Visa version
Version skapad av Olov Engwall 2014-12-18 12:22
DD221X, DD225X, DD226X, DH224X, DM228X, DT220X: Grading criteria
The grading is based on the following criteria:
| 1 Report content | |
| • | Is the project content of interest and of non-trivial scientific or engineering relevance? |
| • | Does the work contain a clear problem formulation? |
| • | Has the choice of methodology been described, motivated and discussed in a scientifically correct manner? |
| • | Is there a background analysis, including descriptions of previous research, publications and other relevant information? |
| 2 The process | |
| • | Has the thesis specification been used as a guiding document throughout the entire work? |
| • | Have deviations from the original specification been signaled to the supervisor and examiner, and been inserted in an updated specification? |
| • | Can deviations, primarily in allotted time and results, be justified? |
| • | Has the thesis student continuously informed the supervisor about the project progress? |
| • | Has the supervisor shown independence during the project? |
| • | Has the student constructively incorporated comments and advice from the supervisor and examiner during the project? |
| • | Has the student been able to produce a report of high quality without several iterations with the supervisor? |
| • | Has feedback (if any) at the oral presentation been taken into account to improve the report? |
| 3a Written presentation | |
| • | Does the report describe the project in a clear and fair manner? |
| • | Does the report adhere to scientific standards related to content and language? |
| • | Does the report clearly describe the different steps in the project? |
| • | Does the report include the project's problem formulation, method, results and a critical reflection? |
| 3b Oral presentation and defence | |
| • | Was the presentation and the following discussion clear and at a level suitable for the audience? |
| • | Was the presentation well prepared and did it keep the time limits? |
| • | Were questions from the opponent and the audience satisfactorily answered? |
| Opponent | |
| • | Has the student filled in the opposition protocol clearly and completely? |
| • | Has the student critically assess the report, identifying strengths and weaknesses, and suggested how the report may be improved? |
|
• • |
Are critical comments realistic and constructive? Did the oral opposition lead to an interesting and constructive discussion |
Each question is judged on a scale 1-3, and a cumulative weighted score is calculated to assign the final grade.