ASSESSMENT FEEDBACK SHEET Name Group/ Centre Module number/ title Programme Tutor Date of submission Patricia Bond

Woodlands CPD: 4508 Inclusive practice for individuals with SEBD MA Education David Armstrong 05/05/2011

Learning Outcomes 1. Evidence deep knowledge and systematic understanding of the literature, research and legislation
surrounding the inclusion of students with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. 2. Undertake critical analysis, with awareness, of the values, attitudes, principles and practicalities of inclusion for children/young people with SEBD. 3. Evidence deep and systematic understanding and evaluation of a range of techniques and methodologies used to facilitate inclusion for SEBD.

Comments related to the achievement of learning outcomes Part A Patricia, the best sections of your submission show a detailed appreciation of the wider issues around the practicalities of inclusion for young people/adults with SEBD. Your emphasis on the views of Fairy and Sam about decisions taken about them by others adults is very important. It shows your critical perspective on educational practice in their case and your commitment to them as autonomous adults. You also draw out the wider weaknesses of ALS/the system of support in your setting, indicating your engagement with wider issues in post-16 education. In light of all the above your assignment deserves a merit. To ensure that you get credit for your arguments ensure that you always cite sources to back up your views. Part B Your offer a clear perspective or argument in Part B and effectively summarise many of the issues which you raise in part B. To enhance it you should ensure that research, literature and policy is consistently referred to. Areas for development and further comments including those following moderation See my annotations Please continue and extend this sound critical analysis in any subsequent modules on our MA Aim for an even higher synthesis of literature, research and policy to achieve a high merit/distinction. Consider presenting Part B to your colleagues. It is insightful and well-structured.

Mark awarded after internal moderation (subject to University and External Assessment) First marker: David Armstrong Moderator Dr Sam Fox

MERIT Date: 20/05/2011 Date: 13/06/2011

Student Patricia Bond

ID Number 21392692 PD Postgraduate Programme Feedback - Generic Assessment Criteria

Distinction Evidence of Merit Evidence of
As Pass plus: An awareness of problems and insights much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of the discipline/practice.

Pass Evidence of
A systematic understanding of relevant knowledge. Good identification, selection and understanding of key issues. Awareness of current problems and/or new insights. Conceptual awareness enabling critical analysis. Accuracy in detail. An understanding of different views. The ability to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, and make sound judgements. Consistent analysis and critical evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline. Consideration of alternative interpretations. A coherent argument supported by evidence. A good range of reading, beyond core or basic texts, including mostly up-to-date sources, with sources appropriately acknowledged according to academic conventions of referencing.

Areas for Development and/or Resubmission Required Some revision Substantial Evidence of revision Evidence of
Coverage of some or most relevant issues with reasonable understanding. Identification of some or most central issues. Some acknowledgement of different views but not much evidence of understanding of application of these. Some ability to deal with complex issues. Judgements not all well substantiated. Some evaluation of research and scholarship. Analysis limited in range and relatively superficial. The ability to construct an argument may be limited. The range of reading may be limited. Sources not always explicitly or accurately acknowledged. Paucity of relevant material in support of response. Areas of controversy ignored or not understood.

Academic Knowledge and Understanding of the academic discipline, field of study Critical analysis and interpretation

As Merit plus: Excellent coverage, offering sophisticated or original insights. A synthesis, possibly, of disparate material.

As Merit plus: Imaginative, insightful, original or creative interpretations. Impressive, sustained level of analysis and evaluation. A cogent argument with awareness of limitations. Extensive, well-referenced research both in breadth and depth. Clear and expert command over the subject matter, offering an original interpretation and/or contribution to the field of study. As Merit plus: Sophisticated critical selfevaluation. New insights informing practical situations.

As Pass plus: A command of accepted critical positions. Conceptual understanding that enables the student to propose new hypotheses. A range in breadth or depth of well-referenced research.

Mainly descriptive. Analysis is limited, deriving from limited sources and/or too limited to a single perspective. Argument or position not made clear. Self-contradiction or confusion. Inadequate resourcing and/or sources insufficiently acknowledged.

Critical reflection: Personal and/or professional application and evaluation

As Pass plus: Originality in addressing needs or specifications, and /or solving problems.

Relevant, appropriate, and explicit links made to professional practice. The independent learning ability and selfevaluation required to continue to advance the students knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills appropriate to a professional context.

Some relevance and links to professional practice. Some exercise of initiative and personal or professional responsibility but a limited self-evaluation

No link to professional practice. Weakness in independent learning, decision-making and/or self-evaluation.