PH754 - Euromasters Year 2 Research Project
Note to Supervisors (and copied to students) - Marking of Interim
Reports/Final Dissertations
Memo to ...........................................................................................................................
Please mark the report(s) of the following student
..........................................................................................................................................
and pass the report(s) on to.................................................................for second marking.
Presentation/Vivas. The aim is to complete all presentation/vivas as soon as is practicable
after the end of the Week 8 report submission deadline for Interim Reports and Week 24
(Final). All the sheets in this pack) should be returned to the Programme Director as soon
after the viva as possible.
Project Marking
Marks should be entered on the mark sheet (appended) as follows:
Section A:
Student progress, aptitude and general diligence.
Section B:
Agreed mark for the report/dissertation.
Section C:
Agreed mark for student presentation/viva ( 40 mins. max.).
Weighting of sections A, B and C
The weightings used for sections A,B and C will be 10%:70%:20%. Marks should reflect
degree classification: 70% - Distinction; 60-70% - Merit;  40% - fail.
Marking criteria
Please consult the appended EBGS-approved scheme before you begin the marking process
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
PH754 - Euromasters Year 2 Research Project
Student
......................................................................................
Title of Report ........….........................................................................
Supervisor
A).
.................................................. Panel Members
Progress / aptitude / general diligence
Supervisor and second marker to sign and date here please to
indicate their agreement:-
.........................................................................................................(Mark
B).
C).
/100)
Report/Dissertation:
(Mark
/100)
.........................................................................................................(Mark
/100)
PresentationViva :
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
PHXXX: marker’s checklist - Euromaster’s project
The following is the EBGS-approved breakdown of how marks ought to be awarded –
supervisors/second assessors are now obliged to follow this guidance:Section A – supervisor’s assessment of the conduct of the project
Sub-section
Intellectual & scientific input
Maximum mark
20
Initiative & extent of supervision
20
Commitment & motivation
15
Communication skills
15
Organisation & planning
15
Comprehension of the project
15
Mark Awarded
Total mark out of 100
Intellectual & Scientific Input
No input from student
Mark
0
The student provided only a few
ideas and little personal
contribution to the project
The student provided a technical
rather than an intellectual
contribution to the project
4
The student made useful
contributions to the development of
the project
12
The student showed an ability to
devise practical or theoretical ideas
facilitating the progress of the
project
16
The student demonstrated an
enquiring mind and an ability to
innovate by controlling the
direction of the project
20
8
Initiative & Extent of Supervision
No initiative was shown. Supervision
was frequently necessary by others
(academics or technicians) before even
basic tasks could be accomplished
The student showed very little initiative
and needed to be directed. Detailed
supervision was required
The student was only able to overcome
minor problems and difficulties. Daily
supervision was necessary for progress
to be made.
The student showed initiative, solving
some problems. Daily supervision was
necessary for optimum progress of the
project
The student demonstrated a high degree
of initiative, responding to new
situations in a positive manner,
generally finding his/her own solutions.
Only infrequent supervision was
necessary for day-to-day tasks, as the
student demonstrated good progress
The student showed much initiative in
solving all problems that lay within the
experiences from undergraduate
training. The student required no
supervision for any day-to-day activity,
is a self-starter and competent
independent worker.
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
Mark
0
4
8
12
16
20
Commitment & Motivation
No commitment was shown
The student showed limited commitment to the project, was
disinterested and time spent on the project was a minimum
The student made adequate use of the normal laboratory sessions
The student made good use of the normal laboratory sessions
The student demonstrated full commitment and high degree of
motivation with full attendance at laboratory sessions
The student demonstrated a high degree of commitment and
motivation making full and efficient use of the laboratory time
available
Communication Skills
Mark
Organisation &
Planning
No attempt at any
planning
The student was not
aware of long term
objectives and had to
be provided with
daily work schedules
The student showed
limited organising
skills
Mark
No communication
skills shown
Only with difficulty was
the student able to
convey to the supervisor
the progress being made
on the project.
The student generally
conveyed progress being
made on the project in
response to leading
questions from the
supervisor
The student with a little
prompting could give a
good account of
progress on the project
The student was
articulate, could lead
discussion with the
supervisor and conveyed
easily the progress being
made on the project as a
whole
The student could
always give an excellent
account of the progress
being made on the
project
0
9
The student showed
a fair degree of
organising skills
9
12
The student was on
the whole well
organised, with
evidence of both
daily and long term
objectives
12
15
The student had a
long term plan, with
clear objectives for
the project
15
3
6
0
3
6
Mark
0
3
6
9
12
15
Comprehension of
the Project
No comprehension of
the project
The student showed no
real comprehension of
the project in anything
other than a superficial
manner
The student
understood only some
aspects of the project
when explained to
him/here
Mark
The student
appreciated the nature
of the problem when
explained to him/her
The student
demonstrated very
good understanding of
the project in
discussion with the
supervisor
9
The student
demonstrated complete
comprehension of the
project, being able to
articulate the
understanding
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
0
3
6
12
15
B – Report mark
Project Report
Abstract
Introduction to topic
Scientific Quality of Report
Extent of Report
Understanding demonstrated (including relevant basic physics)
Style and clarity
Originality/Independence
Experimental errors
Conclusion
References
Mark
Abstract
Inadequate; too long/short; lacks clarity; omits essential
information about the content of the report
Adequate; right length but omits a small amount of essential
information about the report
Good; brief and clear statement of the content of the report
Introduction
Inadequate; omits much important information relating to the aims
of the report in the context of the work undertaken
Barely adequate; omits some important information relating to the
aims of the report in the context of the work undertaken
Adequate; omits a small amount of important information relating
to the aims of the report in the context of the work undertaken
Good; contains relevant material in all areas relating to the aims of
the report in the context of the work undertaken
Complete and coherent; contains all relevant material in all areas
relating to the aims of the report in the context of the work
undertaken. In addition, it conveys an original or deeper insight
into the various aspects of the project.
Results, Discussion & Interpretation
Of importance here is that the report properly addresses the
guidelines issued to each student (and supervisor), and in particular
that it has heeded the following comment from one of our external
examiners: “The final year projects are an important part of the
assessment process and are greatly enjoyed by the students. The
project allows them to participate in sophisticated data collection,
analysis and interpretations but it is still important that they are
clear about the basic physics underlying the project work.
………… Students should be required to include a section in their
final report to explain the basic physics lying behind their project.
They may expect to be questioned about the basic physics in any
viva voce examination. The students should make it clear in their
report what they actually did in the project.”
Insufficient in quantity and inadequate in quality.
Barely adequate in terms of quantity and quality.
Adequate in terms of quantity and quality.
Generally good.
Substantial in terms of quantity and quality.
Conclusions
Makes no connection between the aims or purpose of the project
up to 2
5
10
2
5
7
10
12
up to 10
15
30
40
50
up to 2
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
Mark Awarded
and the results obtained;
Does not fully recognise the connection between the aims or
purpose of the project and the results obtained;
Makes the connection between the aims or purpose of the project
and the results obtained, but does not develop it effectively;
Fully recognises and effectively develops the connection between
the aims or purpose of the project and the results obtained.
Moreover includes an assessment of the results obtained in a novel
or particularly revealing way.
Presentation
The following five categories are to be considered in assessing the
standard of the overall presentation of the report; they are in an
approximate order of importance:
a) References/bibliography (including the balance between peerreviewed and other sources)
b) Style: the manner of writing; choice (and spellng) of words and
clarity of expression; conciseness; grammatical precision.
c) Results: the way in which experimental observations and results
are displayed
d) Layout: use of paragraphs, headings, numbering, diagrams
e) Appearance: the neatness and overall readability
A report which is unsatisfactory in 3 or 4 categories
A report which is unsatisfactory in 1 or 2 categories
A report that is satisfactory in all categories
A report which achieves a good rating in all categories
A report of exceptionally high merit in all categories
TOTAL
4
8
12
16
3
5
7
10
12
100
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
C: Viva assessment
Presentation/Viva
NOTE: presentation skills are NOT judged here. All marks are awarded for ability to
understand and communicate the physics.
Understanding of report content
Appreciation of general field
Experimental accuracy and errors
Discussion of achievements/future possibilities
Range of Points
Lack of detailed knowledge of the research project
Lack of general knowledge of the basics of physics involved
(even after prompting)
Need notes/references/prompting for responses to questions
Displays lack of initiative and motivation towards project
Displays brief knowledge of project
Needs prompting to discuss basic physics
Shows signs of having acquired and read background literature
Displays some signs towards an intellectual discussion of the
concepts involved
Displays a general understanding of the research project.
Able to evaluate the basic physics involved.
Shows signs of critical thinking – able to evaluate the research
in terms of anticipating problems and/or experimental
difficulties.
Shows a thorough knowledge of the research project.
Able to answer questions with minimal of prompting.
Able to discuss probable difficulties involved with the project
and methods of overcoming them.
Displays motivation towards the project.
Shows a full comprehension of the research involved.
Able to answer all questions unprompted.
High level of confidence and competency displayed towards
research.
Able to think critically and laterally unaided – can discuss
possible problems and other avenues to pursue.
0-25
26-45
46-60
61-80
81-100
Chris Solomon, PH600 assessment 2007-2008
Mark awarded