To make marking consistent, fair, and transparent, we’re adopting a standard scoring method for the Certified Orgtologist Program (COP) Module 1 essay. This method is built around what Module 1 is designed to assess: your ability to apply Hypothesis 2x in practice, supported by orgtology theory, presented in a clear argument, and backed by credible scholarship. Pass Mark Rule To pass the Module 1 essay, you must score at least 65%. Why 65%? Because the COP rules state that learners must maintain an average score of 65% in all examinations to successfully complete the program. In short: 65% is the pass mark for the essay, aligned with the program’s overall assessment standard. The Scoring Breakdown (100%) 1) Practical Application of Hypothesis 2x - 50% Hypothesis 2x is the foundation of orgtology and the heart of this essay. We are looking for a real application to your chosen topic - not just definitions. What earns high marks: You correctly apply receptive (concrete, predictable, operational, repeatable) and projective (abstract, unpredictable, strategic, disruptive) activity to your topic. You show how organisations exist through projecting and receiving (reciprocity), forming relations and relationships in your chosen domain. You operationalise the “x” (X‑factor): the unpredictable human element that changes outcomes even when systems look similar. Common reason marks drop: Treating 2x as only “operations vs strategy” without demonstrating reciprocity/relationships and the X‑factor in the case. 2) Use of Orgtology Models & Theories - 20% This measures how well you use orgtology tools/theories to strengthen your argument - beyond simply naming them. High marks look like: You apply at least one orgtology model in a way that produces clear insights (e.g., a mapping, analysis output, or design implication). Your model use directly supports your Hypothesis 2x argument. 3) Argument Design & Structure - 15% This is about logical flow and clarity. Your essay must include: A clear If‑Then‑Because hypothesis statement. A progression of paragraphs that logically leads to a defensible conclusion. 4) Scholarship (Harvard + Breadth) — 15% Your essay must be academically credible. We will score: Harvard-style in-text citations and a Harvard reference list. Correct referencing of course material (each guide includes a ready-made Harvard reference you can cut and paste). Breadth requirement: at least 30% of your sources must be outside the field of orgtology (e.g., peer-reviewed articles, books, laws/policy docs, credible industry research). Use of previous students’ essays is allowed - but must be referenced properly. Most of the original orgtology theory, models, and course material was developed by Derek Hendrikz - please reference and cite accordingly, e.g., (Hendrikz: 2016), "Hendrikz (2016) states that..." Similar rules will apply where you use other students work as part of your essay. Academic Integrity Rule (Threshold Requirement) This is not a “small penalty.” It is a standard requirement. If you use wording, structure, or ideas from: orgtology guides, published orgtology work, other students’ essays, or external sources, …you must cite and acknowledge them clearly. The Module 1 outlay explicitly expects proper referencing, including using external material and other students’ work responsibly. A Simple Self-Check Before You Submit Hypothesis 2x (50%) Did I map receptive (concrete) and projective (abstract) activity clearly to my topic? Did I show reciprocity/relationships (projecting ↔ receiving) in my case? Did I define and apply the X‑factor (human unpredictability) concretely? Orgtology models (20%) Did I apply at least one model and show what it reveals? Structure (15%) Do I have a clear If‑Then‑Because hypothesis and a logical flow? Scholarship (15%) Are citations and references Harvard-consistent? Are ≥30% of references outside orgtology? Why This Scoring Method? Because Module 1 is meant to confirm you can apply the foundation of orgtology - Hypothesis 2x - and build a credible argument using the expected structure and referencing requirements.
