Archaeology Assessment Description and Rubric
|
Module code
|
ARCH6412
|
Module name
|
Professional Practice
|
|
Assessment No.
|
1
|
Assessment Title
|
Portfolio
|
|
Word limit etc.
|
6500 words
|
% of module
|
100%
|
1. Introduction
The module utilises both formative and summative methods of assessment. Formative assessment is optional and will take the form. of a submitted draft for the project design element of the summative portfolio. Written feedback will be provided for the formative assessment. Final assessment (summative) will be through a submitted portfolio of work which will test a range of professional practice skills.
2. Learning outcomes to be assessed
The Aims and Learning Outcomes for this module are set out in the Module Profile. This assessment seeks to assess the extent to which you have achieved the following:
· Gained detailed knowledge of how to design and manage archaeological projects, including post-excavation analysis;
· Instruction in the preparation and writing of project designs, desktop assessments and professional archaeological reports;
· Detailed knowledge of the publication process with explicit reference to archaeological reports.
· Knowledge of the processes and workflows applied in the archaeological sector and heritage industry
· Knowledge of project planning and implementation
· Knowledge of report production for publication
3. What to submit
Final assessment (summative) will be through a portfolio of written and illustrated work. This will include:
· An Archaeological CV detailing your relevant qualifications and experience (5% of total mark).
· A written and appropriately illustrated project design (length 3,500 words max.) (35% of total mark).
· A written excavation structural report with supporting data, containing illustrations produced by yourself (length 500-2,500 words, dependent upon complexity of features and deposits) (35% of total mark).
· A publication-style. text developed from the above (max. 500 words) (20% of total mark).
· Proof-reading exercise (5% of total mark).
Please submit as a single document via Turnitin.
The deadline for submission of the portfolio is Thursday 9th January 2025.
4. Marking Scheme and Grade Descriptors
The portfolio will be marked according to the Marking Scheme and top level (generic) Grade Descriptors that can be found in section 11 of the Faculty Postgraduate Taught Programmes Handbook, which can be found at:
http://www.southampton.ac.uk/studentservices/academic-life/faculty-handbooks.page
Please note, in particular, those relating to ‘Portfolios’ and ‘Technical, Lab and Field Reports’.
5. Rubric
In addition to the relevant grade descriptors (above) the following table describes how markers will assess your work. Note that this is intended as guidance, and that marking requires markers to use their academic judgement about the quality of the work they are assessing.
|
Area
|
Excellent
70 and upwards
|
Good
60-69
|
Acceptable
50-59
|
Poor
49 and below
|
|
Comprehension
|
Excellent work with few or any flaws. Shows understanding of a range of complex reporting and decision-making processes.
|
Very good work with very few flaws. Shows good understanding of a range of reporting and decision-making processes.
|
Acceptable work with some significant flaws. Shows basic understanding of a range of reporting and decision-making processes.
|
Very poor work with many significant f laws. Shows very little or flawed understanding of a range of reporting and decision-making processes.
|
|
Research
|
Addresses a wide range of relevant literature and sources. Excellent organisation and structure.
|
Addresses a range of relevant literature and sources. Good organisation and structure.
|
Addresses a few relevant literature and sources. Acceptable organisation and structure.
|
Inadequately engages with relevant literature and sources. Poor organisation and structure.
|
|
Technical observation and reporting
|
Excellent level of analysis, observation and reporting. Shows a very high level understanding of project design and excavation reporting processes. At best, generates work of industry and publication standard. Shows a capacity to deploy in a highly effective manner appropriate technical language and illustration.
|
Good level of analysis, observation and reporting. Shows a very competent level understanding of project design and excavation reporting processes. Shows a capacity to deploy appropriate technical language and illustration.
|
Acceptable level of analysis, observation and reporting. Shows basic competence in understanding of project design and excavation reporting processes. Shows some capacity to deploy appropriate technical language and illustration.
.
|
Poor level of analysis, observation and reporting. Shows little or flawed understanding of project design and excavation reporting processes. Fails to show capacity to deploy appropriate technical language and illustration.
|
|
Presentation
|
Of a very high, even professional standard. Highly effective use is made of high quality illustrations, photographs and other graphic media.
|
Of a good standard. Proficient use is made of illustrations, photographs and other graphic media.
|
Of an acceptable standard. Basic use is made of illustrations, photographs and other graphic media.
|
Of a poor standard. Inadequate quality of illustrations, photographs and other graphic media, or such are entirely missing.
|