Final Aissgnment: Essay Brief and Grading Criteria for AI Law Module

University	University of Limerick (UOL)
Subject	Artificial Intelligence Law

Second (Final) Assessment (80% of Overall Mark): Essay

Provisional Deadline: 12pm, Thursday 24 April 2025

End-of-module essay: (maximum 4,000 words, excluding footnotes in OSCOLA citation style, excluding title page). No bibliography is necessary.

The essay will be a scholarly piece providing critical analysis on a theme or themes covered in the module. By “scholarly,” this means that your essay must show that you have consulted with, and understood, not only the source material that you are analysing, but also a broad range of appropriate secondary academic literature on the topic.

Your essay must be primarily and fundamentally about the law on artificial intelligence and must overlap with the themes and content of the material covered in lectures. The essay should not be about some other facet of artificial intelligence (e.g. its technical capabilities). You may not address the same issue as you did in your first assessment, the video minilecture.

Some (Purely Indicative) Themes Might Be:

How a particular approach taken by law-makers follows or does not follow a particular rationale or combination of rationales proposed in the theoretical literature on regulation;
How a specific legal instrument (or instruments) for regulating AI reflects / does not reflect / ignores certain ethical values proposed by experts in the field of AI ethics;
The development of the EU AI Act through the legislative process, perhaps critically evaluating how and why certain Articles have changed or not changed over that process;
The consequences of the EU AI Act, whether positive or negative (although this will be a broader exercise than the first assessment and must not overlap with content covered by your first assessment);
The nature of the EU legislative process and how it has impacted on the development of the EU AI Act;
A comparative analysis of two or more current or proposed legal instruments for regulating AI from two or more jurisdictions.

To reiterate, these are entirely indicative themes and you are welcome to write about other themes, provided they meet the criteria set out above. I will host an essay workshop midway through the module to address questions of scope, content, format etc., for this assessment.

Marking Criteria

Step Marking Scheme from Student Handbook:

Grade	Description
80	Grades above 78 not stepped, and are awarded at discretion of the examiner for genuinely exceptional performance. It is envisaged that this will happen very rarely. External examiners or second markers should be consulted about any such grade.
78 High Third step	In addition to the expectations of the first step, this answer excels in all of the criteria mentioned below. It displays significant originality of thought and deep consideration of the subject that is unusual of a postgraduate student.
75 Mid Second step	In addition to the expectations of the first step, this answer excels in many or all of the criteria mentioned below. In addition, it should show some originality of thought, thinking beyond the core materials in the course and engaging in deeper reflection.
71 Low First step	This grade category is reserved for answers that are excellent in some significant respect in addition to displaying the criteria for an upper second class honours grade. It should be of excellent standard for a postgraduate, spotting issues or making interesting points that might be rare in postgraduate assessment.

Additional Criteria for Low First Step (71)

A thoughtful structure
A clear message
Evidence of personal engagement and reflection
Evidence of broad reading of/engagement with case law/articles/commentaries as appropriate
A strong grasp of detail
Very few or no errors or omissions

It should also display excellence in at least one of the following criteria:

Comprehensiveness and accuracy
Clarity of argument and quality of expression
Integration of a range of materials
Evidence of wide reading
Good insight into the theoretical issues where appropriate

Grading Criteria Table

Mark Range	Classification	Description
80 and above	First class honours	Grades above 78 not stepped, awarded at examiner’s discretion for genuinely exceptional performance, rare occasions.
78	Stepped Mark – 78 High Third	Excels in all criteria, significant originality of thought, deep subject consideration unusual for postgraduates.
75	Stepped Mark – 75 Mid Second	Excels in many/all criteria, shows some originality, engages in deeper reflection beyond core materials.
71	Stepped Mark – 71 Low First	Excellent standard for postgraduate, rare insightful points, thoughtful structure, clear message, personal engagement, broad reading, strong detail grasp, few/no errors. Quality displays excellence in criteria: comprehensiveness, clarity, integration, wide reading, theoretical insight.
68	Stepped Mark – 68 High Third	Extremely competent, high degree of qualities from step 1. Lacks excellence that distinguishes it from first class. Needs broader reading, theoretical insight, or more reflection to elevate to upper category.
65	Stepped Mark – 65 Mid Second	Shows most/all qualities mentioned, better grasp of detail, substantial reading, higher insight and analytical ability.
61	Stepped Mark – 61 Low First	Sound understanding of principles & details, applies knowledge accurately, good analysis, complete answer with no major omissions, clear and coherent. Displays many qualities (accuracy, comprehensiveness, organisation, broad reading, sound grasp, clarity).
58	Stepped Mark – 58 High Third	Better than step 2 but lacks completeness; contains errors/omissions; lacks independent reading and engagement; clearer presentation but not well organised; minimal insight beyond basic level.
55	Stepped Mark – 55 Mid Second	More accurate, fewer errors than step 1, beginning of fuller understanding of details, clarity in presentation. Analysis remains basic/surface level.
51	Stepped Mark – 51 Low First	Substantially correct, fairly full understanding, minor inaccuracies, basic competent answer. Displays a range of qualities but lacks deeper consideration.
48	Stepped Mark – 48 High Third	Close to second class but too many weaknesses to qualify. Contains serious inaccuracies, missed key points or indirect approach.
45	Stepped Mark – 45 Mid Second	Displays weaknesses of third class but to a lesser degree; misses fewer points, still largely descriptive and indirect answer.
41	Stepped Mark – 41 Low First	Some knowledge and understanding, not coherent or correct presentation, lacks higher academic understanding. Displays many weaknesses (descriptive only, fails to answer clearly, misses key points, inaccurate information, sparse coverage of relevant material).
38	Fail – F1 High Third	Comes close to passing but misses too many key points, contains inaccuracies. Points may lack clarity or detail.
35	Fail – F1 Mid Second	Fails to answer sufficiently, presents some relevant material but incomplete, poor organization and clarity. Minimal engagement with the course.
31	Fail – F1 Low First	Very poor answer, fails to grasp subject; minimal relevant material. Material is often irrelevant or incorrectly treated with minimal evidence of reading/class attendance.
Below 30	Fail – F2	Very poor performance; answers lacking redeeming qualities or relevant material. Marks from 29 down to 0 at examiner’s discretion.

Stuck in Completing this Assignment and feeling stressed ? Take our Private Writing Services

Get A Free Quote

Get Help By Expert

Anxious about completing your AI Law Essay Brief & Grading Criteria Assignment? Now you don’t have to worry. Our platform, AI-free Assignment Help Ireland, can solve your problem with our experts who are available to help you with 100% original content with no plagiarism Just write do my assignment, and we guarantee you will get your assignment on time. Explore our free sample assignments where you check the quality of our work. Contact us today and take your academic grades to the next level!