INF4825 Marking Rubric for Assignment 3
Student number:
Title
Introduction – at
least 1 typed A4
page for the
entire Portfolio.
Make sure that
the Introduction
covers all 3 RQs.
RQ1: What are
the underlying
concepts
regarding project
management
with reference to
software
development
estimation,
activity planning,
scheduling, and
resource
allocation?
RQ2: Identify the
actors affecting
and influencing
communication
and management
of all people
aspects during
project
management.
Open Rubric
Marker signature:
0
No title, inappropriate or partially appropriate title
0
1-2
3-4
No introduction
Very basic
Very basic
introduction
introduction with few
with no
pointers to the
pointers to
problem under
the problem
discussion
under
discussion
0
RQ1 omitted
1-4
RQ1 vaguely
discussed
5-8
RQ1 discussed BUT
ambiguous or not
logically connected.
No golden thread in
the discussion. Not
well-focused.
0
RQ2 omitted
1-4
RQ2 vaguely
discussed
5-8
RQ2 discussed BUT
ambiguous or not
logically connected.
No golden thread in
the discussion. Not
well-focused.
Final mark:
2
Clearly appropriate title
5-6
7-8
9-10
Limited
Adequate
Clear
background
background
background
providing
providing an
providing an
an
overview of the
overview of the
overview of
topic and the
topic and the
the topic
research
research
and the
method
method
research
method
9-12
13-15
RQ1 clearly and reasonably
RQ1 clearly and
discussed, supported by the
reasonably
literature review. Easy to
discussed,
follow the golden thread but
supported by the
some ST1 concepts were left literature review.
out.
Easy to follow
the golden
thread.
9-12
RQ2 clearly and reasonably
discussed, supported by the
literature review. Easy to
follow the golden thread but
some ST2 concepts were left
out.
13-15
RQ2 clearly and
reasonably
discussed,
supported by the
literature review.
Easy to follow
the golden
thread.
2
10
15
15
RQ3: Measure
and monitor the
quality of a
project
throughout its
development
cycle.
0
RQ3 omitted
1-4
RQ3 vaguely
discussed
5-8
RQ3 discussed BUT
ambiguous or not
logically connected.
No golden thread in
the discussion. Not
well-focused.
9-12
RQ3 clearly and reasonably
discussed, supported by the
literature review. Easy to
follow the golden thread but
some ST4 concepts were left
out.
Conclusion – at
least 1 typed A4
page. Make sure
that the
Conclusion
covers all 3 RQs.
0
No conclusion
1-3
Simply
summarises
study, no link
to research
questions or
contribution
4-6
Simply summarises
study, some link to
research questions
or contribution
7-9
Reasonable attempt to
organise and present
research, and to answer
research questions, stating
contribution.
Technical layout
& presentation
(academic style
scholarly writing,
English
References
0
No principles of academic
writing followed, many
typographical errors, poor
English, poor layout, no
captions to figures and
tables
1-3
Some adherences to
academic writing, some
typographical errors and
layout errors, some errors
in captions to figures and
tables
4-6
Principles of academic writing
mostly followed, few
typographical errors and layout
errors, no errors in captions to
figures and tables
0
No citations
1-3
Few citations, no
consistency, incorrect
citations.
Several omissions in
citations.
4-6
Most citations used correctly
and appropriately
Some omissions in citations
13-15
RQ3 clearly and
reasonably
discussed,
supported by the
literature review.
Easy to follow
the golden
thread.
10
Well-thought
through
conclusion
clearly
connecting
research
questions with
the literature,
includes
reflection on
study
7-8
Outstanding
academic
writing, no
typographical
errors and
layout errors, no
errors in
captions to
figures and
tables
7-8
All citations
provided, used
correctly and
appropriately
All sources cited
15
10
8
8
Use a
Referencing
Manager (e.g.,
Mendeley) and
submit your
essay with a
correctly
formatted
Reference List at
the back.
At least 12
articles between
2011 and 2022.
Complete (and
sign) PortfolioPage 1 and add
as the first page
of your Portfolio.
Final mark:
0
No references
1-3
Poor reference list with
errors and
inconsistencies, not all
references included
0
No referencing manager
was used.
1-2
A referencing manager
was used but not end
result is not acceptable
0
12 articles between 2011 and 2022 not present.
0
Portfolio-Page 1 is absent
4-6
Average reference list with few
errors
7-8
Complete and
consistent
reference list
provided
All references
cited in text
3
Used a referencing manager. Result is neat and
consistent
1-3
12 or more articles between 2011 and 2022
present.
1-2
Portfolio-Page 1 is present
but not signed or
information is not correct
8
3
3
3
Portfolio-Page 1 is
present and signed
3
100