Scale of marks and assessment criteria

Scale of marks - assessment criteria

Mark Defining characteristics
7 Exceptional
The proposal addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion exceptionally well. Shortcomings are not present, or only very minor.
6 Excellent
The proposal successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Only minor shortcomings are present.
5 Very good
The proposal addresses the criterion very well. A small number of shortcomings are present.
4 Good
The proposal addresses the criterion well. A number of shortcomings are present.
3 Fair
The proposal broadly addresses the criterion, but there are a number of significant weaknesses.
2 Weak
The criterion is inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.
1 Poor
The proposal fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information.

Scale of marks - Overall assessment of the referee panel for Researcher Project

Mark Defining characteristics
7 Exceptional
The proposal is of exceptional quality, and of the very highest international standard. All relevant aspects of the criteria are exceptionally well addressed. Shortcomings are not present, or only very minor.
6 Excellent
The proposal is of excellent quality, and of a very high international standard. All relevant aspects of the criteria are successfully addressed. Only minor shortcomings are present.
5 Very good
The proposal is very good. The criteria are very well addressed. A small number of shortcomings are present.
4 Good
A good proposal. The criteria are well addressed. A number of shortcomings are present.
3 Fair
A proposal of fair quality. The criteria are broadly addressed. Significant weaknesses are present.
2 Weak
The proposal is weak. The criteria are inadequately addressed, or there are serious inherent weaknesses.
1 Poor
The proposal is of poor quality. It fails to address the criteria or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information.