Assessment Guideline, Technical Assignments

Technical assignments will be assessed by both the technical content and the report. Technical brilliance is the primary criteria for assessing a piece of work. However, the clarity of the report is very important because I cannot give marks to submission that I do not understand. I use the following guideline in my marking.

• 0-9% Something submitted, but it is incomprehensible; there is some effort
• 10-19% Report difficult to read, hence the technical contributions are unclear; student is confused, but good effort shown
• 20-29% Report difficult to read but readable, hence the technical contents are unclear but could be guessed; student may be confused, but good effort is shown
• 30-39% Poor presentation but report make some sense, hence the technical contents unclear but could be guessed; student may be confused, but good effort shown
• 40-49% Presentation may be weak, student may be confused, but good effort; technical contents unclear but could make sense;

Note: 50% is pass mark for postgraduate modules. A submission would fail if its technical content is unclear or the report is incomprehensible. While the markers will make an attempt to understand the technical content, there is a limit in the marks that they can give to their own guesses. Therefore, it is very important to explain the technical content, including what has been done, what the results are, etc.

• 50-59% Weak report, but the technical work make sense and is clear; technical flows tolerated; weak English tolerated
• 60-69% Good effort, the technical work is reasonably sound and clear; minor technical flaws tolerated

Note: 70% is at distinction level. A distinction submission must be technically sound and clearly explained. Something special must be present, e.g.: The submission has:

• presented some novel algorithms or contrasted different algorithms (but only when all of them are correctly implemented)
• produced good results
• analysed the results in depth, possibly with insight

• 70-79% as specified above
• 80-89% Something more special, e.g. novel algorithms have been invented or insightful interpretations are provided
• 90-100% Technically brilliant, professionally reported, insightful interpretations