-
1. Quality of Programme of study. Is the proposed programme coherent and well thought through? Does the candidate's writing give evidence of higher-order thinking skills and the ability to express thoughts clearly and without jargon?
-
2. Knowledge of Proposed Courses and Supervisors. Has the candidate established the relevance of the proposed academic programme to his or her scholarly and career plans and, in the case of a research proposal, provided evidence of substantive engagement with the proposed supervisor(s)? Is there a compelling academic rationale for doing the work at a British university with Marshall support?
-
3. Evidence of Academic Background that is Strong and Relevant. Does the transcript show evidence of high academic achievement. Does this coursework prepare the candidate for the planned field of study? Is there other evidence of high-level performance (e.g. merit scholarships, academic prizes, research results, artistic creations, publications)?
-
4. Quality and Breadth of Recommendations. Are the recommendations excellent and from people who know the candidate and can make informed comparisons with many other students? Do the recommendations, taken together, provide specific and well-documented details about leadership and ambassadorial potential as well as academic excellence?
