Assignment specification and assessment for McKay Family Foundation MSc EduAT

Deadline for Submission: 

• Friday 28 November 2025 at 12:00 midday (UK time)

Hand in Method: 

• A MS Word version of the essay should be emailed to [email protected] 

Date Feedback will be Received by: 

• The submissions will be reviewed by an independent sub-group of the MSc EduAT advisory group, it is not possible for individual feedback to be provided in all cases. Only those successful in their application will be informed of the outcome, if you do not hear anything by 19 December 2025 you may assume your application to the scholarship has not been successful.

Assignment specification

Prospective students who hold an MSc EduAT offer are eligible to apply for a full fee scholarship.

Students will provide, in addition to their standard application form and personal statement (which must show interest and motivation in the content of the MSc EduAT), a 1,000-word essay responding to the question:

“What is the difference that this scholarship will make in terms of how you plan to apply the MSc EduAT curriculum within your working context for the direct benefit of the AT users you support and your colleagues”.

The purpose of the assignment is to have you:

• Demonstrate a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
• Evidence a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provisioning, ongoing support and review.
• Describe the impact that the scholarship will have on both you and your employing organisation.
• Appropriately describe the planned impact on colleagues through your application of a ‘train the trainer model’ and include in your answer evidence to show you recognise the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
• Demonstrate a commitment to accessibility by submitting an accessible document.

Assessment

In assessing this piece of work, we will be looking for the following:

• A well-presented essay which addresses the essay topic and points highlighted above.
• Evidence of:
  • Self-directed research using the Harvard referencing method.
  • A coherent and organised comparison of different approaches using examples where appropriate.
  • A professionally presented essay.
• The essay must not exceed 1,000 words (excluding diagrams and reference list).

Marking and feedback

The following marking scheme will be used to assess your essay:

Assignment aspects

• Description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.
  • A grade: Complete description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.
  • B grade: Good description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.
  • C grade: Sound description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.
  • D grade: Adequate description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.
  • Fail: Poor description of the impact that the scholarship will have on both the student and their employing organisation.

• Appropriateness of the description of the planned impact on colleagues through your application of a train the trainer model and include in your answer evidence to show you recognise the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
  • A grade: Comprehensive identification of appropriate impact on colleagues, comprehensive application of the train the trainer model and substantive recognition of the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
  • B grade: Good identification of appropriate impact on colleagues, good application of the train the trainer model and reasonable recognition of the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
  • C grade: Adequate identification of appropriate impact on colleagues, adequate application of the train the trainer model and some recognition of the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
  • D grade: An attempt at identification of appropriate impact on colleagues, some application of the train the trainer model and an attempt at recognition of the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.
  • Fail: Little or no identification of appropriate impact on colleagues, no application of the train the trainer model and no recognition of the importance of multi, inter, and trans-disciplinary working.

• Identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
  • A grade: Highly relevant identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
  • B grade: Good identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
  • C grade: Reasonable identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
  • D grade: Some identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.
  • Fail: Poor or no identification of how the student demonstrates a positive view and understanding of disability and the methods by which AT can support independence, achievement, and empowerment.

• Evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.
  • A grade: Highly relevant evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.
  • B grade: Good evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.
  • C grade: Reasonable evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.
  • D grade: Some evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.
  • Fail: Poor evidence of a person-centred approach to assistive technology assessment, provision, and ongoing support.

• Accessibility: Demonstrate a commitment to accessibility by submitting an accessible document.
  • A grade: Final document has outstanding accessibility for users. No clear accessibility errors.
  • B grade: Final document has good accessibility for users. Max 1-2 clear accessibility errors.
  • C grade: Final document has reasonable accessibility for users. Small number of clear accessibility errors.
  • D grade: Final document has poor accessibility for users. Large number of clear accessibility errors.
  • Fail: Final document unusable for users. Clear accessibility errors render the document wholly unusable.