Communication

Question

Communication

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question context is limited to the single word 'Communication' with multiple_answers, and the answer field is empty. In order to evaluate each option properly, we would normally need a rubric or grading scheme that defines how marks translate into degree classifications. Absent that, I will discuss the plausibility of each option as a potential grade band, noting how typical (UK-style) degree classifications are usually structured and where these options align or misalign. This helps you see why some choices look more conventional than others.

Option a: a. 0
- Interpreting 0 as a classification is unusual. In most marking schemes, 0 is a raw score and not itself a degree classification band. If “0” were intended as a credit or failed attempt, it would typically be labeled as a Fail with a numeric range that starts above 0, not the stand-alone 0 as a final grade.
- Likely outcome: questionable as a complete band label; not a standard classification term.

Option b: b. Fail (7-28)
- This presents a Fail band with a specific numeric range 7–28. Some schemes use fail ranges starting at low values, but 7–28 is nonstandard compared to more common ranges (e.g., 0–39 or 0–40 for a fail in many UK systems). The mid-range 28 is low for a typical pass threshold, which would complicate interpretation across modules.
- Likely issue: the numeric span may be inconsistent with conventional grading thresholds; the use of a narrow window is unusual.

Option c: c. F+ (35)
- F+ is not a universal or widely used term in standard degree classifications. When higher-than-fail terms exist, they are usually First, Upper Second, etc., not a separate ‘F+’ label. The numeric 35 also sits in a failing region under most schemes.
- Likely issue: terminology (F+) is atypical, and the numeric value aligns with a fail rather than a distinct pass grade.

Option d: d. Third (42-48)
- This resembles a Third class (third division) band, with a numeric range 42–48. In several UK-style schemes, a Third is near the lower end of passing grades, though exact cutoffs vary by university. A 42–48 range is plausible for a Third in some contexts.
- Plausibility: reasonable as a documented classification label, though the lower boundary (42) and the width of the band are institution-dependent.

Option e: e. Lower Second (52-58)
- This aligns with a Lower Second (2:2) classification in many schemes, typically around the 50s. A 52–58 range is within what some institutions might assign for a 2:2.
- Plausibility: high, as it matches common terminology and a sensible numeric span.

Option f: f. Upper Second (62-68)
- This matches an Upper Second (2:1) band in several grading frameworks, where scores in the low to mid-60s could fall into 2:1 territory. The 62–68 range is plausible as a 2:1 window in some systems.
- Plausibility: high, consistent with standard naming and a reasonable numeric range.

Option g: g. First (72-78)
- First-class honors are typically defined for higher score ranges (often 70+ or 70–100). A band labeled 'First' with 72–78 is plausible if the institution uses a narrower First window, though in many schemes a broader First span would exist (70–100). The 72–78 portion is a valid subrange if such an institution exists.
- Plausibility: moderate to high, depending on the specific grading rubric.

Option h: h. High First (82-95)
- 'High First' is a term used by some universities to denote the top tranche of First-class honors (for instance, 80–100 or 85–100 in some rubrics). A 82–95 range fits the idea of a high First, though exact cutoffs vary widely.
- Plausibility: high in contexts that distinguish 'High First' from 'First.'

Summary of analysis:
- Some options present unconventional or nonstandard terminology (a, b, c), making them less plausible as official degree bands across common schemes.
- Options d, e, f reflect familiar bands (Third, Lower Second, Upper Second) with plausible ranges, though exact cutoffs are institution-specific.
- Options g and h align with common First-class distinctions, with h representing a higher segment of Firsts in schemes that subdivide Firsts.
- Without a stated grading rubric, we cannot definitively determine which options are correct. The analysis above highlights where each option stands in relation to typical grading conventions and where it might conflict with standard terminology or range expectations.

5PAHPSHP 24~25 SEM1 000001 DISTORTED WORLD Practice exam essay marking: Essay A

Communication

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

The CVP and break-even analysis are supported by a range of important assumptions. Which of the following is not an assumption of the CVP:

The break-even point is that at which:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler