Department of Computer Science and Information Systems

MScIT Project Form – Research Dissertation

Consult the programme intranet page for information about the project:

1. Brief proposal

After agreeing on a title and brief outline of a project or dissertation with a supervisor, the student should complete part 1 of this form. They should upload the completed form toMoodle ( in the MSc IT dissertation module (BUCI039D7).

Student details

Name
Programme / MSc Information Technology
Supervisor
Telephone
Email

Project details

Title:
Proposal outline (approximately 200 words):
Work plan:
Departmental equipment/software required: (contact the Systems Group for advice)
Weights agreed with supervisor: yes/no (delete as appropriate)
All ethical issues are routine (agreed with supervisor): yes/no (delete as appropriate)
If not, you will need to apply for ethical review
(

2. Assessment of the Extended Proposal

The supervisor and a second marker should complete theappropriate section of this form. Decide on the weighting you wish to give to each of the aspects (e.g. 35 for background research), staying within the ranges given. These must add up to 100. Then give a mark for each aspect (e.g. 25 out of 35 for background research) and add these up to give the total mark. Justify your marks by writing comments on each aspect for consideration by the Exam Board and External Examiners. Separately, provide comments as feedback for the student. Send the completed form to the programme administrator ().

Supervisor’s report

Supervisor: / Date returned:
Aspects / Comments / Weight / Mark / Revised mark
Background research / 30-40
Presentation of the problem – aims and objectives / 10-20
Plan for developing the solution / 20-30
Presentation of the proposal / 20-30
Any other aspect (write in) / 0-20
Total / (Add justification for revised marks here if applicable.) / 100

Comments to student:

2. Assessment of the Extended Proposal

Second marker’s report

Second marker: / Date returned:
Aspects / Comments / Weight / Mark / Revised mark
Background research / 30-40
Presentation of the problem – aims and objectives / 10-20
Plan for developing the solution / 20-30
Presentation of the proposal / 20-30
Any other aspect (write in) / 0-20
Total / (Add justification for revised marks here if applicable.) / 100

Comments to student:

3. Assessment of the Report

Complete the appropriate section below (supervisor, second examiner). Decide on the weighting you wish to give to each of the aspects (e.g. 30 for implementation), staying within the ranges given. These must add up to 100. Then give a mark for each aspect (e.g. 20 out of 30 for implementation) and add these up to give the total mark. Justify your marks by writing comments on each aspect for consideration by the Exam Board and External Examiners. Separately, provide comments as feedback for the student. Send the completed form to the programme administrator ().

Supervisor’s report

Supervisor: / Date returned:
Aspects / Comments / Weight / Mark / Revised mark
Identification of the problem area, selection, description and justification of research method and design / 20-40
Development of the research / 20-40
Analysis of research data and evaluation of results / 20-40
Presentation of report, documentation / 20-30
Any other aspect (write in) / 0-20
Total / (Add justification for revised marks here if applicable.) / 100

Comments to student:

3. Assessment of the Report

Second marker’s report

Second marker: / Date returned:
Aspects / Comments / Weight / Mark / Revised mark
Identification of the problem area, selection, description and justification of research method and design / 20-40
Development of the research / 20-40
Analysis of research data and evaluation of results / 20-40
Presentation of report, documentation / 20-30
Any other aspect (write in) / 0-20
Total / (Add justification for revised marks here if applicable.) / 100

Comments to student:

4. Assessment Criteria

To pass (at least 50%) a project the markers assess whether the project proposal and project report meet the following criteria. They also assess any other aspect of special relevance for the project.

Project Proposal:

  • Background research: Potential approaches are reviewed and evaluated.
  • Presentation of the problem – aims and objectives: The proposal specifies a suitable problem, and discusses its requirements.
  • Plan for developing the solution: A suitable research method is chosen. The project is broken down into manageable chunks.
  • Presentation of the proposal: Assessed as for the report – see below.

Project Report:

  • Identificationof the problem area, selection, description and justification of research method and design.
  • The area in which a problem soluble with the application of, or surrounding, digital technology, is believed to exist should be clearly delineated and described. This will include a sound review of literature significant to the area. It will identify issues of current interest defining key terms.
  • The research method may be inductive (e.g. emergence of phenomena from grounded data) or deductive (e.g. model building and statistical testing).The degree to which its selection is justified and clearly shown in the report in accordance with the elements of the problem area known prior to commencement of the project, are the basis of this assessment.
  • Development of the research.
  • This must logically develop the main argument of the research. It must be an honest account of why and how the research was undertaken and include an evaluative discussion of the enactment. There should be clear links between the phenomena observed and the theory supported or challenged.
  • Analysis of research data and evaluation of results
  • The report describes the analysis of the data collected whether quantitative or qualitative. The assessment criteria here is whether the analysis techniques are appropriate and have been correctly applied. If well-trodden methodologies, which should be identified in the literature review, have been deviated from, does the report explain why and is the departure justified?
  • Presentation of report, documentation.
  • Is the report properly concluded? Is it clear what has been done and found? Is there an evaluation of whether the research trajectory should be travelled and if so how?
  • Is the report well-structured, engaging and convincing or does it read as if a template has been populated.
  • Other
  • This gives the examiner the opportunity to award marks for meritorious work that does not fit the criteria above.

For a distinction (at least 70%), a student would have to attempt a challenging project (this should be discussed and agreed with the potential supervisor) and gain a high grade under each of the above headings or have constructed and justified a novel but valid means of gaining understanding of phenomena from a complex interaction as is common in socio-technical situations.

Work that meets some, but not all, of the criteria for distinction may be considered for a merit (between 60% and 69%). A merit might be awarded for a respectable, if only partially successful, attempt at a challenging project, or for a less ambitious project carried out, and written up, to a high standard.

The separate examiners grade the project independently and then meet to arrive at an agreed grade. Students may be called upon to make a presentation of their projects to a sub-committee of the Examination Board to demonstrate their grasp of the material.