PMN606 – Project Investigation 2 Assessment 1 – Criteria Reference Assessment (CRA) Final Research report (60%) Criteria Weighting 7 6 5 4 3,2,1 Mark 1. Independent scientific thinking/originality 20% Exceptional originality and findings comprehensively and clearly discussed. Research implications, limitations and future opportunities have been clearly articulated in detail. High level of originality. Results and findings are clearly presented. Most research implications, limitations and future opportunities have been presented. Some originality. Clarity of presentation of results and findings is satisfactory. Some research implications, limitations and future opportunities have been presented. Very little originality. Clarity of presentation of results and findings is reasonable. Limited attempt to discuss research implications, limitations and future opportunities. Little to no originality. Results and findings not well presented, with no attempt to discuss research implications, limitations and future opportunities. /12 2. Scientific method 20% Comprehensive description of methodology. Exemplary execution of all research tasks. Very good description of methodology. High level of achievement in execution of research tasks. Good description of methodology. Moderate level of achievement in execution of research tasks. Description of methodology has been carried out with a lack of detail. Level of achievement in execution of research tasks is satisfactory. Little or no description of methodology. Low level of achievement in execution of research tasks. /12 3. Logic of structure/scientific argumentation 20% Structure is faultless. Exceptional clarity in presentation of results and conclusions. A proficient effort to present scientific arguments, but still scope for minor improvement. Evidence of a concerted effort to be link everything together. Satisfactory but limited cohesion. Little or no cohesion. /12 3. Overall presentation including structure, readability and use of references 25% Highly professional with all aspects exceptionally well executed and integrated. Highly readable and easy to understand with clearly structures sentences. Excellent use of English with no grammatical or spelling errors. Well-referenced submission using relevant and up-to-date references cited using QUT Cite APA. Very well presented with only minor errors or aspects in need of refinement. Good readability with clearly structures sentences. Occasional use of long sentences to fit too much information, making it difficult to follow. Very few grammatical and spelling errors. Good referencing using up-to-date references cited using QUT Cite APA. Good presentation and logically structured document. Fairly easy to read although some points may not be immediately clear. Points could be made with fewer words. A number of spelling and grammatical errors. Sufficient and relevant references cited using QUT Cite APA. Average presentation and structured document. Adequate communication of ideas but a number of ideas difficult to grasp at first read. Numerous errors in spelling and grammar; may have benefited from being proof read. Limited referencing cited using QUT Cite APA. Poorly presented and structured document. No clarity or justification of points made. Many grammatical and spelling errors and inadequate number of references or inappropriate referencing (not using QUT Cite APA). /15 4. Work process 15% Candidate has acquired appropriate knowledge by working independently and displayed exceptional enthusiasm. High level of enthusiasm and independence in carrying the research. Generous evidence that candidate gained new knowledge. Candidate was enthusiastic, and displayed some independence in carrying out parts of the research. Some evidence that candidate gained knowledge. Some enthusiasm, but very little evidence of ability to work independently. Knowledge gained is limited. Little or no enthusiasm, Candidate did not display the ability to work independently and gained little or no knowledge. /9 Mark /60 PMN606 – Project Investigation 2 Assessment 1 – Criteria Reference Assessment (CRA) Final Research report (60%) Assessment Notes: The following questions pertaining to the individual criteria are not comprehensive and can vary in importance depending on the type of thesis. 1. Independent scientific thinking /originality • Does the candidate use and develop original ideas? • Are known ideas interwoven in a new way? • Are the core findings presented in clear statements? • Does the report incorporate critical appraisal? • Are the possibilities and limitations of the applied method discussed? 2. Scientific method • Does the candidate show sufficient familiarity with current knowledge (literature, experiments)? • Is reference made to gaps in knowledge, based on an analysis of literature? • Are the methods and techniques used properly described? • Are the methods adopted appropriate to the subject matter? • Has the research (field work, collecting data, experiments, models, etc.) been carried out carefully and adequately? • Have the results been sufficiently validated (testing by statistical analyses, comparisons with independent data or experiments, etc.) 3. Logic of the structure, scientific argumentation • Is the exposition of the topic clear, are the aims logically stated? • Does the report include clearly formulated hypotheses (if applicable)? • Does the structure of the report show a logical approach to the topic? • Are the results of the research and conclusions clearly and logically presented? • Have the central questions been answered? • Is a comparison made between the results and published or other independent data? Are the results placed in a broader context? • Are generalisations supported by facts? • Are the facts clearly distinguishable from hypotheses and assumptions? • Are issues mentioned that have not been dealt with? 4. Presentation • Have the formal requirements for diagrams, tables, literary sources etc. been met? • Is there a comprehensive, informative summary or abstract? • Is the text scientifically correct, clearly understandable and in a grammatically sound language? • Is the layout attractive for readers? 5. Work process • Has the candidate displayed discernible keenness to tackle the task? • Has the candidate acquired appropriate knowledge? • Has the research been carried out independently? • Has critical appraisal been successfully incorporated? Broad Assessment standards 7 Highly original, proficient, refined and professional; challenging 6 Very accomplished with evidence of a deep understanding of issues and of the ability to produce a cohesive outcome 5 Above average work that shows glimpses of deep understanding and skilful management of complexity 4 Competent work that does not go beyond satisfying basic requirements 3 Work may be inconsistent and some basic requirements are not satisfied 2 Basic requirements are generally not satisfied and work is incomplete 1 Failure to submit