This page outlines the requirements for your final project report, which is the final written assignment in the unit. Your final report is due by noon on Friday 5th June.
No later than 12 noon on Friday 5th June (Week 13), you should submit your final project report via the class Moodle website. There is no specific length requirement for your report, but as a general rule of thumb, we expect a final project report of 30-40 pages in length for ITEC808, 809 and 810 projects, or 50-60 pages for ITEC811 projects. Your report needs to be long enough to describe in detail the work that you have done, but not so long that it discourages someone from reading it.
This document should report in detail on (a) your initial problem specification; (b) relevant related work and background sources; (c) the approach you took to solving the problem; and (d) the outcomes of your work. The report should be provided either as a Word document or a PDF document.
Note that you should also provide at the same time, via the Moodle class website, your presentation for the end of semester workshop: see here for details of what is required here.
This assignment has the following aims.
Make sure your submission meets the following requirements.
Please ensure that your final report is submitted with a filename that has the following format:
Your final report is worth 20 marks. The final report will be assessed by your supervisor according to the following rubric:
| Assessment Attribute | Levels of Attainment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unsatisfactory | Functional | Proficient | Advanced | |
| Comprehensiveness of Abstract | Incomplete, in that it does not provide a brief statement of all three of the problem, approach and outcomes; or, all three are expressed, but the descripiton is muddled and generally unclear. | Conveys the problem, the approach, and outcomes, but a little less clearly than might be expected, or at an inappropriate level of detail. | Stands as a surrogate for the full report: a clear summary of the problem, approach and outcomes; but may require some rewording to make it accessible to a non-specialist. | An excellent summary of the work carried out, clearly stating the problem, the approach taken, and the outcomes, in a manner that is accessible to a technical but non-specialist audience. |
| Clarity of Problem Statement | The introduction to the report does not clearly state the problem the project set out to solve. | The introduction does state the problem to be solved, but it takes a little effort to disentangle. | The introduction states the problem clearly, and its significance is clear. | The introduction provides an exceptionally clear and well-motivated problem statement, presented in a way that makes the reader eager to learn about the details of how the problem was solved. |
| Review of Related Work | Patchy or badly-organised review of related work; unclear exactly why the work cited is relevant to the problem addressed. | The material covered seems comprehensive and relevant, and some attempt has been made at clustering the materials reviewed in a thematic manner. | Thematic organisation of the review, demonstrating a considered extraction of key ideas from sources and how they impact on the problem at hand. | Thoughtful analysis of the material that goes beyond the themes identified explicitly by the sources, concisely drawing out the key points to set the stage for the work that follows; leaves no doubt about what's been done already and what hasn't. |
| Description of Work Carried Out | Hard to work out what was done; the description of the work carried out seems disorganised or incomplete. | The report indicates what work was carried out in reasonable detail. | The report indicates clearly indicates the work that was carried out at a level of detail that allows replication of the results, avoiding vague and imprecise abstractions. | The report clearly describes the work carried out, at an appropriate level of detail for a report of this length, and delivers a sense of maturity in the way in which the work was carried out. |
| Quality of Work Carried Out | A weak or incomplete effort; significant doubt that the work reported represents 100-120 person-hours of effort (200-240 for ITEC811). | A competent piece of work, perhaps with some loose ends and gaps. | A quality piece of completed work that demonstrates ability on the part of the student. | A very high quality piece of work that would have a very good chance of being accepted for presentation at a professional conference in the field. |
| Clarity of Outcomes | Unclear what was achieved in the project. | The report indicates the outcomes of the work, if a little unclearly. | The report clearly indicates the outcomes of the work carried out. | The report clearly describes the outcomes of the work, indicates how these relate to the originally stated outcomes, and realistically appraises the scope for future work. |
| Overall Quality of Writing | Very poor; problems with coherent presentation of ideas. | Understandable, but with some problems in grammar, style and spelling. | Grammar and style of an acceptable standard; could be safely given to an external party with only minor editing. | High quality prose; well written; could comfortably be made available via a corporate website. |
| Appropriate Use of Referencing Conventions | The information in the bibliography is incomplete, or there is a lack of consistency in formatting. | The information in the bibliography is formatted consistently, but with a few missing details. | All references are complete and consistently formatted. | --- |
[Home|Projects|Research|Publications|Professional Activities|Resources]