Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rubrics For Each Milestone Updated (FYP)
Rubrics For Each Milestone Updated (FYP)
Objectives:
To perform academic assessment on the written report
Scoring concept:
Refer report rubric
Marks are given at :
every milestone /submission of each chapter (SV only)
Final report assessment is based on all chapters (SV and Panel)
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
5 EXCELLENT
Introduction
Topic worthy,
problem
statement,
objectives,
scope and
limitations
Concise lead-in
to the report,
problem is well
identified,
precise and
relevant
explanation
Writing Format
(10%)
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice
Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
SV name :
TOTAL MARKS
4 GOOD
3
COMPETENT
2 I
NADEQUATE
Almost
concise leadin to the
report,
problem is
well
identified,
adequate and
relevant
explanation
Almost
precise
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Moderate
lead-in to the
report,
problem
partially
identified,
adequate but
limited
explanation
Poor lead-in
to the report,
problem
barely
identified,
inadequate
and limited
explanation
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
1
Marks
INCOMPETEN
T
No lead-in to
the report,
problem not
identified,
inadequate
/40
and limited or
no
explanation at
all
Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
limited errors
in grammar,
no variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
/10
/50
Student name :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
Literature
Review
Literature
writing task,
topic
understanding
, sources
reliability and
argument of
research
question
SV name :
Student ID :
Writing task
clearly
matched,
complete
understanding
of topic,
variety of
sources,
complete
understanding,
research
question
clearly argued
4 GOOD
Writing task
matched,
good
understandin
g of topic,
some variety
of sources,
good
understandin
g of topic,
research
question
adequately
argued
Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure
and
word choice
3
COMPETENT
Writing task
adequately
matched, fair
understandin
g of topic,
some variety
of sources,
moderate
understandin
g, research
question
partially
argued
2 I
NADEQUATE
1
INCOMPETE
NT
Writing task
Writing task
loosely
not matched,
matched,
poor
minimum
understandin
understanding
g of topic, no
of topic, some
variety of
variety of
sources, poor
sources,
understandin
acceptable
g, research
understanding, question not
research
argued
question
insufficiently
argued
Acceptable
Acceptable
Minimum
format,
format, tables
acceptable
tables and
and figures
format,
figures
according to
tables and
according to standard,
figures
standard,
acceptable
according to
acceptable
grammar,
standard,
grammar,
limited
limited errors
some
variance in
in grammar,
variance in
sentence
no variance
sentence
structure and
in sentence
structure
and word
choice
structure and
word choice
word choice
Marks
/40
/10
/50
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
5
5 EXCELLENT
4 GOOD
Methodology
Description of
research
design and
approach,
tools and
procedures,
compliance to
standard
Excellent
logical
approach, well
laid out design,
complete
logical tools,
complete
procedure,
strictly comply
to a standard
Logical
approach,
adequately
laid out
design,
mostly
logical tools,
complete
procedure,
almost
comply to a
standard
Writing Format
Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
TOTAL MARKS
word choice
SV name :
3
COMPETENT
2
INADEQUATE
Slightly
logical
approach,
partially laid
out design,
mostly
logical tools,
partly
complete
procedure,
loosely
comply to a
standard
Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Barely logical
approach, no
laid out
design,
unclear logical
tools, partly
complete
procedure,
barey comply
to a standard
1
INCOMPETE
NT
Misleading
logical
approach,
no laid out
design, no
logical
tools, no
complete
procedure,
non
compliance
to any
standard
Acceptable
Minimum
format, tables acceptable
and figures
format,
according to
tables and
standard,
figures
acceptable
according to
grammar,
standard,
limited
limited
variance in
errors in
sentence
grammar,
structure and
no variance
word choice
in sentence
structure
and word
choice
Mark
s
/40
/10
/50
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
5 EXCELLENT
(80-100%)
4 GOOD
(65-79%)
3 COMPETENT
(50-64%)
Introduction
(25%)
Topic worthy,
problem
statement,
objectives, scope
and limitations
Literature
Review (35%)
Literature
writing task,
topic
understanding,
sources
reliability and
argument of
research
question
Concise lead-in to
the report, problem
is well identified,
precise and relevant
explanation
Almost concise
lead-in to the
report, problem is
well identified,
adequate and
relevant
explanation
Moderate lead-in
to the report,
problem partially
identified,
adequate but
limited
explanation
Writing task
matched, good
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources, good
understanding of
topic, research
question
adequately
argued
Writing task
adequately
matched, fair
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources,
moderate
understanding,
research question
partially argued
Methodology(30
%)
Description of
research design
and approach,
tools and
procedures,
compliance to
standard
Writing Format
(10%)
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures, grammar,
Excellent logical
approach, well laid
out design,
complete logical
tools, complete
procedure, strictly
comply to a
standard
Logical approach,
adequately laid
out design,
mostly logical
tools, complete
procedure,
almost comply to
a standard
Precise format,
tables and figures
according to
standard, perfect
grammar, variance
in sentence
structure and word
Almost precise
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
SV name :
2 I
NADEQUATE
(40-49%)
Poor lead-in to
the report,
problem barely
identified,
inadequate and
limited
explanation
1
INCOMPETENT
(0-39%)
No lead-in to the
report, problem
not identified,
inadequate and
limited or no
explanation at
all
Marks
Slightly logical
approach,
partially laid out
design, mostly
logical tools,
partly complete
procedure,
loosely comply to
a standard
Writing task
loosely matched,
minimum
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources,
acceptable
understanding,
research
question
insufficiently
argued
Barely logical
approach, no
laid out design,
unclear logical
tools, partly
complete
procedure, barey
comply to a
standard
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar, some
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard, limited
errors in
Panel name :
Misleading
logical approach,
no laid out
design, no
logical tools, no
complete
procedure, non
compliance to
any standard
/25
/35
/30
/10
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
Results &
Discussion
Explanation
and
presentation,
reasoning
discussion,
critical view
and
intepretation
Writing Format
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice
TOTAL MARKS
SV name :
5 EXCELLENT
4 GOOD
Comprehensive
result
presentation,
informative
tables and
figures,
limitations
mentioned,
critical view
and reasoning
Sufficient
result
presentation,
informative
tables and
figures,
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning
Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word
choice
3
COMPETENT
2
INADEQUATE
Insufficient
result
presentation,
somehow
informative
tables and
figures, few
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning
Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Improper
result
presentation,
less
informative
tables and
figures, no
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
1
INCOMPETE
NT
No result
presentatio
n, no
informative
tables and
figures, no
limitations
mentioned,
minimum
view and
reasoning
Marks
Minimum
acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
limited
errors in
grammar,
no variance
in sentence
structure
and word
choice
/10
/40
/50
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA
DETAILS
9
Conclusion
(15%)
Addressing the
objectives,
connection of
recommendati
on to
conclusion
10 Writing Format
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice
5 EXCELLENT
SV name :
3
COMPETENT
2
INADEQUATE
Sufficiently
developed,
addressing
all
objectives,
useful future
research
strategy
Not sufficiently
developed,
addressing
most
objectives, not
useful
recommendati
on
Weak
conclusion,
addressing few
objectives,
unrelated
recommendati
on
Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word
choice
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some variance
in sentence
structure and
word choice
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
TOTAL MARKS
4 GOOD
1
INCOMPETE
NT
No
conclusion,
not
addressing
the
objectives,
bad
recommendat
ion
Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
limited errors
in grammar,
no variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice
Marks
/40
/10
/50
Student name :
Student ID :
SV name :
Panel name :
CRITERIA DETAILS
5 - EXCELLENT
(80-100%)
4 - GOOD
(65-79%)
3 - COMPETENT
(50-64%)
2 - INADEQUATE
(40-49%)
1INCOMPETENT
(0-39%)
Barely any
statement of
problem, lack of
organization of
methods, no
results, methods
and conclusion
Abstract (15%)
Clear statement of
Clear statement of Adequate statement Poor statement of
Objectives of
problem, well
problem, adequate
of problem, not
problem, bad
study, brief
discussed and
organization of
clear organization
organization of
problem
organized methods,
methods, results
of methods, results
methods, no
statement,
results being
somehow
lacking connection
connection of
methods,
connected to
connected to
to methods and
results to methods
procedures and
methods and
methods and
conclusion
and conclusion
expected findings
conclusion
conclusion
Introduction
Concise lead-in to
Almost concise
Moderate lead-in to
Poor lead-in to the No lead-in to the
(10%)
the report, problem
lead-in to the
the report, problem
report, problem
report, problem
Topic worthy,
is well identified,
report, problem is
partially identified,
barely identified,
not identified,
problem
precise and relevant
well identified,
adequate but
inadequate and
inadequate and
statement,
explanation
adequate and
limited explanation limited explanation
limited or no
objectives, scope
relevant
explanation at
and limitations
explanation
all
Literature Review Writing task clearly
Writing task
Writing task
Writing task loosely Writing task not
(15%)
matched, variety of
matched, some
adequately
matched, some
matched, no
Relationship to
sources, complete
variety of sources,
matched, some
variety of sources,
variety of
problem
understanding,
good
variety of sources,
acceptable
sources, poor
statement,
research clearly
understanding,
moderate
understanding,
understanding,
sources and
argued
research adequately
understanding,
research
research not
research question
argued
research partially
insufficiently argued
argued
argued
Methodology
Excellent approach,
Logical approach,
Slightly logical
Barely logical
Misleading
(15%)
well laid out design, adequately laid out approach, partially
approach, no laid
logical
Description of
complete logical
design, mostly
laid out design,
out design, unclear
approach, no
research design
tools, complete
logical tools,
mostly logical tools, logical tools, partly laid out design,
and approach,
procedure
complete procedure
partly complete
complete procedure no logical tools,
tools and
procedure
no complete
procedures
procedure
Insufficient result
No result
Results &
Sufficient result
Improper result
Comprehensive
presentation,
presentation, no
Discussion (30%)
presentation,
presentation, less
result presentation,
somehow
informative
Explanation and
informative tables
informative tables
informative tables
informative tables
tables and
presentation,
and figures,
and figures, no
and figures,
and figures, few
figures, no
reasoning
limitations
limitations
limitations
limitations
limitations
discussion,
mentioned,
mentioned,
mentioned, critical
mentioned,
mentioned,
critical view and
adequate view and
adequate view and
view and reasoning
adequate view and
minimum view
interpretation
reasoning
reasoning
reasoning
and reasoning
Mark
/15
/10
/15
/15
/30
Student name :
Student ID :
CRITERIA DETAILS
COMPETENT
Marks
../10
../30
..../20
./10
No citations in text
and/or no list of
references, or cited
references missing
from reference list. Presentation
is neither
neat nor professional
looking
./10
./100
Organization
of Content
Scholarly
Presentation
Reflects a scholarly
presentation, includes components common to
scholarly presentations in the discipline (i.e.,
abstract, research question, review of the
literature, methods, results, etc.).
Scholarly
Knowledge
Clarity of
Information
Presented
Accuracy of
Information
References and
Aesthetics
TOTAL
SV name :
INADEQUATE
Panel name:
/20
Student name :
Student ID :
5 EXCELLENT
(80-100)%
Evident throughout
presentation,
listeners gain many
new insights
4 GOOD
(65-79)%
3 COMPETENT
(50-64)%
Evident in most of
the presentation,
listeners gain good
new insights
Outstanding
technical content,
with excellent
hypothesis and
reasoning
Very appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background
Moderate technical
content, with
acceptable
hypothesis and
reasoning
Quite appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background
Effects (Graphics /
Audio / Video) 5%
Writing Mechanics
Items used
effectively,
enhancing the
message
Clearly written, a few
errors
Referencing /
Bibliography
10%
All sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style
Organization
Technical Content
20%
Layout
10%
Delivery
20%
Eye Contact
5%
TOTAL
SV name :
1 INCOMPETENT
(0-39)%
Not evident or
listeners may be
misled
Marks
_______ /10
_______ /20
Not appealing,
inappropriate font,
color, background
Very poor,
inappropriate font,
color, background,
not visible
_______ /10
Not present or
irrelevant effects
_______ /5
_______ /10
Most sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style
Some sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style
A few sources
acknowledged,
relevant, not follow
proper style
No sources
acknowledged,
relevant, not follow
proper style
_______ /10
Very poorly
organized and not in
sequence, slides
mixed up badly
_______ /10
Very articulate,
smooth, perceptible
and clear
Articulate, smooth,
loud, perceptible and
clear
Quite articulate,
smooth, perceptible
and clear
Interrupted, not
understandable, not
perceptible
_______ /20
Quite confident,
some eye contact
_______ /5
_______ /100
Appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background
10%
10%
2 INADEQUATE
(40-49)%
Poor technical
content, with weak
hypothesis and
reasoning
Panel name:
Student name :
Student ID :
EXCELLENT
Make memorable
headers/title enticing
Fun, ironic, bold,
expressive, unique
Clear and presentable
Headers/titl
e
COMPETENT
Make memorable
headers/title
interesting
INADEQUATE
Marks
Make
memorable
headers/title
formal , no
catchy words
used
/10
Comments
Section
Make Blog
Unique
Comment section
available but no
comments are visible
No discussion forum
No comment
section is
made available
/10
/10
Blog content is
updated minimum 3
x per academic
semester
Blog content is
updated < 3 x
per academic
semester
/20
Content
Should
Always Be
Fresh
SV name :
Student name :
Student ID :
EXCELLENT
Time
managemen
t
Technical
Content
Moderate technical
content, with acceptable
hypothesis and reasoning
Effects
(Graphics /
Audio /
Video)
Organization
Delivery
TOTAL
SV name :
COMPETENT
INADEQUATE
Marks
hypothesis and
/30
reasoning
Items not used
effectively, not
/20
enhancing the
message
Not well organized
/10
and not in
sequence, slides not
run smooth
Interrupted, very
few understandable,
/20
not so perceptible
./10
0