微信客服：xiaoxionga100
微信客服：ITCS521
程序代写案例-FIT5126/FIT4441
时间：2021-11-11
Page 1 of 7
FIT5210/FIT5126/FIT4441 ASSIGNMENT 1: LITERATURE
REVIEW (AND PROPOSAL)
A. Overview and Deadline
The aim of this assignment is to prepare a literature review and explore the detailed
background of your project so that you can define a focussed research problem. This
assignment is the first assessment in both the ‘minor thesis’ stream and for your honours
project. It is worth 15% of all the available marks across the project module(s) that you
are studying.1 The due date for this assignment is:
- For students on FIT5210 – Friday 3pm, Week 5.
- For students on FIT5126 or FIT4441 – Friday 3pm, Week 8.
Late assignments will have five marks deducted (out of 100 available) for each
calendar day2 that they are late, unless an extension of time is approved under the
applicable Faculty procedures. If your assignment is seven or more days late, then
you will automatically be awarded a mark of zero. (Furthermore, if your Interim
Presentation3 (a separate assignment due in Week 12) is submitted late or not at all,
then further marks will be administratively deducted, as explained in the Interim
Presentation instructions.)
B. The Assignment
You must write a report of up to 6000 words (plus a reference list) that addresses the
following questions:
A. What is the range of research conducted in the research area?
B. What does the existing research tell us?
C. What is the gap in the existing research that motivates the research project?
D. How do you plan on addressing this gap in your research project?
This report will be marked by one assessor4. It will be marked following the rubric
appended to this document in Annex A. This rubric is really important and you should
check you address all the points contained within it when you submit your report.
Warning: If the report you submit is over the 6000-word limit, then any material (asides
the reference list) after the 6000-word point will not be marked. You will also lose further
marks for a lack of concision in your writing, see Criteria 6A in the mark-scheme.
1 For students on the minor thesis program, this is three modules in succession –
FIT5126/FIT5127/FIT5128. For students on the honours program, this is four connected modules
– FIT4441/4442/4443/4444. For those on the graduate certificate, FIT5210 is the only module you
take, but that is a triple module.
2 An assignment that is submitted after 3pm (Melbourne Time for Australian based Students,
Kuala Lumpar time for students registered at Monash University Malaysia and so on) is deemed
to have been submitted on the following calendar day. For example, an FIT5126 assignment
submitted at 4pm on Sunday on Week 8 would be deemed to be three days late and have 15 marks
deducted, whilst one submitted at 2pm that same day would be treated as being two days late and
have 10 marks deducted.
3 This does not apply to FIT5210 students.
4 The marks will be moderated by the Chief Examiner before they are issued.
Page 2 of 7
C. Structure of Report
Your report is required to have the following structure and section headings
(suggested word counts for each in brackets):
Title Page. This is a single page containing (i) a working title for your project, (ii) your
student ID number, (iii) your name, (iv) the course you are studying
(FIT5210/FIT5126/FIT4441) and (v) your supervisors name).
1. Introduction (750 words): This section presents an overview of your literature review,
as well as offering an indication (for your readers) of the structure to follow. It should
capture the broader topic and problem. It should also make clear the aims and objectives
of the literature review itself (rather than just the proposed project).
2. Substantive Literature Review (3000 words) 5: This should contain a number of
subsections, where different topics of the literature review are explored and discussed in
detail. In these sections you are presenting your analysis by connecting and critically
commenting upon different pieces of relevant literature. NB: you must have read and
should have fully understood each source that you cite.6
3. Summary of the State of the Art (500 words): You should present a clear ‘gap’ in the
literature based on your substantive literature review. This should be persuasively
connected to the project you propose to conduct.
4. Research Project Plan (1500 words): Provide a focussed plan explaining what
research you plan do to resolve (or at least, help address) the identified ‘gap’ you found in
your literature review. You should be able to persuade your assessors that your plan is
appropriate, feasible and realistic.
5. Conclusion (250 words). A paragraph summarising your report.
6. Reference List (unlimited word count): A list of all the references cited in the above
text. This is not a ‘Bibliography’, so you should limit this to the references you actually cited
in the sections identified above.
Warning: If the report does not have the above set of section headings, it may be returned
to you to correct, with the late penalty in Section A applying for each calendar day you
spend correcting it.7 Please use the above structure and section headings to avoid this
situation occurring.
D. Support with this assignment
This assignment is your opportunity to conduct a detailed investigation of the academic
literature related to your topic of study. Whilst you are responsible for the assignment,
your supervisor will be able to help you identify the most relevant literature and explain
how to effectively evaluate it. Provided you give them a reasonable amount of time to do
so, your supervisor is expected to provide comments on drafts you share with them,
5 The titles of the subsections in the Substantive Literature Review are chosen by the student to
align with the argument they are making and the literature that they are covering.
6 See Paragraph 2.8 of the new Academic Integrity Procedure:
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2300935/Student-Academic-Integrity-
Procedure.pdf
7 For example, if a report is returned to you for correction on the 25th of October and you return it
before 3pm on the 26th of October, you would lose 5 marks for the assignment.
Page 3 of 7
however they are not allowed to draft substantial chunks of text for you to include in your
report.
Your supervisor is also your point of contact if you are unclear about the assignment. If
there is any confusion or difficulties that you are unable to resolve with them, then you
can contact the Minor Thesis/Honours Co-ordinator.8
We will also offer some optional seminars this semester to support this module.
Finally, please read the rubric overleaf in detail.
E. Application for Assessment Adjustments
If you have a relevant disability or health condition, you may be entitled to ‘assessment
adjustments’ under Part 6 of the University Assessment Regime procedure.9 The process
of applying for these is to first approach the Disability Support Service, and then when
they have provided recommendations, please write to the Chief Examiner without delay
(reuben.kirkham+projects@monash.edu).
F. Submission of Assignment
Your report must be submitted in a PDF format in Moodle in conformity with the following
instructions.
1. The file should be named in the following form: yourStudentID-
yourFirstNameSurname-yourSupervisorName-LitReviewProposal.pdf
2. The submission should be completed in line with the timings set out in Section A
of this document. Late penalties apply as explained in that Section.
Please do not leave the submission to the last minute, but allow an appropriate amount
of time to upload your completed assignment.
8He can be contacted at reuben.kirkham+projects@monash.edu
9 https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2300925/Assessment-Regime-
Procedure.pdf
Page 4 of 7
ANNEX A – MARKING RUBRIC
This assignment is marked out of 100. The marks are apportioned as follows:
Criteria 1: Introduction and Aims (10 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 1 of the report ‘Introduction’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) No statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review. It is mostly unclear what topic the project is investigating.
P (50%-59%) There is a vague statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review. It is somewhat clear as to the topic being
investigated.
C (60%-69%) There is a reasonably clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, however this has obvious omissions. It is
mostly clear as to the topic being investigated in the proposed project, with some indication given as to the project’s
importance.
D (70%-79%) There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with only minor omissions. It is clear as to the topic
being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument advanced as to the project’s importance.
Lower HD (80%-89%) There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with no notable omissions. It is fully clear as to the
topic being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument and mostly persuasive argument advanced as to the
project’s importance.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with no omissions. It is fully clear as to the topic
being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument and persuasive argument advanced as to the project’s
importance.
Criteria 2: Coverage of research (20 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 2 of the report, namely ‘Substantive Literature Review’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The sources used are inadequate or inappropriate; the review does not show clear understanding or justification of sources
for inclusion in the review.
P (50%-59%) The sources used may be somewhat inadequate or inappropriate; the review does not always show clear understanding or
justification of sources for inclusion in the review. There are at least 10 references integrated into the main argument.
C (60%-69%) The sources used demonstrate acceptable selection of literature; the review exhibits reasonable interpretation of sources and
sources’ inclusion in the review is somewhat justified. There are at least 15 references integrated into the main argument.
D (70%-79%) The sources used demonstrate competent selection of literature; the review exhibits appropriate interpretation of sources
and justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 20 references integrated into the main argument.
Page 5 of 7
Lower HD (80%-89%) The sources used demonstrate judicious selection of literature; the review exhibits perceptive interpretation of sources and
clear justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 25 references effectively integrated into the main argument.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The sources used demonstrate judicious selection of literature; the review exhibits perceptive interpretation of sources and
clear justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 30 references effectively integrated into the main argument.
Criteria 3: Analysis of literature (20 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 2 of the report, namely ‘Substantive Literature Review’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The discussion of the literature is wholly uncritical and at best describes/summarises it only.
P (50%-59%) The discussion of the literature acts primarily as a description/summary, rather than a critical evaluation of the sources
used.
C (60%-69%) The discussion of the literature includes some elements of critical evaluation of the sources used.
D (70%-79%) The discussion of the literature demonstrates the students’ ability both to describe/summarise, and to evaluate the sources
used.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The discussion of the literature demonstrates students’ confident ability not only to describe/summarise, but also to
critically evaluate the sources used.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The discussion of the literature demonstrates students’ confident ability not only to describe/summarise, but also to
critically evaluate the sources used, including in a comparative and relative fashion.
Criteria 4: Synthesis of ‘gap’ (10 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 3 of the report, namely ‘Summary of the State of the Art’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) There is no statement as the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review.
P (50%-59%) There is a vague statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review.
C (60%-69%) There is a mostly clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a
connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
D (70%-79%) There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Lower HD (80%-89%) There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
and mostly persuasive connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
and persuasive connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Page 6 of 7
Criteria 5: Quality of Research Plan (20 marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 4 of the report, namely ‘Plan for your research project’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) There is little evidence of a research plan.
P (50%-59%) There is a high-level research plan, however this is mostly unclear. There is no attempt to justify any of the decisions made
in respect of the research plan.
C (60%-69%) There is a mostly clear high-level research plan, albeit with some substantial missing details. There is a limited attempt to
justify some of the decisions made in respect of the research plan. The justification is at least somewhat connected to the gap
identified in the review.
D (70%-79%) The high-level research plan is clear, with only minor missing details. There is a reasonable attempt to justify most of the
decisions taken in the research plan, albeit with substantial limitations. The justification is connected to the gap identified
in the review.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The high-level research plan is fully clear. There is a mostly persuasive justification of the decisions taken in the research
plan, with only minor limitations. The justification is clearly connected to the gap identified in the review.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The high-level research plan is fully clear. There is a persuasive justification of the decisions taken in the research plan,
with no notable limitations. The justification is clearly connected to the gap identified in the review.
Criteria 6A: Concision and Focus of Writing (10 Marks)
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The writing is inappropriate and mostly unclear.
P (50%-59%) There is a limited and mostly unsuccessful attempt to ensure that the account is focussed.
C (60%-69%) There is some attempt to ensure that the account is focussed, although there are numerous passages with prolixity and a lack
of focus.
D (70%-79%) There is a reasonable attempt to ensure that the account is focussed, although there are a substantial number of passages
with prolixity and a lack of focus.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The argument is drafted in a focussed manner with only the occasional prolixity or clunky wording.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The research is drafted in a focussed manner which is easy to read and understand, with no prolixity or clunky wording.
Criteria 6B: General Communication Skills (10 Marks)
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are not accurate or articulate, and the writing may consist of poorly
structured sentences with frequent grammatical errors.
- Poor paragraph structure and development (too short or long) and lack of logic detract from the writing;
subheadings, if used, do not clarify the writing.
Page 7 of 7
- The document produced has an unclear format, inappropriate for the scope of the task, and technical requirements
required by the faculty and/or the discipline have not been addressed.
- The student does not attempt to undertake citing and referencing.
P (50%-59%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing is not accurate or articulate most of time, and the writing, while still
able to be followed, may contain some grammatical errors.
- Paragraphs are not developed, structured and/or linked logically throughout; if applicable, section headings are not
used effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has some attempt at formatting, though not entirely appropriate for the scope of the task;
the student neglects most technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student has attempted to undertake citing and referencing with frequent errors.
C (60%-69%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing is often not accurate or articulate, while the writing consists in the
main of clearly structured sentences with few to no grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of mostly well composed paragraphs that are in most cases linked logically throughout;
if applicable, subheadings are used mostly effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student observes some
technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing, with some errors.
D (70%-79%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are generally accurate and articulate, and the writing consists of
clearly structured sentences without noteworthy grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of well composed paragraphs that are linked logically, and if applicable, subheadings
are used effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a clearly readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student
observes most technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing, with some minor errors.
HD (80%-100%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are consistently accurate and articulate, and the writing consists of
clearly structured sentences with no grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of very well composed paragraphs that are linked logically throughout, and if
applicable, subheadings are used effectively and accurately to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a clearly readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student
observes technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing.
NB – for marks within this range, a perfect piece of work would obtain 10 marks, with deductions made as appropriate up
and until the point three or more of the above descriptors fall at the D level, or some of them fall at the C level.
学霸联盟
FIT5210/FIT5126/FIT4441 ASSIGNMENT 1: LITERATURE
REVIEW (AND PROPOSAL)
A. Overview and Deadline
The aim of this assignment is to prepare a literature review and explore the detailed
background of your project so that you can define a focussed research problem. This
assignment is the first assessment in both the ‘minor thesis’ stream and for your honours
project. It is worth 15% of all the available marks across the project module(s) that you
are studying.1 The due date for this assignment is:
- For students on FIT5210 – Friday 3pm, Week 5.
- For students on FIT5126 or FIT4441 – Friday 3pm, Week 8.
Late assignments will have five marks deducted (out of 100 available) for each
calendar day2 that they are late, unless an extension of time is approved under the
applicable Faculty procedures. If your assignment is seven or more days late, then
you will automatically be awarded a mark of zero. (Furthermore, if your Interim
Presentation3 (a separate assignment due in Week 12) is submitted late or not at all,
then further marks will be administratively deducted, as explained in the Interim
Presentation instructions.)
B. The Assignment
You must write a report of up to 6000 words (plus a reference list) that addresses the
following questions:
A. What is the range of research conducted in the research area?
B. What does the existing research tell us?
C. What is the gap in the existing research that motivates the research project?
D. How do you plan on addressing this gap in your research project?
This report will be marked by one assessor4. It will be marked following the rubric
appended to this document in Annex A. This rubric is really important and you should
check you address all the points contained within it when you submit your report.
Warning: If the report you submit is over the 6000-word limit, then any material (asides
the reference list) after the 6000-word point will not be marked. You will also lose further
marks for a lack of concision in your writing, see Criteria 6A in the mark-scheme.
1 For students on the minor thesis program, this is three modules in succession –
FIT5126/FIT5127/FIT5128. For students on the honours program, this is four connected modules
– FIT4441/4442/4443/4444. For those on the graduate certificate, FIT5210 is the only module you
take, but that is a triple module.
2 An assignment that is submitted after 3pm (Melbourne Time for Australian based Students,
Kuala Lumpar time for students registered at Monash University Malaysia and so on) is deemed
to have been submitted on the following calendar day. For example, an FIT5126 assignment
submitted at 4pm on Sunday on Week 8 would be deemed to be three days late and have 15 marks
deducted, whilst one submitted at 2pm that same day would be treated as being two days late and
have 10 marks deducted.
3 This does not apply to FIT5210 students.
4 The marks will be moderated by the Chief Examiner before they are issued.
Page 2 of 7
C. Structure of Report
Your report is required to have the following structure and section headings
(suggested word counts for each in brackets):
Title Page. This is a single page containing (i) a working title for your project, (ii) your
student ID number, (iii) your name, (iv) the course you are studying
(FIT5210/FIT5126/FIT4441) and (v) your supervisors name).
1. Introduction (750 words): This section presents an overview of your literature review,
as well as offering an indication (for your readers) of the structure to follow. It should
capture the broader topic and problem. It should also make clear the aims and objectives
of the literature review itself (rather than just the proposed project).
2. Substantive Literature Review (3000 words) 5: This should contain a number of
subsections, where different topics of the literature review are explored and discussed in
detail. In these sections you are presenting your analysis by connecting and critically
commenting upon different pieces of relevant literature. NB: you must have read and
should have fully understood each source that you cite.6
3. Summary of the State of the Art (500 words): You should present a clear ‘gap’ in the
literature based on your substantive literature review. This should be persuasively
connected to the project you propose to conduct.
4. Research Project Plan (1500 words): Provide a focussed plan explaining what
research you plan do to resolve (or at least, help address) the identified ‘gap’ you found in
your literature review. You should be able to persuade your assessors that your plan is
appropriate, feasible and realistic.
5. Conclusion (250 words). A paragraph summarising your report.
6. Reference List (unlimited word count): A list of all the references cited in the above
text. This is not a ‘Bibliography’, so you should limit this to the references you actually cited
in the sections identified above.
Warning: If the report does not have the above set of section headings, it may be returned
to you to correct, with the late penalty in Section A applying for each calendar day you
spend correcting it.7 Please use the above structure and section headings to avoid this
situation occurring.
D. Support with this assignment
This assignment is your opportunity to conduct a detailed investigation of the academic
literature related to your topic of study. Whilst you are responsible for the assignment,
your supervisor will be able to help you identify the most relevant literature and explain
how to effectively evaluate it. Provided you give them a reasonable amount of time to do
so, your supervisor is expected to provide comments on drafts you share with them,
5 The titles of the subsections in the Substantive Literature Review are chosen by the student to
align with the argument they are making and the literature that they are covering.
6 See Paragraph 2.8 of the new Academic Integrity Procedure:
https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/2300935/Student-Academic-Integrity-
Procedure.pdf
7 For example, if a report is returned to you for correction on the 25th of October and you return it
before 3pm on the 26th of October, you would lose 5 marks for the assignment.
Page 3 of 7
however they are not allowed to draft substantial chunks of text for you to include in your
report.
Your supervisor is also your point of contact if you are unclear about the assignment. If
there is any confusion or difficulties that you are unable to resolve with them, then you
can contact the Minor Thesis/Honours Co-ordinator.8
We will also offer some optional seminars this semester to support this module.
Finally, please read the rubric overleaf in detail.
E. Application for Assessment Adjustments
If you have a relevant disability or health condition, you may be entitled to ‘assessment
adjustments’ under Part 6 of the University Assessment Regime procedure.9 The process
of applying for these is to first approach the Disability Support Service, and then when
they have provided recommendations, please write to the Chief Examiner without delay
(reuben.kirkham+projects@monash.edu).
F. Submission of Assignment
Your report must be submitted in a PDF format in Moodle in conformity with the following
instructions.
1. The file should be named in the following form: yourStudentID-
yourFirstNameSurname-yourSupervisorName-LitReviewProposal.pdf
2. The submission should be completed in line with the timings set out in Section A
of this document. Late penalties apply as explained in that Section.
Please do not leave the submission to the last minute, but allow an appropriate amount
of time to upload your completed assignment.
8He can be contacted at reuben.kirkham+projects@monash.edu
9 https://www.monash.edu/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/2300925/Assessment-Regime-
Procedure.pdf
Page 4 of 7
ANNEX A – MARKING RUBRIC
This assignment is marked out of 100. The marks are apportioned as follows:
Criteria 1: Introduction and Aims (10 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 1 of the report ‘Introduction’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) No statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review. It is mostly unclear what topic the project is investigating.
P (50%-59%) There is a vague statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review. It is somewhat clear as to the topic being
investigated.
C (60%-69%) There is a reasonably clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, however this has obvious omissions. It is
mostly clear as to the topic being investigated in the proposed project, with some indication given as to the project’s
importance.
D (70%-79%) There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with only minor omissions. It is clear as to the topic
being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument advanced as to the project’s importance.
Lower HD (80%-89%) There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with no notable omissions. It is fully clear as to the
topic being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument and mostly persuasive argument advanced as to the
project’s importance.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
There is a clear statement regarding the aim/s of the literature review, with no omissions. It is fully clear as to the topic
being investigated in the proposed project, with a clear argument and persuasive argument advanced as to the project’s
importance.
Criteria 2: Coverage of research (20 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 2 of the report, namely ‘Substantive Literature Review’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The sources used are inadequate or inappropriate; the review does not show clear understanding or justification of sources
for inclusion in the review.
P (50%-59%) The sources used may be somewhat inadequate or inappropriate; the review does not always show clear understanding or
justification of sources for inclusion in the review. There are at least 10 references integrated into the main argument.
C (60%-69%) The sources used demonstrate acceptable selection of literature; the review exhibits reasonable interpretation of sources and
sources’ inclusion in the review is somewhat justified. There are at least 15 references integrated into the main argument.
D (70%-79%) The sources used demonstrate competent selection of literature; the review exhibits appropriate interpretation of sources
and justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 20 references integrated into the main argument.
Page 5 of 7
Lower HD (80%-89%) The sources used demonstrate judicious selection of literature; the review exhibits perceptive interpretation of sources and
clear justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 25 references effectively integrated into the main argument.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The sources used demonstrate judicious selection of literature; the review exhibits perceptive interpretation of sources and
clear justification for inclusion in the review. There are at least 30 references effectively integrated into the main argument.
Criteria 3: Analysis of literature (20 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 2 of the report, namely ‘Substantive Literature Review’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The discussion of the literature is wholly uncritical and at best describes/summarises it only.
P (50%-59%) The discussion of the literature acts primarily as a description/summary, rather than a critical evaluation of the sources
used.
C (60%-69%) The discussion of the literature includes some elements of critical evaluation of the sources used.
D (70%-79%) The discussion of the literature demonstrates the students’ ability both to describe/summarise, and to evaluate the sources
used.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The discussion of the literature demonstrates students’ confident ability not only to describe/summarise, but also to
critically evaluate the sources used.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The discussion of the literature demonstrates students’ confident ability not only to describe/summarise, but also to
critically evaluate the sources used, including in a comparative and relative fashion.
Criteria 4: Synthesis of ‘gap’ (10 Marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 3 of the report, namely ‘Summary of the State of the Art’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) There is no statement as the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review.
P (50%-59%) There is a vague statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review.
C (60%-69%) There is a mostly clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a
connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
D (70%-79%) There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Lower HD (80%-89%) There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
and mostly persuasive connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
There is a clear statement as to the ‘gap’ in the literature found by completing the literature review. There is also a clear
and persuasive connection made to the proposed project (i.e. how the gap will be filled by the proposed research).
Page 6 of 7
Criteria 5: Quality of Research Plan (20 marks)
NB – this is assessed purely on Section 4 of the report, namely ‘Plan for your research project’ as listed in Section C.
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) There is little evidence of a research plan.
P (50%-59%) There is a high-level research plan, however this is mostly unclear. There is no attempt to justify any of the decisions made
in respect of the research plan.
C (60%-69%) There is a mostly clear high-level research plan, albeit with some substantial missing details. There is a limited attempt to
justify some of the decisions made in respect of the research plan. The justification is at least somewhat connected to the gap
identified in the review.
D (70%-79%) The high-level research plan is clear, with only minor missing details. There is a reasonable attempt to justify most of the
decisions taken in the research plan, albeit with substantial limitations. The justification is connected to the gap identified
in the review.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The high-level research plan is fully clear. There is a mostly persuasive justification of the decisions taken in the research
plan, with only minor limitations. The justification is clearly connected to the gap identified in the review.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The high-level research plan is fully clear. There is a persuasive justification of the decisions taken in the research plan,
with no notable limitations. The justification is clearly connected to the gap identified in the review.
Criteria 6A: Concision and Focus of Writing (10 Marks)
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) The writing is inappropriate and mostly unclear.
P (50%-59%) There is a limited and mostly unsuccessful attempt to ensure that the account is focussed.
C (60%-69%) There is some attempt to ensure that the account is focussed, although there are numerous passages with prolixity and a lack
of focus.
D (70%-79%) There is a reasonable attempt to ensure that the account is focussed, although there are a substantial number of passages
with prolixity and a lack of focus.
Lower HD (80%-89%) The argument is drafted in a focussed manner with only the occasional prolixity or clunky wording.
Upper HD (90%-
100%)
The research is drafted in a focussed manner which is easy to read and understand, with no prolixity or clunky wording.
Criteria 6B: General Communication Skills (10 Marks)
Grade Description
N (0%-49%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are not accurate or articulate, and the writing may consist of poorly
structured sentences with frequent grammatical errors.
- Poor paragraph structure and development (too short or long) and lack of logic detract from the writing;
subheadings, if used, do not clarify the writing.
Page 7 of 7
- The document produced has an unclear format, inappropriate for the scope of the task, and technical requirements
required by the faculty and/or the discipline have not been addressed.
- The student does not attempt to undertake citing and referencing.
P (50%-59%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing is not accurate or articulate most of time, and the writing, while still
able to be followed, may contain some grammatical errors.
- Paragraphs are not developed, structured and/or linked logically throughout; if applicable, section headings are not
used effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has some attempt at formatting, though not entirely appropriate for the scope of the task;
the student neglects most technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student has attempted to undertake citing and referencing with frequent errors.
C (60%-69%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing is often not accurate or articulate, while the writing consists in the
main of clearly structured sentences with few to no grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of mostly well composed paragraphs that are in most cases linked logically throughout;
if applicable, subheadings are used mostly effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student observes some
technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing, with some errors.
D (70%-79%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are generally accurate and articulate, and the writing consists of
clearly structured sentences without noteworthy grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of well composed paragraphs that are linked logically, and if applicable, subheadings
are used effectively to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a clearly readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student
observes most technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing, with some minor errors.
HD (80%-100%) - The style and vocabulary used in the writing are consistently accurate and articulate, and the writing consists of
clearly structured sentences with no grammatical errors.
- The writing consists of a set of very well composed paragraphs that are linked logically throughout, and if
applicable, subheadings are used effectively and accurately to clarify the writing.
- The document produced has a clearly readable format appropriate for the scope of the task, and the student
observes technical requirements required by the faculty and/or the discipline.
- The student follows the requirements for citing and referencing.
NB – for marks within this range, a perfect piece of work would obtain 10 marks, with deductions made as appropriate up
and until the point three or more of the above descriptors fall at the D level, or some of them fall at the C level.
学霸联盟
