DISS: Project Assessment

Project submission (where projects and their materials can be found: https://projsubs.inf.ed.ac.uk/msc/2026.html

Project evaluation forms: https://webmark.inf.ed.ac.uk/group/msc

The marking rubrics are here.

The project is assessed entirely based on your report (i.e., dissertation). The report is normally read independently by the project supervisor and a second member of staff (and, if there is a significant difference of opinion between markers or if either of the two markers gives a failing mark, by a moderator). It must be self-contained and include all information relevant to the project since, in general, the readers will be unaware of the work undertaken, the difficulties encountered and the results obtained. They allocate a numerical mark after assessing the project work in terms of the following criteria:

(The levels for the basic and additional criteria are Fail, Pass, Good, Very Good, Excellent.)

• Basic Criteria
  • Exposition of the topic and aims
  • Completion of the project (“Completion” covers achievement of the original objectives, achievement of modified objectives, or providing convincing evidence that the objectives are unachievable.)
  • Quality of the work
  • Quality of the report
• Additional Criteria
  • Critical evaluation of related work
  • Critical evaluation of own work
  • Justification of choices made (for methodology, software design, and data selection)
• Exceptional Criteria
  • Evidence of outstanding merit: none/some/a lot
  • Innovative approaches? no/maybe/yes
  • Contains publishable material? no/maybe/yes
  • Should be considered for a prize? no/maybe/yes

Projects are marked according to the following classifications, which relate to the above criteria:

0-19: Bad Fail

The project is a Fail on all of the basic criteria.

20-29: Clear Fail

The project fails on more than one of the basic criteria, but not all.

30-39: Marginal Fail

The project is a Fail on one of the basic criteria.

40-49: III

The project is a Pass on all of the basic criteria.

50-59: II.2

The project is at least Good on all of the basic criteria and is Good on most (more than 50%, i.e., at least two out of three) of the additional criteria.

60-69: II.1

The project is at least Very Good on all of the basic criteria and is at least Good and sometimes Very Good or Excellent on all of the additional criteria.

70-79: Low I

The project is Very Good or Excellent on all of the basic criteria, and it is Very Good or Excellent on all additional criteria, or it almost achieves this by being Good on only one of the additional criteria, and also has elements of the exceptional criteria (at least one exceptional criterion marked as some/maybe).

80-89: High I

The project is Very Good or Excellent on all the basic and additional criteria and also has elements of the exceptional criteria (at least one exceptional criterion marked as ‘some’/’maybe’).

90-100: Outstanding I

The project is Excellent on all of the basic and additional criteria and has strong elements of the exceptional criteria (at least one exceptional criterion marked as ‘some’/’maybe’ and at least one other marked as ‘a lot’/’yes’).