Final Report Marking Criteria PDF

Title	Final Report Marking Criteria
Author	kas rod
Course	Civil Engineering Project
Institution	Swinburne University of Technology
Pages	1
File Size	75.9 KB
File Type	PDF
Total Downloads	76
Total Views	145

Preview

CLICK TO PREVIEW PDF

Summary

Final Report Marking Criteria ...

Description

Swinburne University of Technology CVE10005 – Civil Engineering Project Engineering Report - Assessment Criteria

Marks

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

5 marks

Report Structure (individual)

Includes all of the elements expected. Logically organised.

A few of the expected elements are missing. Logically organised.

Includes many of the elements expected. Logically organised.

10 marks

Design / drawings / documentation (individual)

Identified the appropriate elements. High quality discussion.

A few important elements missing. High quality discussion.

Includes many of the appropriate elements. High quality discussion.

5 marks

Accuracy of your Assessment of the Important Issues (individual)

Accurate analysis of the issues. Clear and logical description.

A minor error in the analysis of the issues. Clear and logical description.

5 marks

Grammar & Spelling (individual)

5 marks

Appropriate Use of References (individual)

30 marks

Criteria:

No errors. Appropriate number and quality of references.

A few errors. Does not limit the understanding of the content. Limited number and/or quality of references.

A few minor errors in the analysis of the issues. Clear and logical description. Many errors. Does not limit the understanding of the content. Limited number and/or quality of references.

Unsatisfactory

Poor

Includes only a few of Contains none of the the elements expected. elements expected. AND/OR Poorly organised. Poorly organised. Only a few important Inappropriate elements elements included. identified. AND/OR Poor quality or no Poor quality or no discussion. discussion. Very low level of Many errors in the accuracy in the analysis of the issues. analysis of the issues. AND/OR Poor quality or no Poor quality or no description. description. A few errors. Many errors. Limits the Significantly limits the understanding of the understanding of the content. content. Too few references of poor quality.

Too few references of poor quality....