ELEC5620M Technical Report with DE1-SoC Hardware Testing
Levels of Achievement
Criteria Poor Marginal Adequate Good Very Good Excellent
Abstract &
Introduction
Weight 10.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Negligible abstract
and introduction
40.00 to 50.00 %
Very basic abstract
and introduction;
does not really set the
work in context
50.00 to 60.00 %
Reasonable abstract and
introduction, but with
some errors
60.00 to 70.00 %
Abstract and
introduction sets the
work in context and
describe key outcomes
70.00 to 80.00 %
The abstract introduction
shows insight and
effectively sets the work in
context
80.00 to 100.00 %
The abstract and introduction
show highly perceptive
account of context rationale
and key findings
Quality of Code
Weight 30.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Incomplete code
without comments.
40.00 to 50.00 %
Incomplete code with
pseudocode-like
comments detailing
unwritten code.
50.00 to 60.00 %
Complete code with
basic comments.
60.00 to 70.00 %
Complete code with
detailed comments.
70.00 to 80.00 %
Complete code, well
commented, readable and
structured.
80.00 to 100.00 %
Elegant and sophisticated
code, well commented,
readable and structured. Use
of advanced coding
techniques.
Debugging
Weight 25.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Little or no evidence
of debugging.
40.00 to 50.00 %
Basic debugging
performed.
50.00 to 60.00 %
Good debugging
performed of main
operation.
60.00 to 70.00 %
Good debugging
performed of all
functions. Bug fixing
as a result of testing.
70.00 to 80.00 %
Thorough debugging
performed of all functions.
Structural changes made as
a result of testing.
80.00 to 100.00 %
Sophisticated debugging
performed of all functions.
Iterative coding-testing-
optimization demonstrated.
Hardware Testing
Weight 10.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Little or no evidence
of hardware testing.
40.00 to 50.00 %
Basic visual
observational testing
performed.
50.00 to 60.00 %
Basic visual
observational testing
performed demonstrating
of some operations.
60.00 to 70.00 %
Good visual
observational testing
performed
demonstrating all
operations.
70.00 to 80.00 %
Thorough visual
observational testing
performed demonstrating
ALL operations.
80.00 to 100.00 %
Thorough visual
observational testing
performed demonstrating
ALL operations AND
additional tests proposed.
Discussion/analysis
& Conclusions
Weight 20.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Negligible or
incorrect
discussion/analysis.
40.00 to 50.00 %
Basic level of
discussion of results.
Various errors. Little
analysis. Basic
conclusions.
50.00 to 60.00 %
Reasonable discussion of
results, with some errors.
Analysis attempted and
summarised in the
Conclusions.
60.00 to 70.00 %
Competent technical
explanation with
reasonable analysis and
analytical summary.
70.00 to 80.00 %
Very good, error-free
technical discussion;
competent analysis and
summary.
80.00 to 100.00 %
Highly competent technical
discussion; perceptive
analysis and analytical
summary
Organisation &
Clarity of Writing
Weight 5.00%
0.00 to 40.00 %
Unacceptable
standard of
presentation .
Incoherent.
Negligible
referencing
40.00 to 50.00 %
Unclear descriptions
of the work. Poor
presentation. Limited
and poor referencing.
50.00 to 60.00 %
Descriptions are unclear
in parts; presentation is
not very smart. Some key
references missing or
overuse of unreliable
references.
60.00 to 70.00 %
In general, clearly
written work, tidily
presented. Appropriate
references.
70.00 to 80.00 %
Very clearly written and
very well presented. Good
range of well- chosen
references.
80.00 to 100.00 %
Outstanding presentation and
clarity. Excellent choice and
range of references.