Grading systems
Symbol Mark General, qualitative description of valuation criteria A Excellent An excellent performance, clearly outstanding. The candidate demonstrates excellent judgement and a very high degree of independent thinking. B Very good A very good performance. The candidate demonstrates sound judgement and a high degree of independent thinking. C Good A good performance in most areas. The candidate demonstrates a reasonable degree of judgement and independent thinking in the most important areas. D Satisfactory A satisfactory performance, but with significant shortcomings. The candidate demonstrates a limited degree of judgement and independent thinking.
E Sufficient A performance that meets the minimum criteria, but no more. The candidate demonstrates a very limited degree of judgement and independent thinking. F Fail A performance that does not meet the minimum academic criteria. The candidate demonstrates an absence of both judgement and independent thinking. The grade "pass"/"fail" may be used for some assessments.
The credit system used at NMBU is based upon a workload of 60 credits for each academic year. This corresponds to European Credit Transfer System credits (ECTS).
If a course has changed the grading rule from grading rule A-F to grading rule Pass - Fail or vice versa, the following applies when retaking an exam:
For students who retake an exam they have passed in a course that previously had grading system A-F, but which now has the grading system pass/fail:
- Previous letter grade will be valid, but as long as the new exam is passed, the grade can be changed to Pass.
For students who take an exam with a previous grade rule of pass/fail, but now have a grade rule of A-F:
- In the event of fail on the new exam: Any previous Pass grade becomes valid.
- Upon passing the new exam: Letter grade becomes valid
Please contact sensur@nmbu.no if you have any question
The grading of Master's theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology is governed by the following descriptions of marks for students admitted to Master's programmes. Each description covers these areas: general comments; theoretical overview, insight and choice of methods; manner of completion - level, technical skills; depth, research and development; presentation.
Mark/levelDescription A
ExcellentAn exceptional thesis which clearly demonstrates a talent for research and/or originality, in a national perspective. The candidate has very good insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field and has demonstrated scientific knowledge at a very high level. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand. The candidate is able to convincingly select and apply relevant scientific methods, has all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct very advanced experiments or computations without help, and works very independently. The thesis is considered very comprehensive and/or innovative. The analysis and discussion have an extremely good scientific foundation and justification, and are clearly linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates extremely good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an extremely high level. B
Very goodA very good thesis that is clearly outstanding. The candidate has very good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand. The candidate is able to select and apply relevant scientific methods soundly, has almost all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct advanced experiments or computations without help, and works very independently. The thesis is considered comprehensive and/or innovative. The analysis and discussion have a very good scientific foundation and justification, and are clearly linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates very good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a very high level. C
GoodA good thesis. The candidate has good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are generally well defined, but may contain some inexact formulations. The candidate uses the relevant scientific methods satisfactorily, has most of the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct quite advanced experiments or computations without help, and works independently. The thesis is considered good with elements that are creative. The analysis and discussion have a good scientific foundation and justification, and are linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates good critical reflection and usually distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a good level. D
SatisfactoryA satisfactory thesis. The candidate has quite good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are defined, but may contain some inexact formulations. The candidate is generally able to apply relevant scientific methods, has the main technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct experiments or computations without help. The candidate works independently to some extent, but needs quite close supervision to achieve satisfactory scientific progress. The candidate may have problems utilizing the research group's expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered satisfactory. The analysis and discussion have a satisfactory scientific foundation and justification and are linked to the topic that is addressed, but there is room for improvement. The candidate demonstrates his/her ability for critical reflection, but has problems distinguishing clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an acceptable level. E
SufficientA thesis that is acceptable and satisfies the minimum criteria. The candidate has sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are described, but are vague and imprecise. The candidate is able to apply some relevant scientific methods, has a minimum of technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct simple experiments or computations without help. The candidate achieves limited scientific progress without close supervision and has problems utilizing the research group's expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered limited and somewhat fragmented. The analysis and discussion have an adequate scientific foundation and justification, but ought to have had a better link to the topic that is discussed. The candidate demonstrates sufficient critical reflection, but may have problems distinguishing between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The thesis is mostly acceptable, but has definite shortcomings with respect to form, structure and language. F
FailA thesis that does not satisfy the minimum requirements. The candidate does not have sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are not clearly defined or are lacking. The candidate demonstrates a lack of competence in the use of scientific methods, does not have the required technical skills and independence for the work, and has scarcely utilized the research group's expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered very limited and fragmented. The analysis and discussion do not have an adequate scientific foundation and justification and are loosely linked to the topic that is discussed. The candidate does not demonstrate sufficient critical reflection and does not clearly distinguish between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The thesis has major shortcomings with respect to form, structure, and language. The grade "pass"/"fail" may be used for some assessments.
The credit system used at NMBU is based upon a workload of 60 credits for each academic year. This corresponds to European Credit Transfer System credits (ECTS).
National grade descriptions of master's theses in MNT subjects
In 2012, new national grade descriptions were adopted for master's theses in subjects within mathematics, natural sciences and technology ("MNT subjects"). The scheme was implemented at NMBU in spring 2014.
The intention was that the entire grading scale should be used in a better way and that the grading scale should have a clearer link to the national qualifications framework for higher education. The actual way in which the master's thesis is carried out has not changed. The new grade descriptions also do not lead to a change in the requirements for the master's thesis or the criteria according to which the thesis is assessed.
The distribution of grades for the individual course is shown on the transcript. The distribution of grades are shown for courses with 10 or more students for up to five years back in time from the time of the exam.
The purpose of showing the distribution of grades per course is to provide information on how the grade system is used at the educational institutions. This will make it easier to compare grades between institutions and between countries.
When using different grading systems, internationally and between subject areas, it is important that the grades are understood. When the distribution of grades are shown, it will be easier to give students a fair assessment of their performance. This applies both to students who move between institutions and to graduates who will be looking for a job in their own or another country.
Distribution of grades shown on the transcript is a follow-up to recommendations from the EU. The University and College Council (UHR) has, on behalf of the university and college sector in Norway, assessed how information on distribution of grades should be incorporated and recommended a common system for all institutions.
Information about grade systems and qualifications that have been previously awarded by NMBU (formerly NLH, UMB and NVH). The grading scales and qualifications were discontinued as a consequence of the introduction of the quality reform.
If you have any questions about this please send an e-mail to vitnemal@nmbu.no