EVALUATIONCRITERIA:

Fivemaincriteria:
A. Structure (consistence, coherence)
B. Content (analysis; comprehension)
C. Perspective and insightfulness (reflexivity; applied approach)
D. Use of sources
E. Style and language (coherence)
Essaysaregradedonascaleof05.Seebelowfordescriptionsofgradesregardingeach
criteriontobeevaluated(gradeinbrackets):
(0) = inadequate (fail)
(1) = pass
(2) = satisfactory
(3) = good
(4) = very good
(5) = excellent
STRUCTURE
(0) The essay is not of the required length. There is no coherent structure and the discussion does
not proceed in a logical manner.
(1) The structure of the essay is patchy and inadequate.
(2) The essay has a fairly coherent structure, and the discussion proceeds mainly in a logical
manner.
(3) The aims set out for the essay in the Introduction have been presented fairly clearly and the
arguments are mostly presented in a logical, consistent and factual manner. The reader can easily
grasp the main ideas and arguments in the text. There may be small shortcomings in the
structure.
(4) There is a clear and coherent structure in the essay. The discussion proceeds in a very logical
manner.
(5) There is a very clear and coherent structure in the essay. The discussion proceeds in a logical
and insightful manner.
B.CONTENT
(0) The text does not correspond to the title and does not demonstrate that source texts have been
studied. Relevant issues are not distinguished from irrelevant ones. The text contains factual
errors.
(1) The text corresponds to the title and demonstrates superficial knowledge of the source
literature. The text contains some factual errors and/or it dwells too much on irrelevant points.
(2) The text corresponds to the title and demonstrates knowledge of the source literature. The
text may contain isolated factual errors. Relevant points are distinguished from irrelevant ones to
a certain extent.
(3) The text corresponds to the topic, relevant points are discerned from irrelevant ones and there
are attempts to understand relations between different issues. As a rule, the text does not contain
factual errors, even though some misunderstandings may be present.
(4) The text corresponds to the title and does not contain factual errors. Relevant and irrelevant
issues are clearly distinguished and relations between issues are understood.

(5) The text corresponds to the title and does not contain factual errors. All assertions are well
argued, relevant and irrelevant issues are distinguished clearly. Relations between different issues
have been understood in an insightful manner.
C.PERSPECTIVEANDINSIGHTFULNESS
(0) The text does not present any thoughts or reflections by the student.
(1) There is some reflection by the student in the text, but it remains on a superficial level. The
students thoughts are presented, but they are one-sided, opinionated and alternative perspectives
have not been discussed.
(2) There is some reflection and thought by the student in the essay. Issues are approached from a
variety of different perspectives, but presentation of the arguments is superficial and remains on
the level of an opinion.
(3) The essay contains critical thought by the student. Reflection by the student is present
throughout, and issues are analyzed from a variety of viewpoints.
(4) The essay contains critical thought by the student. Reflection by the student is evident, and
issues are analyzed from a new perspective as well.
(5) The essay contains relevant, critical and well-argued points by the student and original and
new perspectives that are well connected to the sources. The text contains insightful arguments
and good examples. The students own thought is evident throughout the essay and issues are
analyzed from new viewpoints and connections are made in unprecedented ways.
D.USEOFSOURCES
(0) The text has been plagiarized (see instructions for dealing with plagiarism
http://www.helsinki.fi/socialsciences/studying/current/plagiarism.html) or the text does not
demonstrate knowledge of the literature. Citations are few, the sources are dated, not relevant to
the topic or non-scientific and they have been treated in an uncritical manner. The sources have
not been understood or they have been misunderstood. The citations and/or the bibliography are
inadequate.
(1) The text demonstrates superficial knowledge of the sources. The sources are mainly scientific
and related to the topic, but they have not been cited enough. They have been partly understood
correctly, but there are several misunderstandings. Citations and/or the bibliography are
inadequate.
(2) There are enough sources; they are scientific and related to the topic. They have mainly been
understood correctly with some misunderstandings. Citations and/or the bibliography contain
some shortcomings.
(3) The text demonstrates knowledge of the most important sources. They have mainly been
cited correctly, the literature has been understood and there are no misunderstandings. An
adequate variety of scientific sources have been cited and they are related to the topic. There is
some source criticism in the text.
(4) There are a lot of sources and they have been cited correctly. They have been understood
correctly and there are no misunderstandings. The sources are scientific, up to date, related to the
topic and they have been applied and cited in a critical manner.
(5) The text demonstrates thorough knowledge of the sources. A variety of sources have been
cited and the citations are correct. They have also been understood very well and there are no
misunderstandings. The sources are scientific, up to date and related to the topic. They have been
applied in a versatile, insightful and critical manner.

E.STYLEANDLANGUAGE
(0) The text contains multiple grammatical errors and poor spelling. It is impossible or very
difficult to read the text and the language is very imprecise.
(1) It is slightly difficult to read the text. The language is imprecise and contains grammatical
and spelling mistakes.
(2) The text contains some grammatical errors, spelling mistakes and jargon. The text is not fluid.
(3) The text is adequate as a piece of scientific writing and there are no major spelling or
grammatical mistakes.
(4) The text is fluid and does not contain grammatical or spelling mistakes.
(5) The text is fluid, finished, precise and a good example of scientific writing.