Mark Sheet - Final Report - DATA7903 - Page 1 Examiner Name:
Student Name: Student Number:
Grade Band Thesis definition and scope (10%) Background (20%)


Excellent
(85-100%)
Excellent, clear definition of a substantial and significant project topic, problem
and/or hypothesis (including statement of purpose and relevance) and scope
(including context, boundaries and assumptions). The abstract accurately yet
concisely captures the project topic, methods and outcomes.

10
Extensive, relevant and logically organised review, analysis, discussion of background
material, both specific research and general theory, helps the reader understand the
rest of the document, and demonstrates clear mastery of the material in the topic area
and ability to synthesize and abstract knowledge.

20


9
18

17


Very Good
(75-84%)
Very good definition of project topic, problem and/or hypothesis (including
statement of purpose and relevance) and scope (including context, boundaries
and assumptions). The abstract accurately captures the project topic, methods
and outcomes.



8
Relevant and logically organised review, analysis, discussion of background material,
both specific research and general theory, helps the reader understand the rest of the
document, and demonstrates mastery of the material in the topic area and ability to
synthesize and abstract knowledge.
16


15

Good
(65-74%)
Good definition of project topic, problem and/or hypothesis (including statement
of purpose) and scope (including assumptions). The abstract captures the
project topic and outcomes


7
Good review/discussion of background material, with both specific research and general
theory, and shows good understanding of the material in the topic area and ability to
synthesize and abstract knowledge.
14


13

Satisfactory
(50-64%)
Satisfactory definition of project topic, problem and/or hypothesis and scope.
The abstract satisfactorily captures the project topic and outcomes
6 Acceptable coverage of background material, with both specific research and general
theory, and shows basic understanding of the material in the topic area.
12


5
11

10


Poor
(25-49%)
Poor or incomplete definition of project topic and scope. The abstract is not clear
about the project topic and its outcomes
4 A limited coverage of background material, which perhaps does not cover both specific
research and general theory. Flaws in the basic understanding of the material in the topic
area are evident.
9


3
7

5

Very Poor
(0-24%)
Project topic and scope are very unclear. The abstract does not summarise the
project topic and its outcomes. External work heavily used without academic
merit.
2 An extremely limited coverage of background material. A lack of understanding of the
material in the topic area is clear. External work heavily used without academic merit.
4
1 2

0

0


Comments:

Mark Sheet - Final Report - DATA7903 - Page 2
Student Name: Student Number: Supervisor/Examiner:
Grade Band Approach and execution (45%) Conclusion (15%)

Excellent
(85-100%)
A clearly set out plan with goals and methods systematically follows from the background
research. The approach highlights your creativity and innovation and includes an evaluation
of alternative approaches. The execution indicates a substantial work effort, and shows the
application of knowledge gained from background research. The project results are complete
and comprehensively presented and analysed.
45 The analysis of the work conducted highlights your comprehension
and shows insight into the significance of the results. The report has a
critical review of your performance against the stated plan. The report
concludes with a clear concise summary of the outcomes – in context
of specified project definitions and literature – and brings
recommendations for continuation and improvement of the work.
15
42 14

39

13

Very Good
(75-84%)
A clearly set out plan with goals and methods systematically follows from the background
research. The approach shows innovation and includes an evaluation of alternative
approaches. The actual execution of work shows the application of knowledge gained from
background research and indicates a very good effort. The project results are complete and
comprehensively presented and analysed.
38 The analysis of the work conducted shows comprehension and some
insight into the significance of the results. The report has a critical
review of your performance against the stated plan. The report
concludes with a clear summary of the outcomes – in context of
specified project definitions and literature – and brings
recommendations for continuation and improvement of the work.


12
36

34

Good
(65-74%)
A plan of work follows from the background research. The approach is systematic and
includes some consideration of alternative approaches. The execution of work shows the
application of knowledge gained from background research and a good effort. The project
results are mostly complete, well presented and analysed.
33 The analysis of the work conducted shows comprehension of the
project but limited insight into the significance of the results. The
report has a critical review of your performance. The report concludes
with a summary of the outcomes and brings recommendations for
continuation of the work.
11

30

10
Satisfactory
(50-64%)
A satisfactory plan of work is offered. The approach is reasonably systematic. The actual
execution of work shows reasonable understanding via some application of prior knowledge
and some background research, it also shows satisfactory effort in the project. The project
results are complete in the larger part, sufficiently presented and analysed.
29 The analysis of the work conducted demonstrates some
comprehension. The report has a critical review of your performance.
The report concludes with a summary of outcomes.
9
26
8
23

Poor
(25-49%)
The plan of work offered is incomplete or unclear. The approach is not well considered, and
does not logically flow from the background research presented. The actual execution of
work shows flawed understanding and little application of the either background research or
prior knowledge, its fails to show satisfactory effort in project. Project results poor, and/or
poorly presented.
22 The analysis of the work conducted demonstrates limited
comprehension. The report concludes with a poor summary of
outcomes.
7
17 5

12

4
Very Poor
(0-24%)
The plan of work, if offered, is not sensible. The approach is haphazard, and has no logical
basis. The actual execution of work shows very little understanding or application of the
either background research or prior knowledge. Project results not on the level for
postgraduate project work. External work heavily used without academic merit.
11 There is a very poor review of the work and no real comprehension
demonstrated. The report concludes fails to explain what was
achieved.
3
5 1
0 0
Final Mark:
/90
Comments:
Supervisor/Examiner's Signature: Date:

Mark Sheet - Final Report - DATA7903 – Communications Supervisor/Examiner: Mark: /10
Student Name:
Grade Band Writing and presentation (10%)

Excellent
(85-100%)
Excellent logical structure, physical layout and appropriate attention to detail. The work is presented in an accurate, concise and coherent fashion. Scientific and
technical style. No spelling mistakes or grammar errors. Appropriate referencing to a correctly formatted bibliography. Appropriately acknowledges the work of
others.

10

9

Very Good
(75-84%)
Very good logical structure, physical layout and attention to detail. The work is presented in an accurate and coherent fashion. Scientific and technical style. No
spelling mistakes or grammar errors.
Appropriate referencing to a correctly formatted bibliography. Appropriately acknowledges the work of
others.



8
Good
(65-74%)
Good structure, physical layout. Some minor inaccuracies in presentation of work. Neat, occasional spelling mistakes or grammar errors. Occasional errors in
referencing. Appropriately acknowledges the work of others.


7

Satisfactory
(50-64%)
Acceptable structure and physical layout; Some inaccuracies or lack of detail in presentation of work. Neat, some spelling mistakes or grammar errors. Some errors in
referencing or bibliography formatting.
Appropriately acknowledges the work of others.
6


5

Poor
(25-49%)
Structure and physical layout detract; many inaccuracies or considerable lack of detail in presentation of work. Numerous spelling mistakes or grammar errors. Several
errors in referencing or bibliography formatting. Occasional failures to appropriately acknowledge the work of others.
4


3
Very Poor
(0-24%)
Structure and physical layout very poor; presentation of work is inaccurate and incomplete. Numerous spelling mistakes or grammar errors. Several errors in
referencing or bibliography formatting. Many failures to appropriately acknowledge the work of others
2
1

0


Comments: