Marking Grid – Dissertation final Report.

A+/A A- B C D F+ F/F- G
Well prepared Satisfactory and Good enough content Poor presentation, ill
An exceptional quality presentation presentation convincing: and responses, some prepared, little or no system Did not
and “system” demonstration. All and well presentation content, aspects of a system demonstration. Unable to
Viva (10%) questions competently answered. demonstrated. managed to demonstrated. answer questions.
attend.
All questions demonstrate a system,
answered. questions answered.

Original & distinguished idea, Clear and well Satisfactory and clear, Generally Has not presented convincing
RQ, Aim & Objectives, exceptional quality literature developed satisfactory level of satisfactory, but statements, needs a complete
Nothing
Degree of intellectual review, has shown exceptional level statements, individual intellectual further refinement of overhaul and rethinking of the
presented
challenge (10%) of individual competence, commendable capability in dealing the main statements, statements. little evidence of
thorough and full interpretation and review of the with challenges, Shows and additional literature review
evaluation of cited material and underpinning a satisfactory level of background literature
literature. literature. underpinning literature review needed.
search and
interpretation.
Distinguished Exceptional Commendable Satisfactory Broadly satisfactory Some Little or no
Literature review (10%) quality system quality system statements of problem statements of evidence evidence of Nothing
analysis and system analysis and analysis, and requirements, good of relevant appropriate
requirements analysis and high level requirements enough requirements analysis. analysis.
presented
specification. requirements requirements specification. specification.
specification. specification.
System designed Exceptional Designed the Evidence of a Evidence of good Some Poor or no
Methodology & Design to a distinguished system system to a satisfactory system enough system evidence design Nothing
specification. design very high Design. Design. of consideration.
(10%) specification. specification. considered
presented
design
Distinguished level Exceptional Commendable Has satisfactorily Good enough Some Little or no
Implementation/ of development level of level of developed development/implem evidence functional Nothing
fully functional and development/ system /implemented main entation of the of implementation.
Development (15%) completed implementati development/ functional parts of the system. implement
presented
outcome. on. implementatio system. ation.
n.
Distinguished Exceptional A very well Has a satisfactory and Good enough testing Poor/unsuitable evaluation
Testing & Evaluation evaluation and evaluation developed adequate evaluation strategy and planned and testing strategy. Nothing
testing strategy. and testing evaluation and and testing strategy. evaluation.
(10%) strategy. testing
presented
strategy.
Distinguished level Exceptional Commendable Satisfactory conclusive Clear and good Little or non-convincing
Conclusions & Critique of conclusive level of level of statements together enough summary, conclusive statements of the Nothing
summation and summary summary and with statements of conclusions, further report. Unaware of
and Potential recognition of conclusion conclusion further development. development appropriate further
presented
Development (10%) further research with further with some mentioned. development.
and development. development recognition of
recognition. further
development.
Very well Satisfactorily motivated Reasonably Unmotivated, lacked a work
An exceptionally self-motivated motivated, to work to a plan, motivated, attended plan, few or no meeting
Project Management** individual, committed to a well- excellent adequate progress a number of attended to show progress.
Did not
(supervisor only) (15%) developed plan, with regular adherence to meetings. Clear and progression Poor quality proposal, failed to
attend
progress meetings. A distinguished a plan, regular well written proposal & meetings. good address relevant issues. Poor progress
quality project proposal. A progress interim report to enough proposal & quality interim report, failed meetings.
distinguished quality interim report. meetings. Well standard guideline. interim report, but to provide a convincing Etc.
written & the work needs account of progress. Falls well
clearly well further clarification
structured on a number of
short of the threshold
proposal & issues. standard.
interim report.

A distinguished quality report. Well written & Clear and well written Good enough report, Poor written quality, failed to
Report quality (10%) clearly well report to the standard but needs to describe provide a convincing account
Nothing
structured. guideline. and clarify some of the outcome and whether
presented
issues further. the main aim was achieved.

** This aspect includes; the submission of a proposal, Interim report, and 4 progress meeting logs.

The following notes may help you to complete each assessment category.

Degree of Intellectual Challenge

• Does the dissertation show flair, imagination, originality, aptness?
• Does it represent an intellectual challenge to the student?

Aim & Objectives

• Clear statement of purpose?
• Consistent with reported research?
Research Underpinning
• Is there a thorough (and appropriate) literature review concomitant with clear statement of aim and objectives?
• Has the source material been subjected to critical evaluation and interpreted appropriately?

Design, Methodology
• Were a range of approaches considered?
• Appropriate justification for method(s) adopted?
• Evidence of investigative skills?
• Is there a critical awareness of strengths/limitations of the system?

Implementation and Development

• Is there evidence of an implemented system?
• Has anything been developed?

Conclusions, Critique & Potential Development

• Do we read report and think “so what”?
• Is it complete (with implications, consequences, recommendations)?
• Are appropriate conclusions drawn?
• Is there “closure” with respect to the stated aim and objectives?
• Is there a critical component with analysis, interpretation and evaluation?
• Any recognition of the scope for further research/development?
Project Management
• Has the student engaged with the module milestone stages as follows;

o Proposal

o Interim report

• Has the student attended and kept a record of at least 4 supervision meeting

Report Quality & Format

• Is the report clear and readable?
• Does it follow published guidelines with reference to referencing and formatting?

Note: Non-attendance at the Viva is an automatic Fail.