//set this to the number of criteria!!!

numberofcriteria = 6;
numberofranges = 6;

optionrange= new Array();

optionrange[0]="Select option...";
optionrange[1]="70-100";
optionrange[2]="60-69";
optionrange[3]="50-59";
optionrange[4]="40-49";
optionrange[5]="0-39";





var criteria1 = new Array();
var criteria2 = new Array();
var criteria3 = new Array();
var criteria4 = new Array();
var criteria5 = new Array();
var criteria6 = new Array();




marksavailable1 = 0;
criteria1[0] = "Summary Comments ";
criteria1[1] = "Overall, this is an excellent report. You have provided clear evidence of your critical thinking, fully supporting your arguments with evidence from research studies. Your academic writing style is clear and concise with all of the content included being highly relevant to the question. Well done. Comments on each section are as follows: Deep understanding of subject: carefully balanced arguments clearly presented: all material highly relevant to the question. Considerable and effective use of literature information, beyond that supplied as taught material. Clear evidence of critical thinking, originality and novelty. Excellent structure and good use of illustrative diagrams etc.: evidence of originality or novelty in presentation. ";
criteria1[2] = "Sound grasp of subject material: presentation of logical arguments relevant to the question. Reasonable evidence of wider study beyond lecture material. Some evidence of independent thinking and originality. Well organised answer, appropriate use of illustrative diagrams, clear presentation. Comments on each section are as follows: ";
criteria1[3] = "Reasonable understanding of subject material, but some flaws in the logic of arguments and factual errors, possibly some irrelevant material. Only limited evidence of wider study and use of literature information. Little evidence of independent thinking or originality. Fairly clear presentation, generally conforming with accepted format but with some flaws in style, little use of illustrative diagrams. Some parts of your assignment were difficult to read and would benefit from further support to improve your English language writing skills. Please contact your personal tutor to discuss options such as attending the English Language Teaching Center or 301 workshops. Comments on each section are as follows:  ";
criteria1[4] = "This assignment is a fail. To achieve a pass mark please address the points highlighted in your feedback. You do not need to re-write the whole  assignment. The sections where you have done well are... To pass, you will need to make changes to the... Some parts of your assignment were difficult to read and would benefit from further support to improve your English language writing skills. Please contact your personal tutor to discuss options such as attending the English  Language Teaching Centre (ELTC) sessions, Writing Advisory Service  or 301 workshops. Limited understanding of subject, numerous flaws in the logic of arguments, considerable factual errors and or irrelevant material.  Virtually no inclusion of literature information beyond lecture material. Virtually no evidence of independent thinking or originality. Little attention given to structure, very limited use of illustrative diagrams, serious flaws in presentation. Comments on each section are as follows: ";
criteria1[5] = "This assignment is a fail. To achieve a pass mark please address the points highlighted in your feedback. You do not need to re-write the whole  ssignment. The sections where you have done well are... To pass, you will need to make changes to the... Some parts of your assignment were difficult to read and would benefit from further support to improve your English language writing skills. Please contact your personal tutor to discuss options such as attending the Departmental English Language Teaching Centre (ELTC) sessions, Writing Advisory Service or 301 workshops. Minimal understanding of subject, serious factual errors, general lack of any logical arguments, considerable amount of irrelevant material. Virtually no inclusion of literature information. No evidence of independent thinking or originality. Very poorly structured answer, disorganised and untidy, missing sections, virtually no use of illustrative diagrams. Insubstantial answer, very poor coverage of material with little information that is relevant. Virtually no evidence of understanding the question and minimal attempt at structure. Comments on each section are as follows: ";

marksavailable2 = 9;
criteria2[0]= "Criterion 1: Background ";
criteria2[1] = "You have provided a very good summary of previous research or other literature which demonstrates you have an excellent understanding of it and how it relates to your topic and even to how you searched. To improve further, you could have provided even more of a critique of the literature and identified gaps and considered theory where appropriate. Your research questions or aims are exemplary with associated objectives and milestones. ";
criteria2[2] = "You have provided a good summary of previous research or other literature which demonstrates you have a comprehensive understanding of it and how it relates to your topic. To improve further, you could have provided more of a critique of the literature and identified gaps and considered theory where appropriate. Your research questions or aims are clear and well articulated with good associated objectives and milestones. ";
criteria2[3] = "You have provided an adequate summary of previous research or other literature. To improve, you need to identify key relevant literature and ensure you focus on the broader range of literature than you currently do. You could have also provided more of a critique of the literature and gaps and even relevant theory where appropriate. Consider also, whether you could have focused more specifically still on the most influential, relevant and current literature. Your research questions or aims are acceptable but could have been further refined. ";
criteria2[4] = "You have provided only a partly adequate summary of previous research or other literature. To improve, you need to identify more key relevant literature and currently your summary is too limited. You could have also provided more of a critique of the literature and gaps and even relevant theory where appropriate. Do ensure you use the more relevant, influential and current literature also where possible. You could also add in reflexivity. Your research questions or aims are also not ideal and requires further refining in terms of clarity and suitability for qualitative research, [IF THE CASE, you have also confused aims and objectives] ";
criteria2[5] = "You have not provided an adequate summary of previous research or other literature. To improve, you need to identify key relevant literature and describe it succinctly but give an overview. You could have also provided more of a critique of the literature and gaps and even relevant theory where appropriate. Do  ensure you use the more relevant, influential and current literature also where possible. You could also add in reflexivity. Your research questions or aims are also not ideal and requires further refining in terms of clarity and suitability for qualitative research, [IF THE CASE, you have also confused aims and objectives] ";


marksavailable3 = 33;
criteria3[0] = "Criterion 2 Methods (using appropriate references to methods literature) ";
criteria3[1] ="You have written an excellent methods section with an appropriate amount of detail and transparency about all relevant sections of the methods, this demonstrates a very good understanding of qualitative methods. To improve even more, you could have provided even more depth or detail or justification for the methods choices made in one or more areas (perhaps contrasting with others not used), you could have discussed epistemological considerations [OR IF DONE SO] even further] and where theory was relevant or how methods choices in previous similar research had informed your methods choices perhaps, or describing designs (induction, deduction, abduction etc) ";
criteria3[2] ="You have provided a good amount of detail and transparency about all relevant sections of the methods and demonstrated you understand qualitative methods well. To improve, you could have enhanced the level of detail or justification for the methods choices made in one or more key areas (perhaps contrasting with others not used), you could have discussed epistemological considerations [OR IF DONE SO] even further] and where theory was relevant or how methods choices in previous similar research had informed your methods choices perhaps, finally, review whether more could have been added on how you ensured quality/trustworthiness was maintained throughout. ";
criteria3[3] ="You have provided an adequate amount of detail and transparency about all relevant sections of the methods and demonstrated a competent understanding appropriate to a pass. To improve, you could have provided more depth or detail or justification for the methods choices made in one or more areas (drawing on more qualitative methods literature references), you could have discussed epistemological considerations and offered a more sustained reflexive account of the interview and your position, finally, add or enhance much more how you ensured quality/trustworthiness was maintained throughout. ";
criteria3[4] ="You have provided some detail and transparency about the methods but omitted important content in one or more areas which would be expected in qualitative writing, you have only supported your methods with appropriate qualitative methods literature references in a very limited way [OR IF MISSING COMPLETELY and need to state and cite an explicit type of analysis used]. To improve, you need to review the suggested content provided in the marking criteria and the suggested word count, it is important to provide sufficient detail about the process at all stages, also to show reflexivity and that you have reflected on methods choices and justified why you did them, finally, if possible consider how you ensured quality/trustworthiness was maintained throughout ";
criteria3[5] ="Your methods are not described in enough detail or transparency and there are significant omissions in several areas of expected content, you have not sufficiently supported your methods with appropriate qualitative methods literature references [OR IF MISSING and need to state and cite an explicit type of analysis used]. To improve, you need to review the suggested content provided in the marking criteria and the suggested word count, it is important to provide sufficient detail about the process at all stages, also to show reflexivity and that you have reflected on methods choices and justify why you did them, finally, if possible consider how you ensured quality/trustworthiness was maintained throughout. [OR you have made a significant error in terms of the methods used which was not appropriate for qualitative research. To improve, you need to review your understanding of the approaches to qualitative interview data collection and analysis.] ";

marksavailable4 = 30;
criteria4[0] = "Criterion 3: Findings ";
criteria4[1] = "You have presented your findings in an excellent way and fully used accepted practices of summarising work and using appropriate quotes as well as providing an appropriate summary and overview as well as connectings, hierarchies and contrasts in the themes. To improve even further, you could have considered integrating the findings and discussions, offering, including synthesising findings with other literature, theory and doing so in a critical and nuanced way. ";
criteria4[2] = "You have presented your findings well and used most or all accepted practices of summarising work and using appropriate quotes. To improve further, consider providing things like more of an initial overview or indicating where themes connect or are hierarchical or of differing importance and where you could have moved beyond quite descriptive/generic  themes to consider normative aspects, highlight more where there were contrasting or contradictory themes, could any theory have been used in the analysis and informed the findings? ";
criteria4[3] = "You have presented your findings in a credible way and used many accepted practices of summarising work and using appropriate quotes. To improve further, review which elements of good qualitative writing you have omitted, providing things like more of an initial overview or indicating where themes connect or are hierarchical or of differing importance and where you could have moved beyond quite descriptive/generic  themes to consider normative aspects, highlight more where there were contrasting or contradictory themes. ";
criteria4[4] = "You have presented your qualitative findings using some recognised good practices but there are multiple aspects that require improvement. To improve,  [THESE COULD INCLUDE] providing quotes of an appropriate amount overall and length, using accepted formatting to present them in the text, providing more of an initial overview of themes or indicating where themes connect or are hierarchical or of differing importance, providing a sufficiently nuanced set of themes and sub-themes which suggests a thorough analysis has been undertaken, providing contrasting or contradictory themes if appropriate, removing any aspects not related to the findings (references to literature etc). ";
criteria4[5] = "Your methods are not described in enough detail or transparency and there are significant omissions in several areas of expected content, you have not sufficiently supported your methods with appropriate qualitative methods literature references [OR IF MISSING and need to state and cite an explicit type of analysis used]. To improve, you need to review the suggested content provided in the marking criteria and the suggested word count, it is important to provide sufficient detail about the process at all stages, also to show reflexivity and that you have reflected on methods choices and justify why you did them, finally, if possible consider how you ensured quality/trustworthiness was maintained throughout. [OR you have made a significant error in terms of the methods used which was not appropriate for qualitative research. To improve, you need to review your understanding of the approaches to qualitative interview data collection and analysis.] ";



marksavailable5 = 18;
criteria5[0] = "Criterion 4: Discussion/conclusion ";
criteria5[1] = "You have provided an excellent discussion and conclusion which include all suggested areas which are typical to the final parts of a qualitative study article and have done so in a clear, critical, nuanced and reflexive way. To improve further, you could have considered combining findings and discussion in a more ambitious way and grouped themes with linked literature and/or theory and critical reflection. ";
criteria5[2] = "You have provided a good and clear discussion and conclusion which include most or all suggested areas which are typical to the final parts of a qualitative study article. To improve further, you could have provided a more sustained, reflective and critical account of the content included (and reviewed if you did include all the typical elements suggested in the marking criteria), could theory or other additional literature have been drawn on to contextualise or link to your findings also, consider adding more reflexivity to your account where relevant also. ";
criteria5[3] = "You have provided a satisfactory discussion and conclusion which include most of the suggested areas which are typical to the final parts of a qualitative study article. To improve further, you should check for any omitted content as suggested in the marking criteria, also, you needed to provide a more sustained, reflective and critical account of the content included. ";
criteria5[4] = "You have provided a weak discussion and conclusion which do not adequately cover the suggested areas which are typical to the final parts of a qualitative study article. To improve, you need to include these elements (such as a brief summary, reporting on study strengths and weaknesses, connecting your findings to existing empirical and other literature and highlighting similarities and differences and consider reflexivity and your thoughts on the process. ";
criteria5[5] = "There is a very limited [OR ABSENT] discussion and conclusion which do not adequately cover the suggested areas which are typical to the final parts of a qualitative study article. To improve, you need to include these elements (such as a brief summary, reporting on study strengths and weaknesses, connecting your findings to existing empirical and other literature and highlighting similarities and differences and consider reflexivity and your thoughts on the process. ";


marksavailable6 = 10;
criteria6[0] = "Criterion 5: Style, theory, presentation, innovation, referencing ";
criteria6[1] = "This assignment is very well written and presented with no significant issues. It is exceptionally clear throughout and has good signposting and summaries but also depth. To improve, consider whether you could have moved even more beyond the key qualitative methods literature to offer more critical methods insights and also how theory could have informed one or more stages in a more sustained and ambitious way if appropriate. ";
criteria6[2] = "This assignment is well written and presented with some minor issues related to these which detracted slightly to the overall quality. To improve, consider enhancing the quality of some aspects of your academic writing and to consider the use of relevant theory or other literature perhaps. Some improvements in the depth of referencing could also be beneficial. ";
criteria6[3] = "This assignment is generally well written and presented but has some issues related to these which detracted. To improve, consider enhancing the quality of some aspects of your academic writing and to consider the use of relevant theory or other literature perhaps. Do review the range of references used to support your work as these could also be enhanced further. ";
criteria6[4] = "There are some aspects of the assignment which require significant improvement in terms of [DELETE AS APPROPRIATE writing quality, structure, layout and fundamental aspects of referencing style and range.] To improve to the level of a pass, these aspects need to be improved much more. Please see the earlier comments about where to obtain support about this. ";
criteria6[5] = "There are many aspects of the assignment which require significant improvement in terms of [DELETE AS APPROPRIATE writing quality, structure,  layout and fundamental aspects of referencing style and range.] To improve to the level of a pass, all these aspects need to be improved significantly. Please see the earlier comments about where to obtain support about this. ";










//Scores..///////////////////////////////////////////////////

var myscore1 = new Array();
var myscore2 = new Array();
var myscore3 = new Array();
var myscore4 = new Array();
var myscore5 = new Array();
var myscore6 = new Array();





myscore1[0]= ""
myscore1[1] = 85;
myscore1[2] = 65;
myscore1[3] = 55;
myscore1[4] = 45;
myscore1[5] = 20;


myscore2[0]= ""
myscore2[1] = 85;
myscore2[2] = 65;
myscore2[3] = 55;
myscore2[4] = 45;
myscore2[5] = 20;


myscore3[0]= ""
myscore3[1] = 85;
myscore3[2] = 65;
myscore3[3] = 55;
myscore3[4] = 45;
myscore3[5] = 20;


myscore4[0]= ""
myscore4[1] = 85;
myscore4[2] = 65;
myscore4[3] = 55;
myscore4[4] = 45;
myscore4[5] = 20;


myscore5[0]= ""
myscore5[1] = 85;
myscore5[2] = 65;
myscore5[3] = 55;
myscore5[4] = 45;
myscore5[5] = 20;


myscore6[0]= ""
myscore6[1] = 85
myscore6[2] = 65;
myscore6[3] = 55;
myscore6[4] = 45;
myscore6[5] = 20;