Practical Project Assessment Criteria and Information

The PH4T003 practical project assessment criteria consists of both a supervisors

report (40%) overall which comprises a supervisor mark (weighting 25%) and mark
for keeping a lab book (15%) and your project output (report/poster./presentation)
which will comprise 60% of the total project mark

Supervisor’s report

As part of the project assessment your supervisor will provide a report that addresses the
following main themes and will also comprise an assessment of your laboratory notebook.

1. Science Knowledge of Topic

2. Response to Suggestions/Advice/Criticism from Supervisor.
3. Originality and Initiative.
4. Motivation/Engagement,
5. Actual work Undertaken, Independence & Persistence.
6. Observed Precision & Practical Skill (Attended all laboratory sessions and successfully
completed investigations).
7. Awareness & Application of H&S within Lab Environment, and appropriate Clean-up of
Laboratory Work Space upon Completion.
8 Record keeping and maintaining a lab workbook

The above takes into account general achievements within your research project; such as:
a) Theoretical basis of the project (ie your chemistry knowledge while undertaking
research project).
b) Response to suggestions/advice/criticism from your supervisor.
c) Originality, your own suggestions and initiatives within your research.
Independence. It is essential that your supervisor is kept aware of your intentions and
progress from week to week but it is also important that you should make some decisions on
your own (however do not attempt any practical work without your supervisor’s agreement).
Remember that it is your project, always ask when help or advice is required, but do not
expect to be given the answer every time. Problems will arise and you will be expected to try
to overcome them.
Persistence in the face of difficulties. Don’t expect everything to work perfectly the first time
you try it. Research just doesn’t work like that.

1
d) Practical-based work, Your ability and effort within your research project, which has
been observed by your supervisor.
e) Operating and working safely throughout the duration of your research project. The
appropriate clean-up of laboratory work space upon overall completion of research.
f) Keeping an up-to-date LABORATORY NOTEBOOK (i.e. your workbook) of your
research. This should contain individual experiment information, observations, results, etc.
Similar procedures apply in industry.

Practical Workbook - Laboratory Notebook

Must be hand-written and all information must be kept within a single notebook. Your
supervisor will sign your workbook at the end of each laboratory session. A final copy
must be scanned and submitted online for assessment

For general guidance on how to keep a laboratory notebook please read the following:

What makes an experiment a genuine work of science? An experimental procedure?

Experimental observations? Maybe. But procedures and observations become useful (and
interesting) to scientists only when both can be described with enough detail and precision to
allow another scientist to repeat the full experiment.

Why keep a lab book?

There are a number of extremely good reasons for keeping a suitably detailed and robust lab
book. Some of the most important of these are:

Experiments may take months or years to complete, and analysing data and writing up your
results is impossible without decent records. You will never remember all the critical details
without a written record. Indeed, you often don’t find out what the critical points are until well
after an experiment has been finished.

On occasion very significant amounts of prestige or money can be involved in who did what
and when. For this reason lab books are legal documents of record and in industry it is
very common for lab books to be counter signed by your supervisor every week to set
up a well defined paper trail.

Both industrial and academic research projects are often carried out in large teams. People
leave projects, go on holiday, have accidents, equipment fails etc. For this reason a
permanent record of work done, experimental details, operating procedures etc need to be
available, and, most critically, be understandable to other people.

Lastly, on a more personal level, your lab book will be assessed and your degree results will
to some extent depend on how well your lab book is kept.

2
 What Should a Lab Book Look Like?

Complete The lab book should contain everything, including the mistakes. If something is
wrong, cross it out in a way that still lets you read it.

Tough No loose papers, graphs etc. Securely glue, tape, or staple things in. In a real lab
environment expect to have your lab book dropped, kicked, used to prop up equipment,
stained with coffee and so on.

Clear The lab book doesn’t have to be pretty, but it must be legible and contain sufficient
detail (headings, figure captions, table titles, units etc) to make the contents understandable
years later.

True The lab book is a record of what you see and do. Don’t embellish it, don’t draw plots of
raw data the way you think they should look, draw them the way they are. Don’t throw away
“bad” points and things which don’t appear to agree with theory at the time.

What should a Lab Book Contain?

Your lab notebook should contain the descriptions of your experimental procedures and
observations. It is a formal record of your lab work. As a minimum it must contain the
following fundamental pieces of information for each experiment:

 A complete description of the procedure that you actually performed

 A full account of the observations that you actually made

 Whatever information is needed to work safely and efficiently with each substance that you
handle. This information includes instructions on how to handle and dispose of substances
safely.

 Any calculations (e.g., of yields etc) and any characterisation data and assignments of
your products or starting materials.

Each experiment should begin on a new page, and should contain the following entries in
the following sequence:

1. Date - Title of Experiment

2. Aim of the session

3. Chemical/Reaction Equation (if appropriate)

3
4. Information about the Compounds Used (if appropriate):
i) table of physical properties
ii) list of relevant hazards and any instructions for safe handling (this is usually given in your
practical manual
iii) desired amounts

5. Dated (if carried out over different days), Detailed Description of Procedures &
Observations

6. Calculations (rough in preparation for your reports) and all data.

Practical Workbook - Laboratory Notebook : Sample Entry

The following gives a BASIC example of what your lab notebook might look like. Some of
these items can be entered before the practical session, while others (dated entries) must be
entered during and after lab.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: 2/3/2021
Synthesis of 1,2-Dibromocyclohexane from Cyclohexene using Different Solvents

adapted from Organic Syntheses, Coll. II, p. 171

Name Physic Safety Hazards

al
propert
y
cyclohexane liquid flammable
Br2 water liquid irritant/use in fumehood
trans-1,2-dibromocyclohexane liquid
carcinogenic/use in
fumehood/halogenated
CCl4 solvent waste
EtOH solvent Flammable

Monday 2/3/2021

4
Reaction 1 using CCl4 as Solvent

Set up a 2 L, 3-necked round bottom flask with a 500 mL dropping funnel, mechanical stirrer,
and thermometer.
Weighed 119.04 g of cyclohexene into a beaker and dissolved in ~300 mL of CCl4.
Added mxture to the 2 L flask and cooled to –5 oC (ice-salt).
Dissolved Br2 (67 mL) in 145 mL CCl4 and slowly added to the cyclohexane with stirring
(addition time 1:30 pm to 4:25 pm, kept temp below –1 oC at all times).

The initial orange solution turned brown in colour.

Left reaction to stand overnight in fumehood.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tuesday 2/3/2021
Transferred mixture to a 1 L Claisen flask and removed solvent by distillation (bp 75-80 oC).

Obtained a brown thick goo.

Distilled the brown residue under vacuum (bp 99-103 oC at 16 mm Hg).
The product was a colourless oil.

Wight of RB flask = 52.45 g

Weight of flask and product = 55.46 g
Weight of product = 3.01 g

Stored product in sample vial overnight.

Calculation of Yield:
[SHOW WORKING OF YOUR CALCULATION HERE]

Obtained 96% yield.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wednesday 4/3/2021
TLC of product (5:1 hexane: EtOAc, silica gel) shows only one spot.

[tape in your TLC plate or draw a reproduction HERE]

300 MHz NMR (CDCl3, AJS-01a) consistent with trans product stereochemistry.

5
[summarise all signals/assignments here and attach raw spectra either here or in the
back of the manual]

6
Project Output
Alongside your supervisor’s report – you must also present your project via your choice of
Formal Report/ Poster/Presentation

Formal Written Report

The Project report should NOT exceed 8 pages of typescript, double spaced (N.B. the 8
pages do not include data tables, graphs, charts, figures, pictures, diagrams, appendices,
etc), with font size approximately 12.
Remember 8 pages is a maximum (around 2000 words – this does not include title
page/abstract/references or appendices).

The report must be typed (double spacing) on A4 paper on one side only with a 1½ inch (4.0
cm) left hand margin and 1 inch (2.5 cm) right hand margin. If you wish to include large-
scale or superfluous diagrams (e.g. spectra), they should be placed within an Appendix.

Keep in mind, throughout the report, the tremendous virtues of good illustrations including
tables, schematic diagrams, graphs etc. In many projects there is NO substitute for a
schematic diagram showing how "bits and pieces" are interrelated, together with a clear
verbal description.

Report - Structure.
The following structure is a guide:

a) Title Page. This should give the title, your name, the supervisor’s name,
this institution, the period of time that the work was carried out and the qualification sought.
That is a statement like, “carried out in part fulfilment for the requirements for the award of
BSc (Hons) Chemistry”.

b) Abstract. This is best written after the report has been written, and
should set out concisely in about 100 - 200 words the objectives of the project, the
techniques that were used (if appropriate) and the major results and conclusions. It should
be single spaced (as opposed to the rest of the content which should be double spaced).
This is perhaps the most important part of the work since most examiners will read this first.
It should therefore give an accurate and positive impression of the work that is to follow.

c) Symbol and Abbreviation List (if applicable). Try to ensure that it is complete and
in alphabetical order with units.

e) Introduction. The main purpose of an introduction is to set the work to be

described in its wider context and also to outline its objective. It should also include a brief
review of previous work in the field. The introduction will normally end with a statement of
objectives with emphasis on where these are different from, or go further than, previous
work. It should give the examiners a clear view of the problem, the methods to be used in
the problem’s solution and the problem’s significance set in the context of the past literature.

7
Be aware of the University’s attitude to the sin of plagiarism and the law of copyright. It can
be very tempting to use other people’s work verbatim, please resist! Quotations should be in
inverted commas and referenced – used sparingly and only when it is not appropriate to re-
write in your own words!
You should cite your sources of information throughout, using the form given below in
the section on references.
f) Results and discussion. Make sure you make it very clear what is your work and what is
the work of others (by referencing it). Also remember to be concise. You are advised to
resist the temptation to reduce the apparent length of the main report by putting in a
reference to an Appendix and thus carrying on the main theme there. Try to ensure that the
Main Report is self -contained and that there is continuity from the start of the introduction to
the end of the conclusions.
g) Methodology/Experimental. This should contain some general information, for example
the spectrometers used, the method for IR spectra, e.g. Nujol mulls throughout. It should
also contain enough detail for another scientist to repeat all the experiments. Formal styles
have developed for the description of experiments - see any paper. Also CHECK WITH
YOUR SUPERVISOR.
h) Conclusions and Future Work. This section should start with a statement on how well
the objectives stated in the Introduction have been met and also any general lessons which
can be learned from the work. If relevant, it is common to include recommendations for or
against further work.
i) References and Bibliography (not part f word count). A References chapter lists
specific sources of data, ideas or information. A Bibliography is a list of books etc, which
you have found generally useful and can be put underneath the references.

For a research project, your main source of references should be scientific journals and
scientific textbooks, which are all per reviewed. Wikipedia or other non-peer reviewed
sources are not acceptable. This is important - see the marking scheme at the end. If you
access a journal via Web of Science, you should reference the journal and not the webpage.

References are numbered consecutively in order of appearance in the text – they are
identified by Arabic numerals in parentheses (1), square brackets [1], superscript1, or a
combination[1]. Most chemistry journals use superscripts without brackets.

Within our department we use numeric referencing (and NOT Harvard referencing).
For more / specific information please refer to the following USW publication;
“The University of South Wales Guide to Numeric Referencing Using Royal Society of
Chemistry style” which can be found on Blackboard within the Learning Materials
section of this module.

As illustrated by “The University of South Wales Guide to Numeric Referencing Using Royal
Society of Chemistry style”, the expected reference format is :-
I. Craciun, M-F. Reyniers and G.B. Marin, J. Catal., 2012, 294, 136-150
(J. Catal. Is the abbreviated title of the journal (in italics), 2012 is the year, 294 is the volume
(in bold), and 136-150 are the page numbers).

j) Appendices (if necessary). These will generally contain mathematical proofs, fine
details of apparatus, computer programs, experimental spectra and analysis, etc.

8
 Oral Presentation

Students choosing this method of assessment will be required to

1) Submit an abstract (when presenting at a conference all presenters need to provide an
abstract of the presentation to go in the conference proceedings)
2) Submit a formally written summary of an experimental/references and any other information
(e.g., appendices) to support their presentation – this can be combined with the Abstract
above for submission purposes.
(the above are weighted at 20% of the project mark)
3) Give a 15 minute oral presentation to an audience of academics and other students
(this is weighted at 40% of the project mark)

The presentation should cover the following:

Title slide This should give the title, your name, the supervisor’s name.
Overview of presentation - this should outline what you are going to present and the order in
which you will do so, e.g.,
Aim of project
Why is the project necessary? (Context/Introduction)
What is already known? (Background)
What did you do and why (Experimental – but brief as you will be submitting a written
experimental section)
What did you discover (Results)
What do the results mean (Discussion)
Conclusion and future direction (if appropriate)
Acknowledgements

At the end of your presentation you will be asked questions by members of staff and
students – you will also be assessed on how you answer these (in addition to your
presentation skills)

Throughout your slides you should include reference citations but these will be submitted in
the same document as the experimental details.

There is a lot of supporting information on Blackboard to help you with designing and writing
your presentation. Please also refer to the outline of the Formal written report for help in
what to include in each section.

9
 Poster Presentation

Students choosing this method of assessment will be required to

1) Submit an abstract (when presenting a poster at a conference all presenters need to provide
an abstract of the poster to go in the conference proceedings)
2) Submit a formally written summary of an experimental/references and any other information
(e.g., appendices) to support their poster – this can be combined with the Abstract above for
submission purposes.
(the above are weighted at 20% of the project mark)
3) Produce a scientific poster (no more than 2000 words) and present it in a poster session to
an audience of academics and other students.
(this is weighted at 40% of the project mark)

The poster should comprise the following:

Title This should give the title, your name, the supervisor’s name, institution where the
work was performed.
Aim of project
Introduction/Background
Experimental (– but brief as you will be submitting a written experimental section)
Results
Discussion
Conclusion and future direction (if appropriate)
Acknowledgements

Throughout your poster you should include reference citations but the actual references will
be submitted in the same document as the Abstract/Experimental details.

During the poster presentation session you will be asked questions by and assessed on your
responses to questions by academic staff.

There is a lot of supporting information on Blackboard to help you with designing your
poster. Please also refer to the outline of the Formal written report for help in what to
include in each section.

10
Checklist of assessments

Supervisors report – to be written by project supervisor

Laboratory notebook – to be scanned and submitted by student via Blackboard – assessed
by supervisor

Choice of

Formal Written Report – to be submitted on Blackboard – assessed by Supervisor and

second marked

or

Formal Oral Presentation

a) Abstract to be written and submitted on Blackboard – assessed by Supervisor
b) Full experimental/references/and (if used) appendix written and submitted on
Blackboard – assessed by supervisor
c) Oral presentation given (15 minutes + questions) to staff and students – assessed by
all staff attending the oral presentations

or

Formal Poster Presentation

a) Abstract to be written and submitted on Blackboard – assessed by Supervisor
b) Full experimental/references/and (if used) appendix written and submitted on
Blackboard – assessed by supervisor
c) Poster presented and defended to staff and students – assessed by all staff
attending the poster presentations

11
Marking Schemes

Supervisors Report: Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Marking criteria Circle appropriate mark

Science Knowledge of Topic. Non-Submission 0

Unsatisfactory 3,6
Comments :- Poor 9 , 10½
Pass (low) 12 , 13½
Pass (high) 15 , 16½
Merit 18 , 19½
Distinction – Excellent 21 , 24
Distinction – Exceptional 27 , 30
(30%) Mark =
Response to Suggestions/Advice/Criticism from Non-Submission 0
Supervisor. Unsatisfactory 1½ , 3
Poor 4½ , 5¼
Comments :- Pass (low) 6 , 6¾
Pass (high) 7½ , 8¼
Merit 9 , 9¾
Distinction – Excellent 10½ , 12
Distinction – Exceptional 13½ , 15
(15%) Mark =
Originality and Initiative. Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Comments :- Poor 3 , 3½
3rd (Pass) 4 , 4½
2.2 5 , 5½
2.1 6 , 6½
1st – Excellent 7,8
1st – Exceptional 9 , 10
(10%) Mark =
(Effort) Motivation/Engagement, Actual Research Non-Submission 0
Undertaken, Independence & Persistence. Unsatisfactory 2,4
Poor 6,7
Comments :- Pass (low) 8,9
Pass (high) 10 , 11
Merit 12 , 13
Distinction – Excellent 14 , 16
Distinction – Exceptional 18 , 20
(20%) Mark =
(Ability) Observed Precision & Practical Skill. Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1½ , 3

12
Comments :- Poor 4½ , 5¼
Pass (low) 6 , 6¾
Pass (high) 7½ , 8¼
Merit 9 , 9¾
Distinction – Excellent 10½ , 12
Distinction – Exceptional 13½ , 15
(15%) Mark =
Awareness & Application of H&S within Lab Non-Submission 0
Environment, and appropriate Clean-up of Unsatisfactory 1,2
Laboratory Work Space upon Completion.
Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Comments :-
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(10%) Mark =
Name of Marker:
Total Marks: /100
Date:
%:

13
LABORATORY NOTEBOOK : Mark Scheme
Student Name:

Criteria Circle appropriate mark …

Notebook entries kept up-to-date and shown to Non-Submission 0

Project Supervisor on a weekly basis. Unsatisfactory 1,2
Poor 3 , 3½
Comments :- Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(16.7%) Mark =
Originality and Legibility of Notebook Non-Submission 0
(maintained to level expected, pages dated, Unsatisfactory 1,2
clear layout etc)
Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Comments :-
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(16.7%) Mark =
Relevance of Entries, Comprehensiveness Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 3,6
Comments :- Poor 9 , 10½
Pass (low) 12 , 13½
Pass (high) 15 , 16½
Merit 18 , 19½
Distinction – Excellent 21 , 24
Distinction – Exceptional 27 , 30
(50%) Mark =
Evidence of Data Evaluation/Data Summation Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Comments :- Pass (low) 3 , 3½
Pass (high) 4 , 4½
Merit 5 , 5½
Distinction – Excellent 6 , 6½
Distinction – Exceptional 7,8
Pass (low) 9 , 10
(16.7%) Mark =

Name of Marker: Total Marks: /60

Date: %:

14
Oral Presentation: Presentation Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Marking Criteria Circle appropriate mark …

1. Professional appearance and overall manner Non-Submission 0

Professional, smart ‘job interview’ or ‘science Unsatisfactory 1,2
conference’ like appearance (ie how student is Poor 3 , 3½
dressed).
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Efficient manner in setting up electronic presentation
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
slides.
Merit 6 , 6½
Speaking in a professional manner to academic
members of staff during student’s own presentation Distinction – Excellent 7,8
slot (i.e. lack of familiarity). Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
2. Speak clearly / confidently, while providing a Non-Submission 0
Scientific Conference Level presentation Unsatisfactory 1,2
Quality of diagrams, tables, data, other presented Poor 3 , 3½
information.
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Quality of scientific terminology spoken.
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Logical flow, clarity and completeness of presentation.
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
3. Engage with individual Slides, and Audience Non-Submission 0
Specific reference to / interaction with individual slides Unsatisfactory 1,2
throughout presentation. Poor 3 , 3½
Appropriate interaction with audience. Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
Comments

P.T.O.

15
4. Introduction Non-Submission 0
Good Understanding of Topic/Project and Putting into Unsatisfactory 1,2
Context (well researched background to the Poor 3 , 3½
project/problem).
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
5. Results and Discussion Non-Submission 0
Outcomes clearly relayed and summarised and their Unsatisfactory 1,2
importance, relevance and context within the wider Poor 3 , 3½
realm of science discussed.
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
6. Conclusions Non-Submission 0
What learned from the work, and what further work Unsatisfactory 1,2
needs to be done. Poor 3 , 3½
A brief discussion of reliability and or significance of Pass (low) 4 , 4½
results.
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
7. Ability to Answer Questions Non-Submission 0
Demonstrate knowledge when asked subject specific Unsatisfactory 1,2
questions. Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
Comments

Name of Marker:
Total Marks: /70
Date:
%:

16
Oral Presentation: Abstract and Experimental/References Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Criteria … Circle appropriate mark …

Abstract: Concise summary of presentation given (no more Non-Submission 0

than 200 words).
Unsatisfactory 2,4
Poor 6,7
Comments :-
Pass (low) 8,9
Pass (high) 10 , 11
Merit 12 , 13
Distinction – Excellent 14 , 16
Distinction – Exceptional 18 , 20

(40%) Mark =

Methodology/Experimental: Description & Justification of Non-Submission 0

Techniques that supported the project (and appendix if
Unsatisfactory 2,4
needed.
Poor 6,7

All information provided (weights volumes, instruments, Pass (low) 8,9

apparatus, method used etc) and clear scientific Pass (high) 10 , 11
terminology used.
Merit 12 , 13
Distinction – Excellent 14 , 16
Comments :-
Distinction – Exceptional 18 , 20

(40%) Mark =

Bibliography/references Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Provided in expected format – all fully refereed. Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Comments :- Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10

(20%) Mark =

Name of Marker:
Total Marks: /50
Date:
%:

17
Formal Written Report: Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Criteria … Circle appropriate mark …

Abstract & Introduction : Providing the literature Non-Submission 0

background related to the project ie reading around and Unsatisfactory 1½ , 3
understanding of topic (+ use of associated references).
Poor 4½ , 5¼
Pass (low) 6 , 6¾
Comments :-
Pass (high) 7½ , 8¼
Merit 9 , 9¾
Distinction – Excellent 10½ , 12
Distinction – Exceptional 13½ , 15
(15%) Mark =
Results : Presentation and Interpretation/Discussion. Non-Submission 0
Provide evaluation of the experimental Unsatisfactory 3,6
method/outcomes for your project. Poor 9 , 10½
Pass (low) 12 , 13½
Comments :- Pass (high) 15 , 16½
Merit 18 , 19½
Distinction – Excellent 21 , 24
Distinction – Exceptional 27 , 30
(30%) Mark =
Conclusions & Future Work. Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1½ , 3
Comments :- Poor 4½ , 5¼
Pass (low) 6 , 6¾
Pass (high) 7½ , 8¼
Merit 9 , 9¾
Distinction – Excellent 10½ , 12
Distinction – Exceptional 13½ , 15
(15%) Mark =
Methodology/Experimental Procedures : Description & Non-Submission 0
Justification of Techniques. Unsatisfactory 1½ , 3
Poor 4½ , 5¼
Comments :- Pass (low) 6 , 6¾
Pass (high) 7½ , 8¼
Merit 9 , 9¾
Distinction – Excellent 10½ , 12
Distinction – Exceptional 13½ , 15
(15%) Mark =
(Format) Appropriate use of Title Page, Contents / Non-Submission 0
Symbol List, References / Bibliography, Appendices. Unsatisfactory ½,1
Poor 1½

18
Comments :- Pass (low) 2
Pass (high) 2½
Merit 3
Distinction – Excellent 3½ , 4
Distinction – Exceptional 4½ , 5
(5%) Mark =
(Format) Overall Structure & Presentation. Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Comments :- Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(10%) Mark =
Overall Scientific Content (ie ability to write a complete Non-Submission 0
scientific report). Unsatisfactory 1,2
Poor 3 , 3½
Comments :- Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(10%) Mark =

Name of Marker: Total Marks: /100

Date: %:

19
Poster Presentation: Poster Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Marking Criteria Circle appropriate mark …

1. Professional eye-catching poster with all expected Non-Submission 0

sections present Unsatisfactory 1,2
Excellent professional design with suitable font Poor 3 , 3½
styles and sizes. Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Format very pleasing to eye and attracted Pass (high) 5 , 5½
audience. Merit 6 , 6½
All sections present (Title/introduction and or Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Background/Aims/Brief Experimental/Results/ Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
Discussion/Conclusion/Acknowledgments (14.3%) Mark =
2. Professional appearance of presenter and overall Non-Submission 0
manner Unsatisfactory 1,2
Professional, smart ‘job interview’ or ‘science Poor 3 , 3½
conference’ like appearance (ie how student is dressed).
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Appropriate interaction with audience (encouraged to
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
look at poster).
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
3. Speak clearly / confidently, while presenting a Non-Submission 0
Scientific Conference Level poster Unsatisfactory 1,2
Quality of scientific terminology used when presenting Poor 3 , 3½
poster (as opposed to that written in poster).
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Speaking in a professional manner to academic
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
members of staff when showcasing poster
Merit 6 , 6½
Logical flow, clarity and completeness of presentation of
poster (knew poster contents and could direct to/point to Distinction – Excellent 7,8
different parts when needed while speaking). Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
Comments

P.T.O.

20
4. Introduction/Background/Aims Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Successful in conveying aim(s) Poor 3 , 3½
Good Understanding of Topic/Project conveyed and Pass (low) 4 , 4½
the study put into context (well researched background Pass (high) 5 , 5½
to the project/problem).
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
5. Results and Discussion Non-Submission 0
Outcomes clearly relayed and summarised and their Unsatisfactory 1,2
importance, relevance and context within the wider Poor 3 , 3½
realm of science highlighted.
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Appropriate and clear choice of
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
diagrams/tables/figures to relay findings
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
6. Conclusions Non-Submission 0
Conclusions clearly relayed and/or scope for future Unsatisfactory 1,2
work Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
7. Ability to Knowledgeably Discuss poster and Non-Submission 0
Answer Questions Unsatisfactory 1,2
Engaged with staff in discussions actively and Poor 3 , 3½
enthusiastically and answered all questions Pass (low) 4 , 4½
correctly.
Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10
(14.3%) Mark =
Comments

Name of Marker:
Total Marks: /70
Date:
%:

21
Poster Presentation: Abstract and Experimental/References Mark Scheme

Student Name:

Criteria … Circle appropriate mark …

Abstract: Concise summary of presentation given (no more Non-Submission 0

than 200 words).
Unsatisfactory 2,4
Poor 6,7
Comments :-
Pass (low) 8,9
Pass (high) 10 , 11
Merit 12 , 13
Distinction – Excellent 14 , 16
Distinction – Exceptional 18 , 20

(40%) Mark =

Methodology/Experimental: Description & Justification of Non-Submission 0

Techniques that supported the project (and appendix if
Unsatisfactory 2,4
needed.
Poor 6,7

All information provided (weights volumes, instruments, Pass (low) 8,9

apparatus, method used etc) and clear scientific Pass (high) 10 , 11
terminology used.
Merit 12 , 13
Distinction – Excellent 14 , 16
Comments :-
Distinction – Exceptional 18 , 20

(40%) Mark =

Bibliography/references Non-Submission 0
Unsatisfactory 1,2
Provided in expected format – all fully refereed. Poor 3 , 3½
Pass (low) 4 , 4½
Comments :- Pass (high) 5 , 5½
Merit 6 , 6½
Distinction – Excellent 7,8
Distinction – Exceptional 9 , 10

(20%) Mark =

Name of Marker:
Total Marks: /50
Date:
%:

22
23
Marking Guidance Grid : For use against selected criteria for all project outputs with logical adaptation to the media

Unsatisfactor Distinction– Distinction -

Poor Pass 1) Pass 2 Merit
y Excellent Exceptional
(30% , 35%) (40% , 45%) (50% , 55%) (60% , 65%)
(10% , 20%) (70% , 80%) (90% , 100%)

Weak Poor (in Abstract is Reasonable Detailed Excellent Outstanding

(unconcise) concise) very limited abstract. abstract. abstract. abstract and
abstract. Weak abstract. Poor summary of Reasonable Detailed Excellent literature
account of account of study. Limited account of description of account of analysis
project project account of project project project noted, that is a
background background project background background background common
and objectives and objectives background and objectives and objectives and objectives feature of
* Abstract & provided. provided. Poor and objectives provided. provided. provided. articles in
Introduction None or literature provided. Reasonable Detailed Excellent scientific
inappropriate outcomes, Limited literature literature literature journals.
literature including no literature outcomes, outcomes, outcomes,
outcomes, authentic discussed, including including including
including no references. including authentic authentic authentic
authentic authentic references. references. references.
references. references.

* Results & No evidence Interpretation Limited Reasonably Clear A coherent Exceptional

Outcomes that results / of results / understanding clear understanding analysis of results and
outcomes outcomes of project understanding of research results / outcomes, and
were flawed and objectives, of project objectives, outcomes. the quality of
understood at their with very objectives, with correct Clear work is as
all. importance in general with generally interpretation understanding such that it
the wider discussion of sound of results and of how results can be
context is results with discussion of their fit into the submitted for
misunderstood some results. importance in wider context publication.
. misunderstand the wider of the project. Interpretation
ings. context of the of outcomes

24
 project. stimulating
i.e., thought
provoking.

No useful Poorly Very general Reasonably Conclusions Excellent Outstanding

conclusion i.e. presented conclusion presented were well description of summary of
no ability to conclusion covering some conclusion, justified, with conclusions study and
conduct data with no of the research covering most very little room and very novel
analysis. meaningful work and a of the research for creative suggestions
* Conclusions & discussion of proposal for work and a improvement. suggestions for the future
Future Work future work. future work in proposal for for future work. work.
the light of the future work in
research the light of the
conducted. research
conducted.

Weak account Poor account Limited Reasonable Detailed Excellent An

of of account of account of description of account of outstanding /
methodologies methodologies methodologies methodologies methodologies methodologies comprehensiv
/ experimental / experimental / experimental / experimental / experimental / experimental e description
procedures procedures procedures procedures procedures procedures of
* Methodologies provided, provided, provided, provided, provided, provided, methodologies
/ Experimental including no including a including some including some including good including and
Procedures description weak description description description detailed justification for
(and description (and (and (and description adopted
justification) of (and justification) of justification) of justification) of (and protocols
techniques. justification) of techniques. techniques. techniques. justification) of (virtually
techniques. techniques. nothing is
omitted).

* (Format) Incorrect title, Vague title Title clear but Format in All sections Clear title, Exceptional
Appropriate use disappointing with poorly other sections general well presented abbreviation format /
of Title page, … abbreviation, presented riddled with a accurate few with minor and reference shining

25
 bibliography abbreviations, few spelling / errors omission of sections example which
and bibliography grammatical identified but related format correct. could be used
appendices and errors, and still needs information All appendices as an
sections. appendices. minor omission further from specific contain exemplar for
Significant of related improvement. sections. relevant future science
omission of information information for students.
relevant from specific the reader.
information sections was
from these noted.
sections.

No coherent Poorly A few Reasonably Logical and Correctly and Outstanding,

structure and structured and deficiencies well structured well-structured accurately logical and
completely narrated noted in but with clear with minor presented coherent
incomprehensi leading to structure. need for need for report. Well- presentation of
* (Format) ble. confusion to Significant improvement. improvement. presented scientific study
Overall Disappointing the reader. errors in Clear tables numerical (exemplar
Structure & A few errors in
presentation Frequent tables, figures and figures data. work).
Presentation tables, figures
riddled with errors in or structures. followed by
(general look) or structures.
errors in figures and good analysis.
figures and tables noted,
tables. captions
incorrect.

* Overall Unsatisfactory Below average Limited ability Reasonable Good ability to Excellent Exceptionally
Professional ability to write ability to write to write a ability to write write a ability to write gifted to write
Content … a complete a complete complete a complete complete a complete scientific
professional professional professional professional professional professional reports of an
report, report, report, report, report, report, outstanding
including including including including including including professional
correct level correct level correct level correct level correct level correct level standard.
and use of and use of and use of and use of and use of and use of
appropriate appropriate appropriate appropriate appropriate appropriate
language / language / language / language / language / language /

26
 terminology terminology terminology terminology terminology terminology
and logical and logical and logical and logical and logical and logical
progression of progression of progression of progression of progression of progression of
events/topics. events/topics. events/topics. events/topics. events/topics. events/topics.

27
Marking Guidance : Supervisors Report

Distinction– Distinction -
SUPER. Unsatisfactory Poor Pass 1) Pass 2 Merit
Excellent Exceptional
REPORT (10% , 20%) (30% , 35%) (40% , 45%) (50% , 55%) (60% , 65%)
(70% , 80%) (90% , 100%)
No evidence of Minimal Student had Student had Student had Student Student
any detailed knowledge of limited detailed sound demonstrated demonstrated
knowledge topic studied. knowledge knowledge detailed very detailed an outstanding
* Knowledge about the topic about most about most knowledge knowledge knowledge
of topic … studied. aspects of the aspects of the about the about the topic about the topic
topic studied. topic studied. topic studied. studied. studied.

Student did not Student was Response to Response to Student Student was Student was
recognise slow to suggestions suggestions generally keen to seek very willing to
problems and identify the positive but positive but sought advice when seek advice
seek advice. problem and struggled to implementatio support when needed. Very when needed.
Unsatisfactory seek advice. implement fully n rather slow needed. receptive to Very receptive
response to Slow and correctly. at times. Suggestions suggestions and to suggestions
* Response to suggestions / response to were well tried to improve and
Suggestions / advice suggestions received and their skills endeavoured
Advice / generated did not lead implemented through very to improve
Criticism from problems. to improved correctly. regular their skills
Supervisor. results in communication through very
most with supervisor. regular
instances. communicatio
n with
supervisor and
other experts.

* Originality Constant Significant Student Student Student Student worked Student

and initiative. supervision supervision needed needed worked fairly extremely well showed

28
 needed with needed, no significant modest level of well with with minimum remarkable
minor tasks and initiative level of supervision. minimum supervision. initiatives and
showed no shown and supervision. Reasonable supervision. successfully
Student
initiative. no original Limited initiative The student implemented.
demonstrated
ideas initiative shown and regularly
initiative and
proposed. shown and at proposed made
implemented a
times ideas for suggestions
number of
proposed further for
original ideas.
ideas for developments. development
further of project.
developments.
Frequent Student was Student Student was Student was Student was Dedication to
absences and not engaged engagement rather laid very extremely work was
non- with the with the project back and at motivated motivated and noteworthy.
engagement project and was rather times was and worked demonstrated
* (Effort) with the project. did the bare limited and engaged with hard most of outstanding
Motivation / Student failed to minimum that hindered the project to the times to commitment to
Engagement make any work required the project make make all aspects of
… progress. to make progress. reasonable significant work and made
progress. progress. progress. excellent
progress.

* (Ability) Unsatisfactory Working Working Working Working Working Exceptional

Observed working practices practices practices practices practices working
Application practices and were flawed acceptable, reasonable, good. excellent. practices and
and skill, … unacceptable in some generally on generally on Generally on Always on time, record
record keeping. respects. No time and at time but flawed time, planned planned work keeping.
attempt to times plans planning at work ahead. well. Excellent
plan work in were drawn. times. Ability to record keeping.
advance. multitask. Excellent ability
Satisfactory Reasonable
Record to multitask.
record record
keeping not
keeping. keeping.
up to the

29
 mark.

No evidence of Student Student was Student was Good Excellent Exceptional

awareness and demonstrate aware of good aware of good awareness of knowledge and knowledge /
applications of d some lab practice lab practice H&S and application of application of
operating awareness of and followed and followed operated operating health and
procedures. operating protocols most protocols well. equipment procedures. safety policies
Needed procedures, of the times. Lab / work well. Lab / Lab space / under all
* (ie H&S) constant though at Lab / work area was a bit work area work area was circumstances
Awareness reminders about times needed area was not messy on was kept kept tidy at all / scenarios.
and H&S (eg PPE). support in up to the mark. occasions. clean. times.
Application of Lab / work area handling
Operating … untidy most of equipment
the time. safely that in
a way slowed
their
progress.

30
Mark bandings explained

Please note, the marking bands which are used within this module (below), are based on official degree classification bands (i.e. overall marks
which must be achieved to get a Distinction, Merit,Pass postgraduate degree classification) …

Project marking bands (marker must circle appropriate mark) … Overall

%
Non-Submission 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unsatisfactory ½,1 1,2 1½ , 3 2,4 2½ , 5 3,6 10 , 20
Poor 1½ 3 , 3½ 4½ , 5¼ 6,7 7½ , 8¾ 9 , 10½ 30 , 35
Pass (low) 2 4 , 4½ 6 , 6¾ 8,9 10 , 11¼ 12 , 40 , 45
13½
Pass (high) 2½ 5 , 5½ 7½ , 8¼ 10 , 11 12½ , 13¾ 15 , 50 , 55
16½
Merit 3 6 , 6½ 9 , 9¾ 12 , 13 15 , 16¼ 18 , 60 , 65
19½
Distinction – Excellent 3½ , 4 7 , 8 10½ , 12 14 , 16 17½ , 20 21 , 24 70 , 80
Distinction – 4½ , 5 9 , 10 13½ , 15 18 , 20 22½ , 25 27 , 30 90 ,
Exceptional 100

The following marking classifications further represent the differences between the possible student grades …
Marking Classifications Student’s work is … Overall %
Pass (low) Acceptable / Adequate 40 , 45
Pass (high) Satisfactory / Competent 50 , 55
Merit Good and Very Good 60 , 65

31
Distinction – Excellent Excellent 70 , 80
Distinction – Exceptional Exceptional 90 , 100

32