University of Sunderland
School of Computing & Technology
英國dissertation網Double Project Module Guide
Dr Chris Bloor, September 2005
Introduction....................................................................................................................2
Project Selection.............................................................................................................2
Sponsor..........................................................................................................................3
Supervision....................................................................................................................3
Terms of Reference and Schedule..................................................................................4
Assessment.....................................................................................................................6
Reviews..........................................................................................................................7
Writing and Submitting your Report..............................................................................7
The Viva........................................................................................................................11
Appendices.......................................................................................................................12
Marking Schemes..........................................................................................................13
Title Page......................................................................................................................19
Terms of Reference.......................................................................................................20
Schedule.......................................................................................................................23
Gantt Chart....................................................................................................................24
1
Introduction
Welcome to the double project module. This is an important module, occupying a third of the work you will be doing at level three. It is your opportunity to engage in a piece work of your own choosing and I hope that you enjoy doing it and are successful.
Project Selection
You should be looking for a project that is both interesting and challenging. Whilst your Centre or College may be able to provide some ideas, the onus on finding a project does rest with the student. Here are some examples of where you might find project ideas:
Your work Local companies Friends Schools and Colleges Here at the University
What makes a good project?
First of all the project should be interesting! You will be spending over 400 hours working on your project - it needs to be something that will engage your interest and keep that interest going, even when you encounter difficulties. It should be challenging too! This is your opportunity to show what you are capable of - to the University, to your employer and to potential employers. A standard question to ask recent graduates at interviews is "What did you do for your project?". The project should be of the type when you design, build and test a system. Pure research-based projects are not acceptable. It is preferable that it should address a real problem your sponsor has. The project may apply some of the knowledge and techniques you have learnt on the programme so far, but should also expand on these and may take you into an entirely new area of computing. The project should give you sufficient scope to research at least two areas of computing, and to apply that research. Here are some examples of previous project titles:#p#分頁標題#e#
Multimedia Tutorial System Practice Data Management System Neural Network Training Tool Case Based Reasoning Help Desk Tool Cross Platform File Transfer Utility
Simple web sites and access databases are not acceptable. Often a sponsor will say that this is all they want. In this case you may proceed with the project but must add more functionality. In effect you will produce two systems – the basic system the sponsor wants, and an enhanced version that meets the academic requirements of the project.
You should come to your second projects’ session with your ideas sketched out (one side of A4), and discuss these with the local supervisor at that session.
2
Research and Investigation
You must research at least one area in computing and produce a literature review, with recommendations for your project based on the research you have done. Try to make this reasonably specific. ‘HCI’ alone is not acceptable, but should be narrowed down to something like heuristic evaluation, or user-centred design for example. Also try to avoid ‘security’ – it generally makes for very boring reading and there is little you can do in terms of your implementation in this area.
We also ask for a technical investigation, or a second area of research. The technical investigation could be deciding on a language or approach to use, evaluating and learning a new language, investigating more complex requirements etc.
Sponsor
The project sponsor provides a real world problem to be solved. Every project must have a sponsor. It is better if the sponsor is external to the college/centre, but may also be your college or centre. They should understand that they have a commitment of time to provide information to you, and to agree terms of reference, requirements and to evaluate the final product. They must also understand that you have restrictions imposed on you by the University and that, in particular, they cannot normally add to the requirements after they have agreed the terms of reference. It is your job to communicate this to the sponsor. The sponsor should provide a letter confirming that they are willing to act as sponsor and that they will devote the necessary time to the project.
Supervision
You will have a project coordinator at your college/centre and will also be given a Sunderland supervisor. It is your responsibility to make the initial contact with your supervisor in Sunderland, and to maintain regular contact. If you are UK based it is a good idea to have a telephone conversation fairly early on to ensure that you are familiar with the project requirements. Most of your contact will be via email, however. Whilst your supervisor will generally respond or acknowledge receipt fairly quickly (almost immediately if a simple yes/no answer is required) you must remember that commenting on Terms of Reference, schedules, draft chapters can take a while. There will also be periods when your supervisor is not in the University (holidays, conferences, placement visits).#p#分頁標題#e#
Your supervisor will be able to guide you through your project and give general advice on things like terms of reference, research areas, writing up etc. They will also be able to discuss any problems you are encountering. However you do need to recognise that this is your project, and most of the problems you encounter will be for you to solve! It is you that will have the detailed knowledge of your project and so are best placed to solve these problems.
Your supervisor will comment on the general structure proposed for your report, your draft research chapter and at least one other chapter, providing you send this to them in good time. They will not give you guidance on the mark you may expect, or whether your
3
project will pass, because they are only partially responsible for allocating marks. There is a second examiner appointed, and also an external examiner who reviews the marks for each module and may make adjustments. Remember it is up to you to make the most of the opportunity the project presents for you. With the project it is not just a matter of doing as your supervisor tells you, it is a matter of how well you do this and, if you want a good mark, of being self-motivated and doing that bit extra.
Having Problems Contacting Your Supervisor?
It is now the University policy that we will only contact students using their university email address ([email protected]), so make sure you use your university email address in all contact with your supervisor. You must also remember that email is not a guaranteed service and there are problems from time to time. If you are having problems contacting your supervisor, and you have left a reasonable period of time for them to respond (say a week to ten days), then please inform your centre coordinator and ask them to contact the module leader here at Sunderland. We then have an established link to follow and the module leader here can check with the supervisor, or let you know if that supervisor is away from the University for a few days. It's no good just sending further emails to your supervisor! We have had cases where emails have not got through to the supervisor, and where responses we know have been sent have not got through to the student.
The other thing you should do is to make sure you set up your real name as your alias, and give your email a title such as 'COM319 Project Student from XYZ College'. That should make sure that your email gets past the spam filter. A message from 'cool dude' with a title 'waiting for a reply' will not get through, and will be deleted, unread, as spam by your supervisor if it does.
Terms of Reference and Schedule
Once you have agreed your project, you will need to develop your Terms of Reference, a Schedule of tasks, and Gantt Chart. You should also obtain a letter from your sponsor, indicating that they are willing to sponsor your project, that they will make themselves available to consult with you and help evaluate the product, and giving details of any other facilities they will provide. These should be finalised, agreed with your sponsor, and signed off by your supervisor before the time of the first review.#p#分頁標題#e#
Only minor changes may be made to the Terms of Reference after they have been signed off, though you should use your schedule to help you manage the project, and amend it as necessary.
The Terms of Reference define your project and should be the first thing you develop. An example Terms of Reference is provided. The structure is as follows:
Project Title
Overview - a couple of paragraphs that outline the main reasons for undertaking the project
4
Objectives - 6-8 measurable objectives which define your project and against which your project can be tested. These objectives should include research and the writing of your report, in addition to the technical aspects of the project.
Constraints - these define the boundaries of your project and are generally set by the sponsor. They may include a restriction on the target hardware or on the software to be used. Time and lack of knowledge are not constraints! It is up to you to scope and plan the project so that any necessary knowledge can be obtained, and the project can be completed on time.
Legal, Ethical and Professional Issues – List any legal, ethical and professional issues raised in the project. These might be:
Legal – If personal data is to be stored on the system, then the sponsor must be advised of any data protection or other legal implications.
Ethical – Are there any human subjects to be used in experiments eg school students subject to evaluation of a CAL programme? If so University ethics approval will be required. Professional – There is a need to make clear to the sponsor the extent of your expertise (or lack of it!) – see the British Computer Society Code of Practice.
Resources - list the resources (hardware and software) that will be needed for the project, and the source of these resources. Your project supervisor will need to know that you have the resources available to complete your project using those that are available at the University, or which will be provided by the sponsor. The University will not purchase specialist hardware or software for undergraduate projects. Note also that all software used must be legal!
Reporting - to the University supervisor every two weeks, and to the sponsor every x weeks.
References - 6-8 references that indicate to the supervision team that you have made a start on your research.
The Schedule lists all the tasks you will need to undertake to complete the project, including the planning of your project and writing up. You will need to add to the tasks listed in the example schedule to include tasks for learning new software, meetings with sponsors, designing and undertaking questionnaire surveys, preparing for reviews and vivas etc. You should not build any ‘slack’ into the schedule – this is an estimate of your time to complete each task which you will use to manage the project. You will not loose marks if you do not stick to the schedule (the markers may not believe a schedule which shows every task completed to time!). You will loose marks if you do not manage the project properly, or do not know where you are on your schedule. It is perfectly acceptable to modify your schedule from time to time to take account of deviations. Try to divide your projects into tasks of between 1 and 20 hours. This is not a strict rule.#p#分頁標題#e#
5
We are not saying that the maximum hours you should spend on a task is 20 hours but that you should consider dividing a task into two separate tasks if your estimate of the time it will take is more than 20 hours. As an example you may initially include a task of programming your implementation that takes 60 hours. This should certainly be split into 3 smaller tasks - program user interface, program first three modules etc. Each task must have a deliverable – something you will produce which shows that the task is complete. Examples of deliverables include research notes, example programs if you are learning a new language, program code, designs, notes of meetings, test plans, draft chapters etc. For each task you should also indicate your estimate of the time in hours to complete that task, the planned start and finish dates, and the actual hours, start date and finish date. It is difficult to do this at this stage! Remember this is a project management tool. You need to make your own best estimate of the times each task will take, then see how long the whole project will take. If this is between 400 and 425 hours then it indicates that you probably have a good enough project. If your estimate is less than 400 hours then you probably have not got a large enough project to allow you to pass the project module. If your estimate is over 450 hours it is indicating that the project is too large and you may not be able to finish it in time. In both cases you should review your timings and discuss them with your supervisor.
For a project taken over the whole year you should plan to spend about 16 hours a week on your project, and aim to have your design finished towards the end week 10, and your coding complete by about week 20 so that you have plenty of time to complete your write-up and to undertake an evaluation of your system.
You will also need to produce a Gantt chart. This is a graphical representation of your schedule and allows the supervisor to get a quick idea of what tasks should be currently active and which should be complete. A partially completed example Gantt Chart is provided. This has been produced using Excel and this is acceptable. You may use another project planning tool (such as Microsoft Project), but as these are generally designed to be used on larger projects they are not necessarily ideal for a small project such as yours. It is probably not worth learning to use Microsoft Project just for the double project, but you are welcome to use it if you wish. Note that some tasks may be done in parallel and that the Gantt Chart makes it clear that this is happening. While you are doing your research you can also be drawing up your requirements document.
Assessment
The project is assessed as follows:
Control - 20% Success - 30% Dissertation - 30% Viva - 20%
The marking schemes for the various components are given in the appendices. However you should note that marking project dissertations is a complex process and there is seldom one single definitive aspect upon which the performance of a student can be#p#分頁標題#e#
6
solely assessed. One thing is clear: the report certainly has a very important role in giving the markers a clear picture about the extent and quality of work you have undertaken because it is possibly the first time that the marker(s) come across your complete work as they may not have seen your project at a review. The other point to note that it is not merely a matter of doing what your supervisor tells you to do in order to obtain a good mark. It is how you have responded to the advice you have been given by your supervisor and the reviewers that matters.
We consider the project to be an important, if not the most important, indicator of a student’s ability. The project must be included within the 100 credits for your degree classification, and if you fail the project and have to repeat it, then your mark will be capped at 40%.
Reviews
There will be two reviews, one fairly early on and a second review about two-thirds of the way through the project. At the first review you will meet with two members of staff (possibly by video conferencing) who will want to see your project file, your sponsor’s letter, your terms of reference, schedule and Gantt Chart, and to hear a short explanation from you of what your project is about, where you have got to, and whether you have encountered any problems. They will give you a mark (which counts towards your overall control mark), and some feedback. The purpose of the first review is to confirm that you have a reasonable project and have started work on it. You may not make major changes to your terms of reference after this first review. The marking scheme for the first review is given in the appendices.
The main purpose of the second review is to check that you are on target to finish the project on time, and to suggest a recovery plan if this is not the case! The review will take the form of an assessment of the report you submit. This should explain how you are progressing with the project and how you have responded to the recommendations from the first review. You are also required to hand in a draft research chapter, an up-to-date schedule, and a copy of the first review recommendations and how you have responded to these. The marking scheme for the second review is also given as an appendix.
Project File
You need to maintain a project file containing a record of all the work you have done on the project – Terms of Reference, Schedule, Gantt Chart, Supervision notes etc, plus research notes, system designs and other work. Maintaining this file will help you keep control of your project and make the task of writing the final report a lot easier.
Writing and Submitting your Report
The following are the key points that can be used to help you understand how to put together a high quality dissertation.
7
Structure and Layout
The report should ‘tell a good story’. By this I mean it should read through logically, and as a whole narrative, not that it should be a complete fabrication! The story line should be that you had a problem to solve. This required some research and technical investigation to inform how the problem should be tackled. A solution was then designed and implemented, followed by testing and evaluation. Each chapter should link to the preceding and following chapters, rather than reading as separate sections. It is a good idea to summarise the main points of each chapter, particularly the research and technical investigation chapters which should end by telling the reader what the implications are for the actual implementation. In the implementation chapter try to highlight how you have used your research. Remember also that the evaluation is one of the most important parts of the report. This should be more than ‘if I had more time I would …’. It should cover the whole process, including the research. Initially this told you to follow a particular implementation method. Do you still feel this is valid? How could your system be improved? Does the process you have followed tell you anything that can be generalised to other information systems? What about the professional, legal and ethical issues? Layout The final dissertation must be typed, double-spaced on A4 paper with a left-hand margin of between 3 and 5cm. A good quality printer (laser, or inkjet) should be used. All pages should be numbered sequentially from the first page of the first chapter (not the abstract or table of contents). Page numbers should appear at the bottom centre of the page.#p#分頁標題#e#
Length The body of the dissertation (that is excluding the Appendices) should between 12,000 and 15,000 words long. A word count should be included in the Introductory section which says: "This body of this report is xxx words in total".
Title Page The report must have a title page laid out according to the format prescribed. A template is provided and can be downloaded from the projects web site.
Abstract A one page abstract, single-spaced, should be the first printed page after the title, and should summarise the project. The abstract is NOT an introduction, neither is it a justification for your project - it is a SYNOPSIS of the entire document. It is there to help someone else decide what was done in the project and whether they need to read the full report.
Table of Contents A table of contents should be the next page, showing each of the main chapter headings and their appropriate page numbers. Sub-headings can also be shown, but only two levels of sub-heading, e.g.
1. Introduction 1.1 Background to the Project 1.1.1 The Sponsor Company
8
Setting up styles for your headings, then using the Table of Contents facility in word will help you get an accurate table of contents.
Main Body The main body of the dissertation should follow the general model outlined below:
Introduction Research -- 2-3 chapters Design, Development and Testing -- 3-4 chapters Conclusions and Recommendations for Further Work -- 1 chapter References etc
Note this is a general model only; because of the diverse nature of projects, some deviation from this model can be expected. However, it should be used as a starting point in planning the dissertation.
Figures and Diagrams Figures and diagrams should be used wherever possible to illustrate key points in the dissertation. Hand-drawn figures should not be used. Figures should be included in the text at the most appropriate point to support an argument, and not kept to the end of chapters or the main body. All figures should have a caption, in bold italics, centred underneath the figure, and should be sequentially numbered within chapters e.g.
Figure 2.1 - ER Model for the System
References Wherever possible, references should be used to support your research and development work. You should use the Harvard method for references. The library provides a leaflet explaining how to use Harvard referencing, and more information is given in the introductory lectures.
Appendices The appendices should include all relevant material that is not appropriate for inclusion in the main body text. This can include (but is not limited to) the following:
Terms of Reference (required) Gantt Chart (required) Schedule (required) Design documentation Program code Actual test results (as opposed to summaries or analyses of the results, which should go in the main body) Questionnaires/user feedback forms User guide for software developed Disk with copy of the software and dissertation (required) Additional diagrams (for example, if example screen shots are shown in the main body, you can refer to additional screen shots in the appendices).#p#分頁標題#e#
Appendices should be sequentially ordered by LETTER (not number) - e.g. Appendix A, B, C etc.
9
Writing Style Tense The dissertation should be written in the PAST TENSE, THIRD PERSON.
This means that you should refer to work that WAS done (not is being done or will be done); and that you should refer to work that was done by THE AUTHOR (not by me or him/her).
For example:
"I considered ..." should be written as "It was considered ..." "I decided to ..." should be written as "The author decided to ..." "I asked the user to ..." should be written as "The author asked the user to ..." or "The user was asked to …" "I will do some tests ..." should be written as "The author carried out tests ..." or "Tests were carried out …"
However, it is likely that in the introduction and discussion of results/recommendations for future work, some mix of tense may be required and this is acceptable.
For further clarification of writing style, students are directed towards the numerous texts on scientific writing in the Library (see Dewy number 501.49).
Drafting and Correction A draft research chapter should be produced for the second review, when members of the supervision team can give feedback both on the content and the writing style. Your supervisor will also comment on the dissertation contents but will not necessarily give detailed comments chapter by chapter.
Plagiarism Plagiarism is "the insertion in student’s work of material derived from the work, published or unpublished, of another".
Students are expected to observe "scholarly conventions". Make it completely clear which are your own words, and which are the words of someone else. Use suitable annotation, quotations marks, and references (see section on references above). If you are not copying directly, but basing your words substantially on someone else’s, then you must acknowledge that person.
Any infringement on plagiarism will be dealt with according to the University Policy on Cheating, Collusion and Plagiarism. It is usually pretty obvious when materials from other sources have been inserted, and easy to confirm this using a web search engine.
Submission of your Report
Typing and Binding The student is responsible for production of the dissertation, including typing and binding. TWO COPIES of the dissertation must be produced, spiral bound, with a window in the front cover through which the title and author must be clearly visible.
Submission The two copies of the dissertation must be submitted to the University by the
10
arrangements given to you by your college/centre. The University Policy on late submission without valid reason is to deem the student to have failed in the assessment.
Common reasons given by students for late submission are:
Computer viruses Corrupt disks Hardware failures Access to printers Binder not delivering as promised Traffic problems getting in to University etc etc etc#p#分頁標題#e#
Excuses such as these, when given on submission day, reflect poor planning - you should allow yourself some leeway in submission, and should ensure you have backup copies of the dissertation and other deliverables. Ensure that the binder is given plenty of time, and allow for traffic jams! None of these excuses is likely to gain you any sympathy with the Module Leader, markers, or Module Board.
You should make sure you also submit the normal cover sheet for assignment submissions. Fill in your details and take this form with you when you submit your dissertation; receipt of your work will be recorded, and you will be given a slip as proof of receipt. Without this you have no proof that your work was ever handed in - so make sure you don’t lose it!
An example report is provided, together with a commentary on that report. You should read the report and make your own notes about it. What is good about this report? How could it be improved? Does it follow the recommended format? After you have made your own judgement, read the commentary to see what supervisors at the University thought about it. When it comes to writing your dissertation do not just follow this style, however. You need to think about how you want to express yourself and your ideas. A structure developed by another student may not be the best vehicle to use for this.
The Viva
As well as submitting your dissertation, you will be given a viva. This is a ten-minute presentation by yourself, using PowerPoint slides. The presentation will be to two members of staff and may be by video conferencing. In the viva we assume you will be able to give a good presentation and, while this is required to get a good mark, a good presentation alone will not be sufficient to get a good mark. We are primarily interested in the content of your presentation and your response to our questions.
11
Appendices
12
Marking Schemes
First Review
% Mark
Description
>=70
Signed off TOR, Schedule & Gantt Chart
> 5 Research references proffered
Sponsor’s letter obtained
Project file organised
(Contents List, Sectioned/referenced etc)
Obviously in control
60, 65
Signed off TOR (or signed off at review), Schedule & Gantt Chart
Sponsor’s letter obtained
< 5 Research references proffered
Some project file organisation
50, 55
Signed off TOR and little else
40, 45
No signed off TOR but an overview/ some ideas
<40
No real attempt at developing a TOR
13
Second Review
Students are required to hand in:
• A progress report of between 500-1500 words, including a response to any issues raised in the first review
• An updated schedule (there are approximately 110 hours before the hand-in date, assuming consistent effort throughout the year).
• A draft research chapter
• First review sheet
First Class (>=70%) No issues from the first review, or minor issues that have been fully addressed. The schedule is realistic and clearly justifies and evidences that the project will be completed on time with little additional effort. #p#分頁標題#e#http://www.400190.com/Thesis_Tips/The draft chapter is well written, has a good range and number of references, and clear conclusions that indicate how the research will be utilised within the project. Only minor amendments are required before the chapter could be included in the final report.
Upper Second (60-69%) Issues from the first review have been addressed and a realistic schedule produced. There is evidence that the project will be completed on time, though some additional effort may be required. The research chapter is well written, but better use could be made of references and the conclusions require some strengthening.
Lower Second (50-59%) Some major issues from the first review, not all of which have been addressed satisfactorily. Some doubt whether the project will complete on time, or completion not clearly evidenced and/or a major effort is required. Research chapter is short on references and conclusions.
Third (40-49%) Major issues from the first review have not been addressed and there is considerable doubt whether the project will be completed on time, and/or little evidence to indicate successful completion. Research chapter has few references, is poorly written and has weak or missing conclusions.
Fail No submission or a minimal attempt to meet the submission requirements.
Plagiarism – this review is to be seen as a learning exercise. The research chapter will be checked for plagiarism. If this is confirmed with the module leader, then it will be marked ignoring the plagiarised sections. A note will be made on the marking sheet that plagiarism has been found and the student advised to re-read the notes on quotation that are available via WebCT. No further punishment will be inflicted, though the incident will be taken into account if the matter is not resolved in the final report.
14
Viva
At this stage it is assumed that the student is able to give a competent demonstration, with good use of PowerPoint. A good presentation will hence not be sufficient to get a high mark. The purpose of the viva is to explore the depth of the student’s understanding of their research and of the process they have undertaken.
1st Class (>70%)
An excellent presentation, with good, clear visual aids. The presentation is an analysis of the product/process rather than a description. The student clearly identifies future work and/or other areas of application. Responses to questions show a depth of technical knowledge and understanding, and reading broader than the narrow confines of the project.
2.1 (60-69%)
An excellent presentation, with good, clear visual aids. The content is mainly descriptive, but does identify future work and/or other areas of application. Responses to questions show technical competence, breadth and understanding
2.2 (50-59%)
Good presentation with relatively minor faults. The content, however, is descriptive and the response to questioning shows a reluctance to move away from a narrow interpretation of the project#p#分頁標題#e#
3rd (40-49%)
A poorly organised presentation that is wholly descriptive. Response to questioning exposes some lack of knowledge or understanding
Fail (<40%)
No show, or poor presentation with inappropriate visual aids. Fails to answer some questions, or questioning reveals severe lack of knowledge.
15
Dissertation and Success
First Class (over 70%) You have exhibited strong all round strength (i.e. control, viva, etc.) as well as evidence of original thought and initiative. The project work is excellently documented in a well produced report, and there are high quality deliverables (products).
Dissertation: Well structured and organised, with a clear theme/aim. Writing is of a high quality with no (or very few) grammatical and typographical mistakes. Good use of well illustrated diagrams/figures to elaborate points. Proper report/research writing conventions are adhered to (i.e. proper citations, cross references, useful appendices, relevant references and bibliographies etc). Excellent and insightful conclusions and strong recommendations with highly critical and relevant evaluation. Content is well balanced and far exceeds the level for a undergraduate project with lots of your own relevant input.
Success: All the objectives stated in the terms of reference are fully attained and exceeded expectations. The underpinning theoretical research is of good depth and with a clear focus supported by an excellent collection of authoritative references (journal/conference research articles). The research findings/concepts are well applied or related to the project. The system implemented is highly successfully and highly complex and met with the original specifications. Full documentation of the systems development was undertaken.
Critical evaluation and analysis of the research, technique and approach, and the systems implemented etc. is undertaken and the wider relevant business/practical implications are deduced and drawn.
Upper Second Class (60 - 69%) You have exhibited generally strong performance in the majority of aspects. Some evidence of forethought. The project work is well documented in a well produced report. The deliverables (products) are generally of a high quality.
Dissertation: Well written with a good logical structure. There is a theme/aim in the research and writing is of a good quality with few errors (grammatical or otherwise). There is good use of illustrated diagrams/figures. Most report/research writing conventions are observed. Good conclusions and recommendations with effective and relevant evaluation. Content is well balanced and at a level slightly exceeding that of an undergraduate project with a good amount of your own relevant input.
Success: All the objectives stated in the terms of reference are attained. The underpinning theoretical research is well executed and of sufficient depth and scope supported by a good collection of research journal/conference papers. The system is successfully implemented and has many functionalities and innovative features, and met with specifications. Research findings strongly influence the design, implementation and the evaluation.#p#分頁標題#e#
Critical evaluation and analysis of research, technique and approach is undertaken and business/practical implications are deduced.
16
Lower Second Class (50 - 59%) You have exhibited some strong points and done well in some aspects of the project. Potential for original thought if initiative is exercised. The project work is clearly and adequately documented. Most products (deliverables) are of average or slightly above average quality.
Dissertation: Could have been organised and structured more logically to enhance the theme/aim. Writing is acceptable with occasional errors (typographical, grammatical or otherwise). Could do with more well illustrated diagrams/figures to help bring points across. Conclusions and recommendations slightly weak in some areas. Evaluation could be more thorough. Content is slightly lacking in depth. Some input on your part.
Success: Most of the objectives stated in the terms of reference are attained to a varying degree of success. The underpinning theoretical research could have been dealt with in more depth. Some collection of research journal/conference papers. The system implemented does have its merits but more could have been done with it. Documentation of system development is complete with a standard evaluation. A good attempt at the evaluation and analysis of research, techniques etc., although lack of relevance of some of the research. Some attempt at drawing the business/practical implications of the project work undertaken.
Third Class (42 - 49%) You have exhibited some potential to produce some good work. Lack of initiative and an inquisitive mind prevented you from doing that. The project work is adequately documented in an average report. Products (deliverables) are of average, or slightly below average, quality.
Dissertation: Recurring errors (typographical, grammatical or otherwise). Sign of report produced in haste but with some limited planning. A distinct lack of use of relevant/useful diagrams/figures to help assist in elaborating points. Weak references and/or sourcing of more relevant research issues. A lack of coherence in the report in terms of the content. Slightly lacking input on your part. Some evaluation attempted. Conclusions and recommendation generally weak.
Success: All objectives stated in the terms of reference are dealt with, some of which were in depth. The underpinning research is mostly standard 'regurgitation' of facts from bibliographies with some effort on your part of trying to draw relevance out of these to relate to your project. Some business/practical implications of project work were given.
Bare Pass (40 - 41%) Generally weak but not without merit. You have expended some amount of effort on your part in trying to achieve but the deliverables (products) are generally weak but acceptable.
Dissertation: Too hastily prepared which is shown in the weak structure and poor organisation of information. Theme/aim did not come through in the report but the data/research gathered were of interest and acceptable. Poor or inappropriate writing style is used. There is a lack of input on your part as regards to opinions, criticism, analysis and evaluation etc. Potential of a good report if more effort and time were put into it. Weak conclusions and recommendations.#p#分頁標題#e#
17
Success: Most objectives on the terms of reference were achieved or touched upon. However, these were lacking in depth and scope. Underpinning research inadequate, with few or no up-to-data issues. However, system implementation was acceptable and has its merits. There is no critical evaluation of the work/research undertaken and the wider implications of your project work were not explored. Business/practical implications were not drawn/deduced.
Fail (0 - 39%) An overall poor effort, ranging from non-submittal to shoddy work with no system developed as required, or a dissertation of sub-standard quality. Report does not conform to any recommended structures or a lack of structures. Grammatical and typographical errors abound.
18
Title Page
University of Sunderland
School of Computing & Technology
A Computerised
Basket Weaving Application
Christopher Bloor
A Project Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the
regulations governing the award of the degree of BSc in
Applied Business Computing, University of Sunderland 2005
19
Terms of Reference
DOUBLE PROJECT
SAMPLE TERMS OF REFERENCE
Student Name:
Project Title:
Overview of the Project
What is the project all about? Give a little background to the problem which you are addressing, why you have chosen this project, any collaborators (eg company, project sponsors etc).
Objectives for the Project
This is very important. You must CLEARLY and SPECIFICALLY state what the project objectives are, perhaps using bullet points for emphasis. Your success mark will be judged against these. Here is an example of a set of objectives:
The objectives of this project are to:
• Research the areas of … and … and to make recommendations for the implementation phase of the project.
• Design, implement and test a system to … including: