IFN600 Understanding Research Assessment Criteria for Assignment 3 (34% weighting; 238 points available) Student Name: ________________________________ Student Number: ________________________________ 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail Problem Statement (6%) – Ability to: • Clearly identify the research problem and discuss its central issues • Explain why the problem is worthy of solving through research and identify the potential benefits of solving it • Use contemporary research literature to support claims for the novelty and value of the proposed research • Problem statement very clearly expresses the motivation, objective and scope of the research. • Presents a highly compelling argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates a superior understanding of the research topic, in the context of current knowledge as published in peer-‐ reviewed literature. (42 points) • Problem statement clearly expresses the motivation, objective and scope of the research. • Presents a convincing argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates an advanced understanding of the research topic, in the context of current knowledge. (36 points) • Problem statement provides a general indication of the motivation and scope of the research. • Presents a credible argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates a credible understanding of the research topic, in the context of current knowledge. (30 points) • Problem statement gives some indication of the motivation and scope of the research but requires further development. • Presents a good argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates a good understanding of the research topic, in the context of current knowledge. (24 points) • Limited problem statement provided. • Presents a weak argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates limited understanding of the research topic, or provides limited reference to current knowledge. (18 points) • Unclear problem statement provided. • Presents a poor argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates a poor understanding of the research topic, or provides very little reference to current knowledge. (12 points) • Little or no clear problem statement provided. • Presents little or no convincing argument for the potential benefits of solving the research problem. • Demonstrates little or no understanding of the research topic, or does not reference current knowledge. (6 points) Assignment 3: Assessment Criteria IFN600: Understanding Research Page 2 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail Research Question (6%) – Ability to: • Define a clearly worthwhile and answerable research question • Clearly indicate how answering the research question will contribute to solving the overall research problem • Clearly explain that the expected answer is distinct from any existing knowledge • The research question is extremely clear and the nature of the expected answer is obvious. • It is made obvious that answering the research question will produce valuable new knowledge relevant to the research problem and obvious that the question can be answered with existing tools and techniques. • A superior argument is given for the novelty of the research question, citing contemporary literature as necessary. (42 points) • The research question is very clear and the nature of the expected answer is clear. • It is very clear that answering the research question will produce valuable new knowledge relevant to the research problem and very clear that the question can be answered with existing tools and techniques. • An advanced argument is given for the novelty of the research question, citing contemporary literature as necessary. (36 points) • The research question is largely clear but the nature of the expected answer needs minor clarification. • It is mostly clear that answering the research question will produce new knowledge relevant to the research problem and mostly clear that the question can be answered with existing tools and techniques. • A credible argument is given for the novelty of the research question, citing contemporary literature as necessary. (30 points) • The research question is generally clear although the nature of the expected answer needs improvement. • It is generally clear that answering the research question will produce new knowledge relevant to the research problem and generally clear that the question could be answered with existing tools and techniques. • A good argument is given for the novelty of the research question, citing contemporary literature as necessary. (24 points) • The research question or the nature of the expected answer lacks clarity. • Answering the research question is of doubtful value to the research problem or the question would be extremely difficult or prohibitively expensive to answer with existing tools and techniques. • A limited or weakly supported argument is given for the novelty of the research question. (18 points) • The research question and/or the nature of the expected answer are very unclear. • Answering the research question appears to be of little value to the research problem or the question would be almost impossible to answer with existing tools and techniques. • A poor or unsupported argument is given for the novelty of the research question or the answer appears to be already known. (12 points) • The research question and the nature of the expected answer are entirely unclear. • Answering the research question is of very little or no value to the research problem and/or the question cannot be answered with existing tools and techniques. • Very little or no convincing argument is given for the novelty of the research question or the answer is already common knowledge. (6 points) Assignment 3: Assessment Criteria IFN600: Understanding Research Page 3 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail Research Methodology (10%) – Ability to: • Design a feasible, stepwise research methodology to answer the research question • Identify the data collection and analysis steps needed to answer the research question • Estimate the resources needed to complete the project • The proposed research methodology is described extremely clearly, as a series of precise steps. • It is made obvious that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It is obviously possible to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question using the approach described. • It is obvious that the listed resources are sufficient and necessary to execute the research methodology and obvious that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (70 points) • The proposed research methodology is described very clearly, as a series of clear steps. • It is made very clear that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It is very clearly possible to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question using the approach described. • It is very clear that the listed resources are sufficient to execute the research methodology and very clear that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (60 points) • The proposed research methodology is described clearly, as a series of generally well-‐described steps. • It is made clear that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It is clearly possible to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question using the approach described. • It is clear that the resources are sufficient to execute the research methodology and clear that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (50 points) • The proposed research methodology is generally clear, but some steps need further explanation. • It is generally clear that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It appears possible to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question using the approach described, but some detail is lacking. • It is mostly clear that the resources are sufficient to execute the research methodology and generally believable that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (40 points) • The proposed research methodology is described weakly, or some key steps are unclear. • It is not entirely clear how completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It is not fully clear how to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question. • It is not entirely clear that the resources are sufficient to execute the research methodology, or not fully clear that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (30 points) • The proposed research methodology is described poorly and/or several key steps are described inadequately. • It is not at all clear that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • It is not clear how to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question. • It is not clear that the resources are sufficient to execute the research methodology and/or not clear that the methodology can be completed with contemporary technologies. (20 points) • There is little or no useful stepwise description of the proposed research methodology. • There is no convincing argument that completing the process will contribute to answering the research question. • There is little or no explanation of how to collect and analyse the data needed to answer the research question. • Little or no convincing argument is given for the resources required to execute the research or the methodology does not appear feasible with contemporary technologies. (10 points) Assignment 3: Assessment Criteria IFN600: Understanding Research Page 4 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail Expected Outcomes (4%) – Ability to: • Define clearly the deliverable outcomes produced by the project if the methodology is completed successfully • Make the value of the outcomes with respect to the research question clear • Explain clearly how executing the stepwise research methodology will produce these outcomes • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are described crisply and clearly. • The outcomes are obviously a sound basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge. • The outcomes will inevitably be produced by executing the stepwise methodology. (28 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are described clearly. • The outcomes are a solid basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge. • The outcomes clearly will be produced by executing the stepwise methodology. (24 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are described well but with some minor unclear aspects. • The outcomes are a good basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge. • It is reasonably clear that the outcomes will be produced by executing the methodology. (20 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are generally described clearly. • The outcomes are a feasible basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge. • It appears the outcomes should be produced by executing the methodology in the right way. (16 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are not entirely described clearly; or • The outcomes may not be a feasible basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge; or • The outcomes may not be producible by executing the methodology. (12 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are described very poorly; or • The outcomes are not likely to be a feasible basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge; or • The outcomes are unlikely to be produced by executing the methodology as described. (8 points) • The deliverable outcomes to be produced by completing the project are described inadequately; and/or • The outcomes are not a feasible basis from which to derive the project’s new knowledge; and/or • The outcomes cannot be produced by executing the methodology. (4 points) Assignment 3: Assessment Criteria IFN600: Understanding Research Page 5 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail New Knowledge (4%) – Ability to: • Identify the new knowledge which will be gained by answering the research question • Explain how this knowledge will be derived from the outcomes produced if the research methodology is executed successfully • Explain how this knowledge contributes to solving the original research problem • The new knowledge to be gained from completing the research is described crisply and clearly. • The new knowledge is derived from but is entirely distinct from the project’s deliverable outcomes. • The new knowledge will inevitably be produced by executing the stepwise methodology. • The new knowledge obviously answers the research question. (28 points) • The new knowledge to be gained from completing the research is mostly described clearly. • The new knowledge is derivable from and is mostly distinct from the project’s deliverable outcomes. • The new knowledge will be produced by executing the stepwise methodology correctly. • The new knowledge clearly answers the research question. (24 points) • The new knowledge to be gained from completing the research is described well but with some minor unclear aspects. • The new knowledge is based on and mostly distinct from the project’s deliverable outcomes. • The new knowledge will be produced by executing the methodology correctly. • The new knowledge reasonably clearly answers the research question. (20 points) • The new knowledge to be gained from completing the research is generally described clearly but with unclear aspects. • The new knowledge is closely related to and mostly differs from the project’s deliverable outcomes. • The knowledge should be produced by executing the methodology in the right way. • The new knowledge appears to answer the research question. (16 points) • The nature of the new knowledge is poorly explained; or • The new knowledge overlaps significantly with the project’s deliverable outcomes; or • The new knowledge does not obviously inevitably result from executing the methodology; or • The new knowledge does not fully answer the research question. (12 points) • The new knowledge is very poorly explained; and/or • The new knowledge almost entirely overlaps with the project’s deliverable outcomes; and/or • The new knowledge is unlikely to result from completing the methodology; and/or • The new knowledge contributes little to answering the research question. (8 points) • The new knowledge is inadequately explained; and/or • The new knowledge is essentially the same as the project’s deliverable outcomes; and/or • The new knowledge cannot be produced by completing the methodology; and/or • The new knowledge does not answer the research question. (4 points) Assignment 3: Assessment Criteria IFN600: Understanding Research Page 6 Additional comments, if any: 7 - High Distinction 6 - Distinction 5 - Credit 4 - Pass 3 - Marginal Fail 2 - Fail 1 - Low Fail Written Expression (4%) – Ability to: • Demonstrate professional written communications skills • Write in language appropriate to the audience • Refer to supporting evidence in a consistent, professional style • All parts of the document are presented at the highest professional standard with respect to: Spelling and grammar; Style and formatting; Structure and fluency; Language and terminology. • All parts of the document are written in language accessible to a lay reader. • All major claims are supported accurately via citations to relevant and trustworthy literature. (28 points) • The document is very well-‐written and understandable throughout, with only a few insignificant presentation errors. • Almost all parts of the document are written in language accessible to a lay reader. • The main claims are are very well supported via citations to relevant and trustworthy literature. (24 points) • The document is well-‐written and understandable throughout, but with a few noticeable presentation errors. • Most of the document is written in language accessible to a lay reader, but some parts are unclear. • Most claims are well supported via citations to relevant and trustworthy literature. (20 points) • The document is generally well-‐written and understandable, but with a few small presentation errors that make one or two points unclear. • Generally the document is written in language accessible to a lay reader, but several parts are unclear. • The key claims are mostly well supported via citations to relevant and trustworthy literature. (16 points) • The document contains a number of distracting errors in its presentation, making several parts hard to understand. • Many significant parts of the document are hard to understand due to inappropriate use of language, or use of unexplained terminology and abbreviations. • Most claims are not fully and convincingly supported by accurate, detailed refererences. (12 points) • Large parts of the document are poorly written, making many passages difficult to understand. • Most of the document is hard to understand due to inappropriate use of language, unexplained terminology and abbreviations. • The claims are not supported by convincing evidence. (8 points) • The entire document is poorly-‐written; and/or • The document is largely incomplete or impossible to understand; and/or • Supporting evidence is absent or entirely inappropriate. (4 points)