Outstanding
10
Introduction
Good
8
Acceptable
6
Needs work
4
Clearly and concisely describes the Good introduction to data, Introduction and roadmap Rote description of data.
data, and why it is of interest. Sets but roadmap for rest of
unclear and missing
No context provided for
up clear roadmap for the rest of the paper lacking.
important details.
data or questions.
paper
Questions and findings
Curiosity
20
Intense exploration and evidence of
many trials and failures. Presents
best ideas, rather than all ideas.
Additional research from other
sources used to help
understand/explain findings.
Scepticism
20
16
Plenty of exploration and
investigation. Some
additional research helps
explain findings.
16
12
Some exploration, but little
evidence that you have
selected the best of many
ideas. Little to no
additional research.
12
8
Very little exploration, and
no additional research.
Presented results are only
work done.
8
Critical of findings, and uses
Some critical analysis, and Generally, little criticism of Some findings accepted
multiple approaches and techniques some use of multiple
findings and few
without question.
to verify unintuitive results.
techniques to answer the approaches used.
same question.
Organisation
20
Findings very well organised. Clear
headings demarcate separate
sections. Excellent flow from one
section to the next. Clear evidence
of systematic analysis.
Conclusion
10
Conclusions follows logically from
results and findings. Includes
interesting further questions and
ideas for future research.
16
12
Findings well organised
Generally well organised,
and separate sections
but some sections
clearly separated, but flow muddled.
is lacking. Each section
has clear purpose.
8
Good summary, but
doesn't pull pieces
together into cohesive
whole. Interesting ideas
for futre research
6
8
Sections unclear and no
attempt to flow from one
topic to the next.
4
Needs a lot of work
2
Fails to introduce data and
questions of interest.
4
Questions are simple, and
there is no evidence of
exploration. Ideas
primarily from in class
discussion.
4
Findings accepted
uncritically. Leaps of logic
without justification.
4
Report lurches haphazardly
from one topic to the next.
No unifying thread.
2
Summary patchy, but with Repeats findings with no
Fails to summarise findings
some attempt at synthesis synthesis. No proposoals or ask more questions.
and development of ideas for future work
for future work.
Outstanding
Presentation
Text
5
English is polished, concise and
clear. No grammar or spelling
mistakes
Graphs
7.5
Graphs carefully tuned for desired
purpose. Evdience that many
graphs were created before
choosing one for presentation. Each
graph illustrates one point.
Tables
7.5
All tables carefully constructed to
make it easy to perform important
comparisons. Careful styling
highlights important features
Reproducibility
10
Sufficiently detailed to reproduce
entire report. Code nicely formatted
and organised to follow flow of
report
Comments
Good
Acceptable
Needs work
Needs a lot of work
4
3
2
1
Clear and concise, but not Readable, but excessively Marginally readable. Many Barely readable. Many
elegant. A few spelling
verbose, or lacking in
errors.
spelling and grammar
and gramatical errors
detail. A number of errors
errors. No evidence of
in text.
proof reading
6
4.5
Graphs well chosen, but a Most graphs appropriate.
few have minor problems: Many graphs have minor
inappropriate aspect
problems.
ratios, poor labels, poor
quality when printed
6
4.5
Tables generally well
Most tables appropriate.
constructed, but some
Many tables have minor
have minor flaws: too
problems.
many d.p, tables too large.
8
6
Code reproduces relevant Most findings can be
findings, but poorly
reproduced, but many
organised and hard to
errors are present in code
follow
3
1.5
Graphs poorly chosen to Graphs do not support
support questions. Some questions and findings.
redundant or
Major presentation
fundamentally flawed
problems
3
Tables badly arranged to
support comparisons of
interest. Too many, or
inconsistant, decimal
places
4
1.5
Tables do no support
questions and findings.
Major display problems.
2
Little documentation of
Major omissions, and
procedure. Very difficult to substantial parts of the
reproduce results.
report can not be
recreated.