Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology,

Islamabad Campus

Department of Computer Science

Final Year Project Guidelines for BS-Software Engineering

Prepared By:
BS(SE) FYP Committee
Foreword:
This is the Final Year Project handbook of the Department of Computer Science for BS
Software Engineering students. This handbook contains guidelines for the conception,
preparation, implementation, completion and finally the assessment of Final Year Projects.

The intention of this handbook is to develop guidelines, a uniform structure and outline for
undergraduate students of BS(SE). It serves as an instructional manual for the expected
contents, deliverables, quality, and the required quantity of the final projects for students of BS
(SE) and provides evaluation rubrics for supervisors and evaluators.

Members:
• Dr. Arshad Ali Shahid (Adjunct Professor)

• Syed M. Usman (Lecturer, Program Manager BS(SE) )

• Mr. Aamir Anwar (Lecturer)

1
Revision History:
Compiled By Date Reason for Changes Version
Syed Muhammad Usman 15/19/2020 Prepared Initial Draft 1.0
Mr. Aamir Anwar
Dr. Arshad Ali Shahid 01/10/2020 Reviewed 1.0

Syed Muhammad Usman 05/10/2020 Finalized First Version 1.0

Mr. Aamir Anwar

2
Contents
1. Introduction: ................................................................................................................................. 4
2. Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs): .......................................................................................... 4
3. Final Year Project Overview: ...................................................................................................... 5
3.1. FYP Milestones and Evaluation Stages: ............................................................................. 6
3.2. Proposal Defense: .................................................................................................................. 7
3.3. Final Evaluation: ................................................................................................................... 7
3.4. Open House: .......................................................................................................................... 8
4. Guidelines for Project Supervision: ............................................................................................ 8
5. Project Development Life Cycle: ................................................................................................. 8
6. Team Leadership: ....................................................................................................................... 10
7. Students’ Responsibility: ............................................................................................................ 10
8. Late Submissions: ....................................................................................................................... 10
9. Plagiarism: ................................................................................................................................... 10

3
1. Introduction:
The Final Year Project (FYP) is the culmination of the students’ degree program. The main
purpose of this project is to encourage students to apply the knowledge and skills acquired
during their studies. It allows them to work on a substantial problem for an extended period
and show how proficient they are in solving real world problems. It brings them an opportunity
to demonstrate their competence as professionals and to apply what they have learnt in the
other components of the degree. Besides this, they get a chance to improve their technical skills
and their communication skills by integrating writing and presentation and it also gives them
the opportunity to learn how to work in teams. With a real-world problem at hand, the students
learn professional practice and how to deal with a variety of non-technical issues such as
management, finance, safety, reliability, environment, and social impacts. Moreover, it
provides an integrated assessment of the students’ progress regarding the training they went
through during their academic tenure at the college.

FYP activity is different from other courses because it requires independently objective
formulation, planning and management, and implementation, working in team in addition to
self-motivation. It is therefore essential to design fair and comprehensive guidelines for the
students, supervisors, and the evaluators. A structured manual and lifecycle process is therefore
essential in order to help students conform to the required quality standards, general
expectations from the supervisors, and sketch assessment criteria for the evaluators. Hence,
contribute as a fundamental underpinning to achieve high quality learning outcomes of the
projects.

2. Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs):

The learning outcomes of FYP-1, FYP-2 are defined by the department as listed in Table 1.

Table 1: FYP Course Learning Outcomes (CLOs)

CLO Description Domain BT Level*

1 Understand the complexity of organizing a large software C 1

development project as a team, identifying risks associated
with their decisions and adapting the processes as the
project evolves during the year

2 Obtain experience in the application of their previous C,P 2

knowledge in software requirements, design, test and
validation in a concrete large project

3 Identify previous incorrect considerations in their time C,P 2, 3

and management skills and gain working experience that
would allow them to correct their views on the own
capabilities leading to more realistic project plans

4
 4 Improve their oral and written communication skills in the A,C,P 3
preparation of software prototypes, demos, and
documentation and so as to satisfy the standards of
engineers and other software professionals

5 Improve their research skills in software engineering by P 3

developing a better understanding of technical information
and standards

*BT=Bloom’s Taxonomy, C=Cognitive domain, P=Psychomotor domain,

A=Affective domain

3. Final Year Project Overview:

A Final Year Project is a two-semester activity performed by a team of two (2) students
who select, plan, and execute a development project and it is supervised by a faculty
member. The other tasks of this activity are: students choose a project subject and define
the objectives of the project under the supervision of a faculty member, and prepare the
project proposal including: defining the statement of the problem, defining system
requirements, defining different candidate solutions for the problem of study, making
feasibility study for different candidate solutions, defining the best candidate solution,
defining time table schedule.

5
 3.1. FYP Milestones and Evaluation Stages:

Table 2: FYP-1 Detailed Timeline

Phases Deadlines
Project Selection Week 16 (6Th Semester) or 3 Weeks prior to
start of 7th Semester
Proposal Submission Week 17 (6th Semester) or 2 Weeks prior to start
of 7th Semester
Proposal Defense Week 1 (7th Semester)
Report Submission (Ch#1,2) Week 8 (7th Semester)
Mid Review Week 9 (7th Semester)
Report Submission (Ch#3,4) Week 15 (7th Semester)
Final Review Week 16 (7th Semester)

Poster Presentation Week 16 (7th Semester)

Table 3: Milestones & Marks Distribution of FYP-1

Marks Evaluator
FYP Proposal
Project Proposal Report 5 Verified by Supervisor
FYP Evaluation Committee
Project Proposal Defense 10 FYP Evaluation Committee
Mid Evaluation
Report (Ch#1,2) 10 Verified by the Supervisor
FYP Evaluation Committee
Presentation 15 FYP Evaluation Committee
5 FYP Supervisor
Final Evaluation
Report (Ch#1-4) 10 Verified by the Supervisor
FYP Evaluation Committee
Presentation 20 FYP Evaluation Committee
10 FYP Supervisor
Poster Presentation/ 10 FYP Evaluation Committee
Competition 5 FYP Supervisor

6
 Table 4: Milestones & Marks Distribution of FYP-2

Marks Evaluator
Mid Evaluation
Report (Ch#1 - 6) Verified by Supervisor
10 FYP Evaluation Committee
Presentation 15 FYP Evaluation Committee
5 FYP Supervisor
Final Evaluation
Report (Ch#1-8) Verified by Supervisor
25 FYP Evaluation Committee
Project Demo 20 FYP Evaluation Committee
10 FYP Supervisor
Open House 10 FYP Evaluation Committee
5 FYP Supervisor

Table 5: Milestones of FYP-2

Deliverables Deadlines
Final Report Submission of P1 Week 1 (8Th Semester)
Report Submission (Ch#5,6) Week 8 (8th Semester)
Mid Evaluation Week 9 (8th Semester)
Report Submission (Ch#1 – 8) Week 14 (8th Semester)
Final Evaluation Week 16 (8th Semester)
Open House Week 17 (8th Semester)
Report Hard Binding Submission Week 18 (8th Semester)

3.2. Proposal Defense:

The students must choose a project topic/title and define the objectives of the project under
the supervision of a faculty member and prepare the project proposal as per given template.
The format of FYP proposal defense and evaluation forms are attached in Annex-I. Rubrics
are given in this document.

After proposal defense, next FYP activity is Mid-Evaluation and Design expo. Students
have to present their work and progress. The format of mid evaluation and evaluation forms
and their rubric are given in Annex-II. Students also have to submit the Software
Requirement Specifications (SRS) Report at the time of mid evaluation. Template for SRS
and evaluation rubrics are given in Annex-II.

3.3. Final Evaluation:

Final Evaluation is the last activity for FYPs, which is evaluated by Supervisor and
evaluation committee. The format of FYP Final evaluation and evaluation forms and their
rubric are given in Annex-III. Also the template for FYP final report submission is attached
in Annex-III.

7
 3.4. Open House:
Open house is arranged for final exhibition of final year projects. Most of the people from
industry visits FYP stalls and judges are allocated to each FYP for evaluation.

4. Guidelines for Project Supervision:

Following guidelines shall be taken under considerations during project supervision.

a. Each group will work under the supervision of an assigned supervisor throughout the
final year (semester 7 & 8).
b. Students are recommended to meet with their supervisor at least once a week. The
students are expected to discuss their progress with their supervisors in these weekly
meetings. Depending on students’ requirements and the supervisor’s availability,
supervisors may also arrange additional meetings (physical/online) as required.
c. Supervisors might also arrange communication with student groups via email or other
means for the purpose of advising project groups.
d. It is the responsibility of the supervisor to inform his students with this handbook and
all the included instructions and regulations.

Tasks expected from supervisors:

During these meetings supervisors are expected to:

To provide FYP Outlines / Objectives

Discuss project expectations and the plan with the group

Orientation
To share previous practice experience, research, skills and expertise

Assign /Recommend related literature

To clarify students queries effectively as needed

To make students aware of professional ethics and standards Provide

Knowledge
To advise students on how to work effectively as a team while working under
pressure, remaining optimistic and persistent, and how to meet milestone
deadlines
To monitor the project progress on a weekly basis

To ensure students are completing outlined project deliverables Assess

To grade students’ work (at individual/group level) periodically on each

deliverable.

5. Project Development Life Cycle:

The supervisors will guide the group through different steps in the software engineering life
cycle and describe, discuss, assign, receive and review the corresponding at the end of each
step as described in Figure 1.

8
 Figure 1: Software Engineering Lifecycle and Respective artifacts

During the Project Proposal, students undertake the initial phases of project planning, selection,
analysis and designing phases. In the Project Implementation, students proceed with the
implementation phase of their proposed project. As part of SDLC, the supervisors should guide
the students to follow, but not limited to, the following best-practices:

a. Having a life cycle or system development methodology

b. Ensure proper research and background knowledge is acquainted
c. Feasibility study is conducted on the proposed project
d. Scope of the project is precise and crystal clear
e. Generating and comparing alternative designs to determine best match for the requirements
f. Roles & responsibilities of individual student working within the group is clear and accepted
g. Able to apply project resources as per the approved project plan
h. Track and report any issues and risks in completing assigned tasks
i. Both logical and physical design aspects are analyzed
j. Proper programming standards are maintained during the development of the project
k. Auto or Manual Test Cases are developed and executed
l. Source control with versioning tools are used for developing as a team
m. Reporting required deliverables using industry standards
n. Participating in Seminars, Events, Publications and Workshops relevant to the project

9
6. Team Leadership:
Every graduation project group is assigned with a team leader who is essentially a cross-
functional key player working within the project group. It is extremely important to get the
right student within each group fit for the role of team leader which is crucial for the success
of any project. Team leader should work very closely with the supervisor on the following,
but not limited to, the primary tasks:

a. Provide input on the performance of team members

b. Resolve any conflicts within group members and maintain healthy group dynamics
c. Inform supervisor of any task delays and meeting hours change requests from students
d. Ensure rest of the group understands their roles and responsibilities on the assigned tasks
e. Coordinate with internal or external project stakeholders on behalf of the team
f. Provide weekly status report signed by each team member as per the Schedule

Note: During the course of the project, if the supervisor finds team leader is not performing as
per the above expectations, the supervisors can ask for the replacement of team leader from
within the group member who could be a best choice for this role.

7. Students’ Responsibility:
During the Final Year Project, students are responsible for the following:

a. Agree with their assigned supervisors on the topic

b. Perform weekly tasks, assigned by the supervisor
c. Discuss problems and seek advice from the supervisor to accomplish the assign tasks.
d. Provide supervisor weekly status reports and get his/her feedback
e. Follow recommendations/instruction to refine the previous task
f. Finalize the project proposal and development/implementation plan, incorporating all the
feedbacks and comments provided by the supervisor and evaluators.

g. Conduct presentation at the end of each deliverable and defend project to the evaluation panel

8. Late Submissions:
It is the responsibility of each group to ensure they complete the milestones of each semester
and submit deliverables by the due date. No project will be accepted after the cutoff date and
necessary actions will be taken as per the supervisor and the evaluation committee decision.

9. Plagiarism:
Each project must be the original work of student groups. At the end of each semester, students
will be required to present their project development and implementation outcomes as per the
provided deliverables guidelines and the original work undertaken throughout each semester.

10
In the project report, for instance, if students have taken ideas or referencing other work as part
of the proposed project, then, it must be cited and reference should be clearly specified. Same
is the case while implementing the proposed solution. For instance, if students are developing
project using 3rd party tools and libraries, it must be referenced and relevant comments and
notes must be highlighted and will not be regarded as part of the original work of student
groups. Hence, it is extremely important to note that it is the responsibility of students to ensure
they are not plagiarizing knowingly or unknowingly.

11
 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP Proposal Document

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
R1: Not written Product Scope is Product scope is Product scope is identified and Product scope is identified and
Product Scope identified and written in identified and written in written in good way and it written in excellent and concise
vague way and is it very ordinary way and clearly defines the scope, way. No further improvements
hard to understand. conveys the massage. however it can be improved to are required.
achieve excellence.
R2: Not written Project area / Project area / Project area / Introduction is Project area / Introduction is
Project Introduction is identified Introduction is identified identified and written in good identified and written in
Introduction and written in vague way and written in ordinary way and it clearly defines the excellent and concise way. No
and is it very hard to way and conveys the area, however it can be further improvements are
understand. massage. improved to achieve excellence. required.

R3: Literature Literature Review / App Literature review / App The review provides a good Literature review / App review is
Literature Review Review / App review is written in an review provides a background and details of the excellently written according to
/ Application review is not ordinary way. The review reasonable description literature. However, it is not the scientific writing standards
Review, written or written material i.e. research of the project written in scientific writing and covers maximum of the
References in a vague form. papers or web material is background and its standards for review. research papers/web material
not at all clear to a reader significance but can be related to project.
The list of who is unfamiliar. improved. Number of The list of references appears
references is research papers/ web reasonable and citation follow A comprehensive list of
clearly The list of references material needs to be standard format. references is cited using a
inadequate. should be expanded. added. standard format.

The list of references

appears reasonable but
citation does not follow
standard format.
R4: Problem Problem statement is Problem statement is Problem statement is stated and Problem statement is stated and
Problem statement is not stated but not clear and stated but lacks covers necessary justification covers sufficient justification.
Statement stated at all or incomplete. necessary justification in with reference to the review. New reader can clearly
vaguely stated. light of the literature understand its value and context.
review / application
review.
R5: The approach Some aspects of the The methods, The methods, approaches, tools, The methods, approaches, tools,
Methodology taken to solve solution are discussed approaches, tools, techniques, algorithms, or other techniques, algorithms, or other
the problem is briefly but seems techniques, algorithms, aspects of the solution are aspects of the solution are
not discussed. incomplete. or other aspects of the sufficiently discussed and completely discussed with
solution are discussed justified. sufficient details and supporting
but not justified. Much is evidence.
left to the readers’
imagination.
R6: A lot of spelling Frequent spellings and Occasional spellings and Occasional spellings and Almost no spelling or
Language and and grammatical grammatical errors that grammatical errors. grammatical errors that have grammatical mistake. Writing is
Grammar mistakes in the impede the reading flow. Writing is acceptable but only minor impact on flow of well organized and easy to
report and Writing needs significant not entirely clear. reading. Writing is overall clear. follow.
writing is not editing and Organization is good. Content is
understandable improvement. supported by good number of
Proofreading is required. figures and tables.
 FYP Proposal Document Evaluation Form
Project Title:_______________________________________________________________________________________

Student Name & Registration #:_______________________________________________________________________

Student Name & Registration #:_______________________________________________________________________

S. No Description Weight Marks

Performance
(1 – 5)
R1 Product Scope 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R2 Project Introduction 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
0.5
Literature Review, References
R3 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R4 Problem Statement 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R5 Methodology 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R6 Language and Grammar 0.5 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________

Evaluator Name: ____________________________________ Signature with Date: ___________________________________________

 Rubrics for FYP Proposal Evaluation (Presentation + Demonstration)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
Unable to plan and set Students have Adequate analysis of the project. Analysis of the Complete analysis of the project
R1: objectives for the realization some idea for Objectives have been set, but project is deficient has been done. Objectives have
Analysis and of the project. realization of strategies to follow are not clearly in few aspects. been set. Strategies to follow
Approach project. stated. Approach may also have been defined.
Correct approach to solve the need some
project is not followed. Approach taken to solve the improvement. Approach taken to solve the
problem is satisfactory. problem has been chosen after
thorough analysis and is
practically feasible.
Description of unmet need or Some new / Details of the project novelty are Some useful Potential customers have been
problem the project caters to is useful features briefly discussed. features are identified.
missing and description is are included. missing to achieve
R2: quite poor. The novelty of the proposed complete product. The proposed solution is novel.
Novelty and solution is marginal.
Creativity The proposed solution is not The project solves complex
novel. engineering problem.

The project appears trivial. The project can be included in

the startup stream.
Student has no knowledge of Student has only Student has presented full
R3: Student’s knowledge is Student has
Subject both problem and solution. basic knowledge knowledge of both problem and
reasonable and needs sufficient
Knowledge of both problem solution. Answers to questions
enhancement to fully implement knowledge to are strengthen by rationalization
Cannot answer basic and solution.
the idea. implement the and explanation.
questions.
proposed solution.
Timeline for entire project is Timeline is Major milestones Project timeline with milestones
R4: Timeline is defined to fully
not defined. defined partially have been are excellently defined.
Timeline and implement the idea.
and milestones mentioned and
Implementation Some of the milestones are
Milestones are not set for are missing. needs clarification.
Knowledge defined.
entire project.

R5: Only one member appears to Work Not all members have All members have All members contributed.
Team work be actively working on the distribution is contributed to the project. Work contributed to the
project. mentioned but division is not uniform. project. Work Work division is clearly
incomplete. division is mentioned.
somehow uniform.
R6: Students are unable to Students are It is not clearly demonstrated Students demon- It is clearly and effectively
Demonstration demonstrate the project. unable to how the system will fulfills its strated the project demonstrated how the system
Style demonstrate the functional requirements. in good manner and will fulfills all of its functional
project with explained logically. requirements.
clarity.
 FYP Proposal (Presentation + Demonstration) Evaluation Form
Project Title:_______________________________________________________________________________________

Student Name & Registration #:_______________________________________________________________________

Student Name & Registration #:_______________________________________________________________________

S. No Description Weight Marks

Performance
(1 – 5)
R1 Analysis and Approach 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R2 Novelty and Creativity 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

0.5
Subject Knowledge
R3 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R4 Timeline and Implementation 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Knowledge 1
R5 Team Work 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
1
R6 Demonstration Style 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
0.5

Comments (Mandatory):

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________

Evaluator Name: ____________________________________ Signature with Date: ___________________________________________

 Rubrics for Mid Evaluation of FYP-I Document (Ch#1,2)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
R1: Introduction is not Introduction is written Introduction provides a Introduction provides a good Introduction is excellently
Introduction written or written in a in an ordinary way. minimum description of the overview of the project and written according to the
vague form The important project but need more detail. results. scientific writing standards and
background are not provides a good summary.
clear to a reader who is
unfamiliar.
R2: Literature Review is Literature Review is Literature review provides a The review provides a good Literature review is excellently
Literature Review, not written or written in written in an ordinary reasonable description of the background and details of the written according to the
References a vague form. way. The review project background and its literature. However, it is not scientific writing standards and
References not cited or material i.e. research significance but can be written in scientific writing covers maximum of the
improper. papers or web material improved. Number of research standards for review. research papers/web material
is not at all clear to a papers/ web material needs to related to project.
The list of references is reader who is be added more.
inadequate or unfamiliar. A comprehensive list of
incomplete. The review is not The list of references appears The list of references appears references is cited using a
reflective of the topic reasonable but citation does not reasonable and citation follow standard format.
chosen. follow standard format. standard format.
The list of references
should be expanded.
R3: Product scope is not Product scope is Product scope provides a The product scope provides a Product scope is excellently
Product Scope written or written in a written in an ordinary reasonable description of the good background and details written according to the
very vague form. way. System boundary system boundary and its of the system boundary. scientific writing standards and
is not well defined. It significance but can be However, it is not written in system boundary is clearly
does not specify what improved by adding details scientific writing standards defined with implementation.
is not in the scope. (like adding exact functional for review.
units}.
R4: Problem statement is Problem statement is Problem statement is stated but
Problem statement is stated Problem statement is stated and
Problem Statement not stated at all or stated but it does not lacks necessary justification in
and covers necessary covers sufficient justification.
vaguely stated. entirely clear describe light of the literature review.
justification with reference to New reader can clearly
the problem (s) in the literature review. More understand its value and
hand. elaboration and details can context.
improve it.
R5: The approach taken to Some aspects of the The methods, approaches, The methods, approaches, The methods, approaches,
Methodology solve the problem is solution are discussed tools, techniques, algorithms, tools, techniques, algorithms, tools, techniques, algorithms, or
not discussed. briefly and it provides or other aspects of the solution or other aspects of the other aspects of the solution are
only hints about the are discussed but not is a solution are sufficiently sufficiently discussed with
steps of the convincing manner. Much is discussed. But more details sufficient details and supporting
methodology. left to the readers’ can be added. figures.
imagination.
R6: Project requirements Project requirements Project requirements are Project requirements are Project requirements are
Requirement are not gathered/ are included but included in ordinary way. included in good way. included in excellent way.
Engineering included at all or entirely poor way. No Requirement gathering Requirement gathering Requirement gathering
Process vaguely stated specific techniques are stated. techniques are stated. techniques are stated and
approach/process is However, the required details However, the requirements requirements are written in a
stated. and justification of techniques are not written in a scientific scientific way.
selection is missing. way.

R7: A lot of spelling and Frequent spellings and Occasional spellings and Occasional spellings and Almost no spelling or
Language and grammatical grammatical errors grammatical errors such that grammatical errors that have grammatical mistake.
Grammar mistakes in the report. that impede the reader faces difficulty in only minor impact on flow of Writing is easy to read.
Writing is not under- reading flow. comprehension. reading. Writing is almost Excellent organization. Writing
standable. Writing is in need of clear. is concise yet all necessary
significant proof Organization is good. content is included. Figures and
reading and Content is supported by good tables support content.
improvement. number of figures and tables.
Minor improvements can
enhance the writing.
 FYP-I Document Mid Evaluation Form
Project Title:_________________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name & Registration#________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name & Registration #: ______________________________________________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Abstract 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Literature Review,
R2
References 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 Product Scope 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 Problem Statement 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 Methodology 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 Requirement Engineering Process 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R7 Language and Grammar 1
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluator Name: _________________________________________ Signature with Date: _____________________________

 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP-I Mid Evaluation (Presentation + Demonstration)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
Unable to plan and set Incomplete analysis Adequate analysis of the Adequate analysis of the Complete analysis of the project has
R1: objectives for the realization done. project done. Objectives have project done. Objectives have been done. Objectives have been set.
Analysis and of the project. Objectives not clear been set, but strategies to been set, strategies to follow Strategies to follow have been defined.
Approach and inappropriate follow are not clearly stated.are clearly stated.
Correct approach to solve approach used to Approach taken to solve the problem
the project is not followed. develop the solution. Approach taken to solve the Approach taken to solve the has been chosen after thorough analysis.
problem is partially problem is partially
satisfactory. satisfactory.

R2: Project requirements are not Incomplete project Project requirements are Project requirements are Project requirements are included in
System gathered from stakeholders. requirements are included in ordinary way. included and documented. excellent way. Requirement gathering
Requirements gathered from Requirement gathering Requirement gathering techniques are stated and requirements
Gathering Project team is unaware of stakeholders. techniques are stated. techniques are stated. are written in a scientific way.
actual stakeholders of However, the requirements However, the requirements
system. Project team is are not collected from system are not collected from Requirements are gathered from actual
partial aware of stakeholders rather written by system stakeholders rather stakeholders by using proper RE
actual stakeholders own imagination. written by own techniques.
of system. imagination.
R3: Student is unaware of In between Some of the system’s non- In between All of the system’s non- functional
Quality System’s non- functional functional requirements are requirements are clearly demonstrated.
requirements demonstrated.

R4: Most part of the working In between Working product has some In between Working product has several creative
Originality product is copied. potential for making a /original /inventive /innovative elements
creative contribution. and a clear potential for making a
creative contribution.
Timeline as defined in the All milestones are completed according
R5: Timeline as defined in the
project proposal is not to the timeline defined in project
Timeline and project proposal is followed
followed. In between In between proposal.
Implementation Milestones have not been for the most part.
Progress (25 % achieved. Some of the milestones have
of project) been achieved

R6: Only one member appears to Not all members have All members contributed.
Team work be actively working on the In between contributed to the project. In between
project. Work division is not clearly Work division clearly mentioned
mentioned.
R7: Students are unable to Students are unable It is not clearly demonstrated Students demonstrated the It is clearly and effectively demonstrated
Demonstration demonstrate the project. to demonstrate the how the system will fulfills its project in good manner and how the system will fulfills all of its
Style project with clarity. functional requirements. explained logically. functional requirements.
 FYP-I (Presentation + Demonstration) Mid Evaluation Form
Project Title:________________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name and Registration#______________________________________________________________________

Student’ Name and Registration #______________________________________________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Analysis and Approach 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
System Requirements Gathering
R2 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 Quality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 Originality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 Timeline and Implementation Progress 5 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 Team Work 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R7 Demonstration Style 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________

Evaluator Name: _________________________________ Signature with Date: __________________________________

 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP-I Document (Ch#1-4)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
R1: Project planning Project planning Project planning document is Project planning document is Project planning document is
Project Planning document is not document is partially written however, scheduling written however, scheduling well written with clear
written. written with vague techniques like Gantt chart, techniques like Gantt chart, scheduling techniques and
description. WBS is missing. WBS structure is not proper diagrams.
appropriate or detailed.

R2: Project management Project management Project management Project management Project management objectives
Management objectives are not objectives are poorly objectives are written objectives are written with are well written with
Objectives and written. written. however, assumptions and assumptions and project assumptions and project
Priorities project constraints are not constraints; however, further constraints.
written. elaboration/details is
required.
R3: Project risk Project risk Project risk management is Project risk management is Project risk management is
Project Risk management is not management is written written however clearly (risks written and risk management well written with techniques
Management written. in an ordinary way. definations), but no such techniques are mentioned in used practically.
Only risk definitions technique as risk management document with less
are written. plan is proposed. description of
implementation.
R4: System architecture System architecture is System architecture is System architecture is System architecture is included
System is not included at all included but entirely included in ordinary way. included in good way. in excellent way. Architecture
Architecture or vaguely stated. in a poor way. No Architecture design approach Architecture design approach design approach is stated and
standard/common is stated. However, it is is stated and clear. Subsystem clear. Subsystem architecture is
architecture design missing the required details. architecture is also clear. also added in excellent way
description approach Important information about Functional description or
is used. Subsystems/modules is also object oriented description is
not clear and/or missing. included along with required
Functional description or diagrams. However, there is
object oriented description is still need to add more details
included; however, required and further improvements
diagrams are missing. like description of all parts
and interactions are required.
R5: A lot of spelling and Frequent spellings and Occasional spellings and Occasional spellings and Almost no spelling or
Language and grammatical grammatical errors grammatical errors such that grammatical errors that have grammatical mistake.
Grammar mistakes in the report. that impede the reader faces difficulty in only minor impact on flow of Writing is easy to read.
Writing is not under- reading flow. comprehension. reading. Writing is almost Excellent organization. Writing
standable. Writing is in need of clear. is concise yet all necessary
significant proof Organization is good. content is included. Figures and
reading and Content is supported by good tables support content.
improvement. number of figures and tables.
Minor improvements can
enhance the writing.
 FYP-I Document Evaluation Form
Project Title:________________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name and Registration#______________________________________________________________________

Student’ Name and Registration #______________________________________________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Project Planning 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Management Objectives and Priorities
R2 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 Project Risk Management 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 System Architecture 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 Language and Grammar 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________

Evaluator Name: _______________________ Signature with Date: _______________________

 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP-I Final (Presentation + Demonstration)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
Unable to plan and set Adequate analysis of the project. Adequate analysis of Complete analysis of the project has
R1: objectives for the Objectives Objectives have been set, and strategies the project. Objectives been done. Objectives have been set.
Analysis and realization of the have been to follow are stated. have been set, and Strategies to follow have been defined.
Approach project. set, but Methodology stages/step need further strategies to follow are
strategies to elaboration and justification. stated. Approach taken to solve the problem
Correct approach to follow are Approach taken to solve the problem is Methodology has been chosen after thorough analysis
solve the project is not not clearly satisfactory. stages/steps have and justified up to satisfactory level.
followed. stated. been properly
elaborated. Solution
Approach justification along
taken to with alternative
solve the missing.
problem is Approach taken to
unsatisfact solve the problem
ory. is satisfactory.
R2: All system requirements System System requirements (functional & System System requirements (functional &
Correctness (functional & requirements nonfunctional have been specified but requirements nonfunctional have been specified
and nonfunctional not (functional & not specified correctly and can cause (functional & correctly and are testable. The system
Completeness specified. The system nonfunctional confusion and difficulty in testing. The nonfunctional was correctly functional and all of the
failed to produce the have been system execution led to inaccurate or have been features were implemented.
required results. specified but incomplete results. It was not correctly specified correctly It was demonstrated how the real world
incomplete or functional or not all the features were and are testable. problem was solved.
vague. The implemented. The system
system failed execution led to
to produce the accurate or
required complete results.
results. Minor changes can
improve the SRS
R3: Coding standards, best Coding Coding standards, best programming Coding standards, Coding standards, best programming
Coding programming practices standards, practices are rarely followed. Other best programming practices are followed extensively.
Standards are not mentioned and best documentation like comments not practices are Code has been properly documented
not followed. One programmin given. followed. Other and clearly help understanding the
cannot understand the g practices documentation logic.
code. are have like comments are
been given.
mentioned The documention
and not is incomplete and
followed all required part
properly. not covered
 One cannot
understand
the code.

R4: Student is unaware of In between Some of the system’s non-functional In between All of the system’s non- functional
Quality System’s non- functional requirements are demonstrated. requirements are clearly demonstrated.
requirements

R5: Most part of the working More than Working product has some potential for Working product Working product has several creative
Originality product is copied/and/or 60% of the making a creative contribution. More has much more /original /inventive /innovative elements
similar to some already working than 60% work is new/original potential for and a clear potential for making a
developed. product is making a creative creative contribution.
copied/and/o contribution. More
r similar to than 80% work is
some new/original
already
developed.
Timeline as defined in the Timeline as All milestones are completed according
R6: Timeline as defined in the project Timeline as defined
project proposal is not defined in the to the timeline defined in project
Timeline and proposal is followed for the most part in the project
followed. project proposal.
Implementation (more than 60%). proposal is followed
proposal has
Progress (50 % Milestones have not been been followed for the most part
of project) 50% of the milestones have been (more than 80%).
achieved. only 25%.
achieved.
75% of the
Few milestones have been
milestones achieved.
have been
achieved.
R7: Work division is not Work division Work division is partial mentioned. Work division is Work division clearly mentioned
Team work mentioned at all. Its is not clearly Not all members have contributed to the almost (80%) All members contributed equally.
difficult to assess the mentioned. project. mentioned.
contribution of the team Only one All members have
members. member contributed to the
appears to be project but not at
actively the required pace
working on the (refer to R6
project. above).
In between

R8: Students are unable to Students are It is not clearly demonstrated how the Students demonstrated It is clearly and effectively demonstrated
Demonstration demonstrate the project. unable to system will fulfills its functional the project in good how the system will fulfills all of its
Style demonstrate requirements. manner and explained functional requirements.
the project logically.
with clarity.
 FYP-I (Presentation + Demonstration) Final Evaluation Form
Project Title:________________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name and Registration#______________________________________________________________________

Student’ Name and Registration #______________________________________________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Analysis and Approach 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Correctness and Completeness
R2 5 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 Coding Standards 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 Quality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 Originality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 Timeline and Implementation Progress 5 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R7 Team Work 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R8 Demonstration Style 2
1 ☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________

Evaluator Name: ______________________________________ Signature with Date: ___________________________

 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP Design Expo Poster

Criteria 1 2
R1: Cluttered or Sloppy
Overall Appearance appearance. Gives the
impression of a solid mass
RULE: Use a light background color, of text & graphics, or
solid non-gradient fill pattern; 2 or 3 scattered and
font colors; dark text on light disconnected pieces.
background best. Impression of solid mass
White Space: Don’t create large, of text and graphics
monolithic blocks of text
Text / Graphics Balance: Too much text. An
overwhelming impression
of text only. OR Not
enough text. Cannot
understand what the
graphics are supposed to
3 4
In between Pleasant to look at. Pleasing In between
use of colors, text, and
graphics.
Some separation between
sections.
Balanced text & graphics
are evenly dispersed in the
poster. But there is not
enough text to explain
graphics.
5
Very pleasing to look at.
Particularly nice colors
& graphics.
WINNER: An effective visual
display of data… an “illustrated
abstract.”
Sections of the poster are
separated from one another
Text & graphics are evenly
dispersed in the poster. Enough
text used to explain the graphics.

R2: Cannot figure out how to In between Implicit flow used by In between Explicit numbering used or
Organization & Flow move through poster. making headings stand out columns used to indicate logical
(Methods, etc.) flow (top to bottom, then L to
RULE: Use headings in contrasting R)
color; use 3 or 4 column format for
flow.

R3: Can’t find. In between Present, but not explicit. In between Explicit. This includes headings
Research Objective / Project Buried at end of of “Objectives”, “Aims”,
Objectives “Introduction” or “Goals”, etc.
“Background.”
RULE: Tell readers why your work
Matters
R4: Cannot figure out In between Partial or incomplete. In between Complete. This includes design
Research Method / Development Not enough information to and development; tools
Methodology comprehend method and
 main variables in the study, technologies and methodologies
RULE: Tell reader about the design especially the outcome used in project development
and development; tools technologies variable.
and methodologies used in project
development
R5: Can’t find In between Present, but not explicit. In between Explicitly labeled. Uses
Results May be embedded in heading, e.g. “Main Points”,
RULE: Share just the main results monolithic blocks of text. “Conclusions”, “Results”
relevant to the research
objectives/aims.

R6: None In between Present, but not explicit. A In between Explicitly labeled. “Discussion”,
Discussion/Conclusion summary is given under the “Conclusions”, and “Implications”
/Recommendation “Conclusion.” No heading is used and stands out.
RULE: Interpret findings, summarize “Discussion” or
and recommend, what’s next… “Implication.”

19
 FYP Design Expo Poster Evaluation Form

Project Title:________________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name and Registration#______________________________________________________________________

Student’ Name and Registration #______________________________________________________________________

S. No Description Weight Marks

Performance
(1 – 5)
R1 Overall Appearance 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R2 Organization & Flow 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Research Objective / Project
R3
Objectives
2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Research Method /
R4
Development Methodology
2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R5 Results 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Discussion/Conclusion
R6 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
/Recommendation

Comments (Mandatory):

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluator Name: __________________________ Signature with Date: ______________________________

 Rubrics for Mid Evaluation of FYP (II) Report

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
R1: Project planning Project planning Project planning document is Project planning document is Project planning document is
System Structural document is not document is partially written however, scheduling written however, scheduling well written with clear
Design (Class and written. written with vague techniques like Gantt chart, techniques like Gantt chart, scheduling techniques and
Deployment, description. WBS is missing. WBS structure is not proper diagrams.
Diagrams) appropriate.

R2: Project management Project management Project management Project management Project management objectives
System Behavioral objectives are not objectives are poorly objectives are written objectives are written with are well written with
Design (Activity, written. written. however, assumptions and assumptions and project assumptions and project
Communication project constraints are not constraints however, further constraints.
and Sequence written. improvement is required.
Diagrams)
R3: Project risk Project risk Project risk management is Project risk management is Project risk management is
System Interfaces management is not management is written written however, no such written and risk management well written with techniques
written. in an ordinary way. technique for risk techniques are mentioned in used practically.
Only risk definitions management is used. document with less
are written. description of
implementation.
R4: System architecture System architecture is System architecture is System architecture is System architecture is included
System Physical is not included at all included but entirely included in ordinary way. included in good way. in excellent way. Architecture
Design (User, or vaguely stated. poor way. No Architecture design approach Architecture design approach design approach is stated and
Admin Tables) architecture design is stated. However, it is is stated and clear. Subsystem clear. Subsystem architecture is
approach is stated. missing the required details. architecture is also clear. also added in excellent way
Subsystem Subsystem architecture is also Functional description or
architecture is not not clear and missing few object oriented description is
mentioned. Neither important information. included along with required
functional description Functional description or diagrams. However, there is
nor object oriented object oriented description is still need to add more details
description is included; however, required and further improvements are
included. diagrams are missing. required.
R5: Functional modeling Functional modeling Functional modeling diagrams Functional modeling Functional modeling diagrams
System Functional diagrams i.e. ERD and diagrams are wrongly are not in proper standard diagrams are designed are well designed with no such
Modeling (ERD, DFD are missing in designed with vague structure. however, improvements can improvements required.
DFD) document. description. be made by restructuring
diagrams.
R6: A lot of spelling and Frequent spellings and Occasional spellings and Occasional spellings and Almost no spelling or
Language and grammatical grammatical errors grammatical errors. Writing is grammatical errors that have grammatical mistake.
Grammar mistakes in the report that impede the acceptable but not entirely only minor impact on flow of Writing is easy to read.
Writing is not reading flow. clear. reading. Writing is overall Excellent organization. Writing
understandable Writing is in need of clear. is concise yet all necessary
significant editing and Organization is good. content is included. Figures and
improvement. Content is supported by good tables support content.
number of figures and tables.
 FYP (II) Mid Review Report Evaluation Form
Project Title:_____________________________________________________________________________________

Student’s Name and Registration#__________________________________________________________________

Student’ Name and Registration #__________________________________________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 System Structural Design 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
System Behavioral Design
R2 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 System Interfaces 1 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 System Physical Design 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 System Functional Modeling 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 Language and Grammar 1
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory):

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluator Name: ______________________________________________ Signature with Date: ____________________________________

 Rubrics for Evaluation of Complete FYP Report

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
R1: Abstract is not Abstract is written in an Abstract provides a The abstract provides a good Abstract is excellently written
Abstract written or ordinary way. The reasonable description of overview of the project and according to the scientific writing
written in important results are not the project but can be results in two pages or less. standards and provides a good
a vague form clear to a reader who is improved. summary in two pages or less.
unfamiliar.
R2: Literature Ligature Review is Literature review The review provides a good Literature review is excellently
Literature Review, Review is not written in an ordinary provides a reasonable background and details of the written according to the
References written or way. The review material description of the project literature. However, it is not scientific writing standards and
written in a i.e. research papers or background and its written in scientific writing covers maximum of the research
vague form. web material is not at all significance but can be standards for review. papers/web material related to
clear to a reader who is improved. Number of project.
The list of unfamiliar. research papers/ web The list of references appears
references is material needs to be reasonable and citation follow A comprehensive list of
clearly The list of references added more. standard format. references is cited using a
inadequate. should be expanded. standard format.
The list of references
appears reasonable but
citation does not follow
standard format.
R3: Problem Problem statement is Problem statement is Problem statement is stated and Problem statement is stated and
Problem Statement statement is stated but not entirely stated but lacks covers necessary justification covers sufficient justification.
not stated at all clear. necessary justification in with reference to the literature New reader can clearly
or vaguely light of the literature review. understand its value and context.
stated. review.

R4: The approach Some aspects of the The methods, The methods, approaches, tools, The methods, approaches, tools,
Methodology taken to solve solution are discussed approaches, tools, techniques, algorithms, or other techniques, algorithms, or other
the problem is briefly but much of the techniques, algorithms, aspects of the solution are aspects of the solution are
not discussed. description is left out. or other aspects of the sufficiently discussed. sufficiently discussed with
solution are discussed sufficient details and supporting
but not is a convincing figures.
manner. Much is left to
the readers’ imagination.
R5: System System architecture is System architecture is System architecture is included System architecture is included
System Architecture architecture is included but entirely included in ordinary in good way. Architecture in excellent way. Architecture
not included at poor way. No way. Architecture design approach is stated and design approach is stated and
all or vaguely architecture design design approach is clear. Subsystem architecture is clear. Subsystem architecture is
stated. approach is stated. stated. However, it is also clear. Functional also added in excellent way.
Subsystem architecture missing the required description or object oriented Functional description or object
is not mentioned. details. Subsystem description is included along oriented description is included
Neither functional architecture is also not with required diagrams. along with required diagrams.
description nor object clear and missing few However, there is still need to There is no need for further
oriented description is important information. add more details and further Improvements.
included. Functional description improvements are required.
or object oriented
description is included;
however, required
diagrams are missing.
R6: System design is System design is System design is System design is included in System design is included in
Detailed System not included at included but entirely in included in ordinary good way. Low-level excellent way. Low-level
Design all or vaguely poor way. No low level way. Low-level components and Components and
stated. components and components and subcomponents are described subcomponents are described
Subcomponents are subcomponents are with adequate details. Also with very good details. Also
stated. Also class described but, it is class diagram and ER diagram class diagram and ER diagram
diagram and ER missing the required are good. Subcomponents are are drawn according to UML
diagrams are missing. details. Also class described according to software standards. Subcomponents are
diagram and ER diagram component attributes i.e. described according to software
are ordinary designed. classification, definition and component attributes i.e.
responsibilities etc. However, classification, definition and
does not cover all the ten responsibilities etc. And it
attributes. covers all the ten attributes.
R7: System System implementation System implementation System implementation is System implementation is
Implementation and implementation is included but entirely is included in ordinary added in good way and provides added in excellent way and
Testing and testing is not in poor way. Very little way. However, Testing all the necessary details for the provides all the necessary details
included at all or description is added. is not adequate enough reader. System testing is for the reader. System
vaguely stated. No system testing is to test the entire system. performed in good way. Various testing is performed in very good
performed. test cases are way. Various test cases
generated and details are are generated and details are
included however, further included. No further
improvements are required improvements are required
regarding the number and regarding the number and quality
quality of test cases. of test cases.

25
R8:
Reports / Results Results and Results and Evaluation Results and Evaluation of Results and Evaluation of the A comprehensive evaluation of
evaluation of the of the solution are briefly the solution are discussed solution are discussed with the solution is presented with
solution are not discussed without with few supporting supporting figures and graphics. supporting figures and graphics.
provided. supporting figures and figures and graphics.
graphics.

R9: User manual is User manual is poorly User manual is ordinary User manual is written well User manual is excellently
User Manual not written or written with very less written with usage however, improvement maybe written with detailed information
vaguely written. information of system information. Some of the required. of system usage.
usage. errors are there and
should be removed.

R10: Conclusion does Essential project results Conclusions are largely Most important results and Conclusions provide a succinct
Conclusion / Future not present the are not clearly stated. qualitative rather than contribution are presented. summary of all essential results.
Work essential project Recommendation for quantitative. The Strengths and limitations of the Results are summarized
contribution and future work is discussion of strengths final design are discussed. quantitatively as well as
results. No incomplete. and limitation could be Some cost information is qualitatively. The discussion of
recommendation expanded. included. strengths and limitations is
for follow-up Recommendations for A good set of recommendations insightful and objective. Useful
work given. future work are given but for future work is provided. final cost information is provided.
not clearly thought-out. Reflections on the design process
are included.
R11: A lot of spelling Frequent spellings and Occasional spellings and Occasional spellings and Almost no spelling or
Language, and grammatical grammatical errors that grammatical errors. grammatical errors that have only grammatical mistake.
Grammar and mistakes in the impede the reading flow. Writing is acceptable but minor impact on flow of reading. Writing is easy to read. Excellent
Formatting Style report Writing is Writing is in need of not entirely clear. Writing is overall clear. organization. Writing is concise
not significant editing and Organization is good. Content is yet all necessary content is
understandable improvement. supported by good number of included. Figures and tables
figures and tables. support content.

26
 Evaluation Form for Complete FYP Report
Project Title:________________________________________________________________________________________
Student’s Name and Registration#______________________________________________________________________
Student’ Name and Registration #______________________________________________________________________
Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Abstract 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R2 Literature Review, References 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

R3 2
Problem Statement 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 Methodology 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 2
System Architecture
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 2
Detailed System Design
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R7 3
Implementation and Testing
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R8 3
Reports / Results
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R9 3
User Manual
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R10 2
Conclusion / Future Work
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R11 2
Language, Grammar and Formatting
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory): ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Evaluator Name: _ _______ Signature with Date: _ _________________

27
 Rubrics for Evaluation of FYP Final Evaluation (Presentation + Demonstration)

Criteria 1 2 3 4 5
Unable to plan and set objectives Adequate analysis of the project. Complete analysis of the project has
R1: for the realization of the project. Objectives have been set, but strategies been done. Objectives have been set.
Analysis and In between to follow are not clearly stated. In between Strategies to follow have been defined.
Approach Correct approach to solve the
project is not followed. Approach taken to solve the problem is Approach taken to solve the problem
satisfactory. has been chosen after thorough
analysis.
R2: The system failed to produce the The system execution led to inaccurate The system was correctly functional and
Correctness right accurate results. or incomplete results. It was not all of the features were implemented.
and In between correctly functional or not all the In between It was demonstrated how the real world
Completeness features were implemented. problem was solved.

R3: Coding standards, best In between Coding standards, best programming In between Coding standards, best programming
Coding programming practices are not practices are rarely followed. practices are followed extensively.
Standards followed. Students cannot
understand the code.
R4: Student is unaware of System’s In between Some of the system’s non-functional In between All of the system’s non- functional
Quality non- functional requirements requirements are demonstrated. requirements are clearly demonstrated.

28
R5: Most part of the working product In between Working product has some potential for In between Working product has several creative
Originality is copied. making a creative contribution. /original /inventive /innovative elements
and a clear potential for making a
creative contribution.
R6: Students are unaware of modern In between Students have little knowledge of In between Students have excellent knowledge of
Modern Tool software engineering tools that are computer added software engineering computer added software engineering
Usage to be used in development. tools with vague description. tools with strong justification of usage.

Timeline as defined in the project All milestones are completed

R7: Timeline as defined in the project
proposal is not followed. according to the timeline defined in
Timeline and proposal is followed for the most part.
In between In between project proposal.
Implementation Milestones have not been achieved.
Progress (100 % Some of the milestones have been
complete) achieved

R8: Only one member appears to be Not all members have contributed to the All members contributed.
Team work actively working on the project. In between project. Work division is not clearly In between
mentioned. Work division clearly mentioned

29
 FYP Final Evaluation Form (Presentation + Demonstration)
Project Title:___________________________________________________________________________________________

Student Name: __________________________________ Student Name: _________________________________________

Student Registration #: ___________________________ Student Registration #: __________________________________

Performance
S No Description Weight Marks
(1 – 5)
R1 Analysis and Approach 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
Correctness and Completeness
R2 5 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R3 Coding Standards 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R4 Quality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R5 Originality 2 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R6 Modern Tools Usage 2 ☐
R7 Timeline and Implementation Progress 13 1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐
R8 Team Work 2
1☐ 2 ☐ 3☐ 4 ☐ 5☐

Comments (Mandatory): _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________

Evaluator Name: ________________________________________ Signature with Date: ___________________________________________

30
 PROJECT EVALUATION FORM (Open House)

Project Name Table #

Performance Marks
S No Description Weight
(0 – 10 )
How well does the project solve an
1
Industry/social/local problem? 2 Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐

2 Quality of the System level design work?

3 Commercialization potential of the project
DEMONSTRATION
How well are the interactions between Software
4 & Hardware defined and implemented?
1 Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐
2 Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐
Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐
1

POSTER
5 1 Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐
Creativity, Clarity, layout
END PRODUCT QUALITY
H/W Projects: Physical Design, Finishing Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐
6 2
S/W Projects: UI Design, Completeness
Research Project: Results, Completeness
Did the student understand and answer your
7 questions completely and appropriately? 1 Fail ☐ Below Average ☐ Average ☐ Good ☐ Excellent ☐

Name (judge) Company Signature (with Date)

Comments

31