Annex J
STRUCTURE
Definition: Order/setting out of
material according to hierarchy and flow.
| A | Unusually complex matters clearly presented
|
| B | Very clear, orderly sequence of items
|
| C | Straightforward structure
|
| D | Slightly muddled structure but all necessary elements are present
|
| E | Material poorly organised
|
| F | Confused structure: requires substantial restructuring
|
COVERAGE
Definition: Breadth and involvement of all relevant
material and dealing with less relevant/irrelevant material.
| A | Deals impressively with all aspects of the case
|
| B | High quality coverage of all necessary elements
|
| C | Contains all necessary elements with no significant omissions or inclusion or irrelevant material
|
| D | Some necessary elements missing or given inappropriate weight; inappopriate weight given to matters not at issue
|
| E | Some important elements of letter omitted (eg failure to reach conclusion on development plan) or not adequately dealt with; undue emphasis on peripheral matters
|
| F | Important element of letter missing (eg failure to refer to development plan or deal with conditions); includes wholly irrelevant matters or matters not raised or commented upon by the parties
|
REASONING
Definition: Identification of issues; analysis
of relevant matters to be resolved; professional/technical input,
quality of reasoning, including that for conditions.
| A | Exceptionally lucid; impressive grasp of issues
|
| B | Crisp definition of issues with good, clear, economical, logical reasoning
|
| C | Satisfactory definition of issues: well reasoned
|
| D | Issues could be more clearly expressed; sufficient reasoning though a little thin in places and not easy to follow
|
| E | Poorly defined/inadequate issues; unconvincing "woolly" reasoning
|
| F | Inappropriate or missing issues; incomprehensible; illogical
|
JUDGEMENT
Definition: Conclusion(s) on relevant matters
and/or submissions. Technical/specialist judgement. Overall conclusion(s)
and soundness of decision.
| A | Authoritative resolution of complex technical aspects; excellent judgement firmly expressed.
|
| B | Professional expertise confidently applied; sound and convincing decision.
|
| C | Technically competent; good judgement.
|
| D | Conclusions not convincing but judgement safe.
|
| E | Minor technical weaknesses; decision wavering or lacking conviction.
|
| F | Fundamental technical flaws; consequently gives a perverse decision; needs major surgery.
|
PRESENTATION
Definition: Clarity of representation/expression
of thought processes, conciseness, "readability", grammar,
expression, style.
| A | Smoothly flowing but economical use of English: excellent presentation throughout.
|
| B | Notably good, simple prose style; concise but not terse; well presented and easy to read.
|
| C | Readable; satisfactory standard of grammar, punctuation and presentation.
|
| D | Overlong paragraphs and/or sentences; grammar, punctuation and/or presentation can be improved.
|
| E | Uneven style; lack of clarity; use of inappropriate words; overlong; slipshod presentation.
|
| F | Turgid style; contains jargon, slang or obscure wording; arrogant or pretentious tone; inordinately long.
|
ACCURACY
Definition: Assessment of accuracy/lack of errors,
correctness of references, spelling, proof reading, consideration
of whether any loss of accuracy undermines meaning.
| A | Flawless grammar and accuracy.
|
| B | Accurate letter with no errors.
|
| C | No more than 1 or 2 typographical errors.
|
| D | Contains a few minor errors; odd words missed out; spelling mistakes; but meaning of text not substantially prejudiced.
|
| E | More substantial errors (eg points of compass); and omissions (eg sections of text or important words missing); a significant number of spelling mistakes and/or typographical errors.
|
| F | Major inaccuracies; letter sprinkled liberally with errors—words/text missing; spelling mistakes, typographical errors.
|
|
