Cardiff School of Computer Science and Informatics
Coursework Assessment Pro-forma
Module Code: CMT221
Module Title: Topics, Research and Skills in Computing
Lecturer: Dr Martin Chorley
Assessment Title: Dissertation Project Proposal and Initial Literature Review
Assessment Number: 1
Date Set: 9th February 2023
Submission Date and Time: by 4th May 2023 at 9:30am
Feedback return date: 8th June 2023
If you have been granted an extension for Extenuating Circumstances, then the
submission deadline and return date will be 1 week later than that stated above.
If you have been granted a deferral for Extenuating Circumstances, then you will be
assessed in the summer resit period (assuming all other constraints are met).
This assignment is worth 100% of the total marks available for this module. If
coursework is submitted late (and where there are no extenuating circumstances):
1 If the assessment is submitted no later than 24 hours after the
deadline, the mark for the assessment will be capped at the minimum
pass mark;
2 If the assessment is submitted more than 24 hours after the deadline, a
mark of 0 will be given for the assessment.
Extensions to the coursework submission date can only be requested using the
Extenuating Circumstances procedure. Only students with approved extenuating
circumstances may use the extenuating circumstances submission deadline. Any
coursework submitted after the initial submission deadline without *approved*
extenuating circumstances will be treated as late.
More information on the extenuating circumstances procedure can be found on the
Intranet: https://intranet.cardiff.ac.uk/students/study/exams-and-
assessment/extenuating-circumstances
By submitting this assignment you are accepting the terms of the following declaration:
I hereby declare that my submission (or my contribution to it in the case of group
submissions) is all my own work, that it has not previously been submitted for
assessment and that I have not knowingly allowed it to be copied by another student. I
understand that deceiving or attempting to deceive examiners by passing off the work of
another writer, as one’s own is plagiarism. I also understand that plagiarising another’s
work or knowingly allowing another student to plagiarise from my work is against the
University regulations and that doing so will result in loss of marks and possible
disciplinary proceedings1.
1 https://intranet.cardiff.ac.uk/students/study/exams-and-assessment/academic-integrity/cheating-and-
academic-misconduct
Assignment
For this assignment you will put together a dissertation proposal, an overview of the
literature or state of the field/market connected to that proposal, and a reflection on your
personal skills related to the completion of a dissertation.
Note:
• the proposal you complete as part of this assessment does not need to be the same
proposal you eventually work on as part of your dissertation project, though it can
be.
• You do not need to wait to be assigned a dissertation supervisor to complete this
assessment.
• If you have not agreed a dissertation project with a supervisor and do not expect to
do so within the time limit for this assessment, you may complete this assessment
on a different topic.
• Completing this assessment on a given topic does not then commit you to
completing your dissertation on the same topic.
Note:
• the overview/literature review you complete as part of this assessment should be
related to the dissertation proposal created during the assessment – not your
actual dissertation proposal if this is different.
Note:
• the overview/literature review completed as part of this assessment will need
expansion and re-writing to be included in your final dissertation project.
Dissertation proposal
This should be a short description of a project that is suitable for a dissertation project in
Computing, and an overview of how it will be carried out, including a justification for this.
Your dissertation proposal should cover the problem that you are attempting to solve, the
solution you are proposing to solve this problem, and a justification of the methods used to
create and evaluate this solution. This proposal may not be the final dissertation proposal
that you ultimately complete for your dissertation, it just needs to be *a* project proposal
that would be suitable for an MSc Computing dissertation.
Literature Review
The contents of your literature review will depend on the type of project, but it should aim
to provide an overview of the context of your problem. For example, are there any
existing/competing solutions that you can build on or build an alternative to? What external
factors will influence the completion of your project?
Personal Skills
The reflection of your personal skills should be an audit of your skillset as compared to the
skills needed to complete your proposed dissertation project, and where there are gaps
should include an assessment of how these skills will be acquired/strengthened to allow the
project to be completed successfully.
Learning Outcomes Assessed
• Discuss the purpose, goals and process of academic research
• Appreciate and compare a variety of research approaches, methods, tools and
techniques, and choose appropriate methodology relevant to the research issue or
topic
• Demonstrate the process of evaluating and synthesising prior knowledge through
carrying out a literature review on a topic related to Computing and IT Management
• Reflect upon their strengths and skills acquired or enhanced to date
• Create a project pitch and design a project plan
Criteria for assessment
Credit will be awarded against the following criteria.
Deliverable 1: Dissertation Proposal and Plan (40%)
Problem Description
Distinction Comprehensive and insightful critical examination of the problem that shows clarity of expression without going
into unnecessary detail, with comprehensive aims and objectives addressing novel problem or existing
challenge from a new perspective.
Merit The problem description provides a clear and concise written overview of most of the key information with clear
aims and objectives. Problem area may not be original or approach an existing area from a new angle.
Pass The description includes several areas of key information however the explanation is unclear and or difficult to
follow or the project may not align with learning outcomes as required. Some aims and objectives stated, while
the project may be pedestrian or be well-covered previously/elsewhere.
Fail The description includes limited key information, or the project is unsuitable for the degree programme. Fails to
describe the problem in a coherent manner
Proposed Solution
Distinction
Appropriate methodology chosen to solve problem and evaluate the solution created that will clearly address
and is relevant to the problem and is likely to deliver a successful result. Approach uses best practices or may
be original. Key objectives clearly outlined.
Merit
Methodology chosen to solve problem and to evaluate the solutions is sound and the solution is possible to
deliver a successful result. Key objectives identified.
Pass
A solution is presented that may address part of the problem or may be missing part of the evaluation.
Proposed solution may potentially deliver a successful project completion or minimum viable product. Some
objectives presented.
Fail
Solution presented is unlikely to deliver a successful result and is missing details on evaluation of the solution.
Vague and/or not relevant to the research topic. Unlikely to result in a successful project. No objectives
identified, or irrelevant objectives identified.
Overall Justification
Distinction
Demonstrates a clear alignment with the learning outcomes of the Dissertation module and relevant
accreditation criteria. Proposed solution is critically evaluated and justified in a succinct fashion.
Merit
Project proposed is aligned with learning outcomes of the dissertation module. Proposed solution has been
evaluated but may not be fully justified.
Pass
Proposed solution has some evaluation but has not been completely justified.
Fail
Project solution is poorly justified or lacks justification/evaluation. Missing important relevant information
Deliverable 2: Literature Review (40%)
Distinction Demonstrates a rigorous and insightful knowledge of the subject area relating to the project. Excellent quality
critical evaluation of relevant high-quality source literature and/or best practices. It demonstrates a good
awareness of legal/ethical/ professional/social issues where appropriate. Concise discussion of literature and
excellent structure to the review.
Merit Demonstrate significant and appropriate knowledge of the subject area relating to the project. Good quality
critical evaluation of relevant literature, at least some of which are from high quality sources and that
demonstrates awareness of relevant issues and problems. It shows a reasonable awareness of legal/ethical/
professional/social issues where appropriate. Good discussion, though this may be over long or need editing,
review is structured well.
Pass Demonstrated some if limited appropriate knowledge of the subject area relating to the project. A critical
evaluation of relevant literature is provided however, limited consideration as to the quality of the sources. It
shows some awareness of legal/ethical/professional/social issues where appropriate. Some discussion of
literature, though this may not always be clearly written or relevant to the project. Overall review is structured.
Fail Reference to literature is descriptive rather than evaluative and limited. Relevance to the problem being solved
is weak. It lacks awareness of legal/ethical/ professional/social issues where appropriate. Discussion of
literature is lacking and overall review is unstructured.
Deliverable 3: Reflection on Skills (20%)
Reflection on Current Skills
Distinction Thorough critical evaluation of skills required to complete project, with a thorough and achievable plan to
resolve any gaps in knowledge. Shows ability to problem solve and think analytically.
Merit A critical evaluation of skills required for completion of the project provided. Achievable plan provided to
resolve most gaps in knowledge.
Pass Brief / limited evaluation of skills and/or plan to resolve gaps, limited in detail. Further insight needed to identify
and address skills gaps.
Fail List of skills provided, descriptive rather than evaluative. Limited links between students' skills and those
needed for the project. Plan to resolve gaps inappropriate/unachievable.
Component Maximum Mark
Mark
Dissertation Proposal and Plan 40
Literature Review 40
Skills Reflection 20
Total:
Feedback and suggestion for future learning
Feedback on your coursework will address the above criteria. Feedback and marks will
be returned on 8th June via email and Learning Central, with further cohort feedback
given online. Feedback for this assignment will be useful when completing your
dissertation.
Submission Instructions
The coursework submission should consist of three items. These are described in more
detail later in the assessment description, but in brief they are:
1. A dissertation project proposal and plan. This could be presented as:
a. A 700-800 word written description
b. A 3-4 minute video description
c. A 3-4 minute audio description
2. A short initial literature review on the topic of the proposal above. This could be
presented as either:
a. A standalone presentation (8-10 slides)
b. A poster (A1 size)
3. A reflection on your personal skills as related to a dissertation project. This should be
presented as a short piece of reflective writing (~800 words).
Description Type Name
Dissertation
Proposal
Written
Description
Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) or Word
file (.doc or .docx)
P_[student
number].pdf/doc/doc
x
Audio
Recording
One MP3 (.mp3) file P_[student
number].mp3
Video One MP4 (.mp4) file P_[student
number].mp4
Literature
Review
Presentatio
n
Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) or
Powerpoint (.pptx) file
LR_[student
number].pdf/pptx
Poster One PDF (.pdf) or
Powerpoint (.pptx) file
LR_[student
number].pdf/pptx
Reflection Document Compulsory One PDF (.pdf) or Word
file (.doc or .docx)
R_[student
number].pdf/.doc/.d
ocx
Any deviation from the submission instructions above (including the number and types of
files submitted) will result a reduction in marks for that assessment or question part of 20%.
Submission will be through Learning Central.
Staff reserve the right to invite students to a meeting to discuss coursework submissions
Support for assessment
Questions about the assignment can be posted to the COMSC StackOverflow site:
https://stackoverflow.com/c/comsc using the tag ‘cmt221-cw’