible sources. 

Critical reasoning and evaluation of ideas needs development. 

No attempt to combine evidence or others’ views to create a critical perspective of the topic.  

No evidence of understanding or weighing up the relationship /connections between sources.  

Reflection 

[From taxonomy; Give deliberate thought to the critical consideration of issues from a range of diverse settings and the methods, process, and outcomes by which new solutions or actions emerge and can affect self and others.] 

Very good, evidence demonstrated indicating full responsibility for own learning, the capacity to advance their knowledge and develop new skills to a high level. Very good, effective use of reflective cycles/ frameworks. 

Clear consistent evidence throughout that the process and outcomes are articulated in some detail in terms how they impact on self and others  

Good evidence demonstrated of the capacity to continue to advance their knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level. Good, effective use of reflective cycles/ frameworks. 

Clear evidence that the process and outcomes are articulated in terms of how they impact on self and others. 

Adequate evidence of a sense of motivation and commitment to personal and professional development, which is clearly communicated and evidenced. Some evidence that issues have been critically deliberated on and considered from different perspectives/ settings.  

Some development required on citing evidence that the process and outcomes are articulated in terms of how they impact self and others. 

Inadequate evidence of awareness of personal qualities and areas for self-development  

and that issues have been critically deliberated on and considered from different perspectives/ settings. 

Development required in using appropriate reflective frameworks and citing evidence that the process and outcomes are articulated in terms how they impact self and others 

Limited awareness of personal strengths and areas for development in relation to task. Minimal evidence that the process and outcomes are considered in terms of impact on how they affect self and others. 

Ineffective and sporadic use of reflective cycle/frameworks used. 

Little awareness of personal strengths and weaknesses in relation to task. Minimal evidence that the process and outcomes are considered in terms of impact on how they affect self and others. 

Insufficient evidence of reflective cycle/frameworks used. 

No awareness of personal strengths and areas for development in relation to task. No evidence that the process and outcomes are considered in terms of impact on how they affect self and others. 

No evidence of reflective cycle/frameworks used. 

Creativity 

[From taxonomy: Propose alternative solutions and modifications by combining different sources of information in new patterns. Identify new areas for investigation/new problems /new methodological approaches.] 

Frequent indications of originality in the application of knowledge. 

Significant new areas for development, innovation and exploration identified.  

Demonstrates good, consistent understanding of specialised and/ or applied knowledge, with some indications of originality. 

Some new areas for development, innovation and exploration identified.  

Adequate indication of originality in the application of knowledge. 

Satisfactory alternative solutions/ ideas proposed.  

Some approaches/ areas for exploration identified.  

Inadequate, inconsistent indication of originality in the application of knowledge. 

Some development still required in proposing alternative solutions/ ideas. 

Minimal indication of originality in the application of knowledge.  

Few alternative solutions/ ideas proposed.  

 And little attempt to identify approaches for further exploration.  

No indication of originality in the application of knowledge.  

No alternative solutions/ ideas proposed.  

No new approaches/ areas for exploration identified.