CS计算机代考程序代写 database flex algorithm Hive Microsoft Word - 6000CEM_6001CEM_study_guide_AY2122 - r20210821

Microsoft Word – 6000CEM_6001CEM_study_guide_AY2122 – r20210821

Faculty of Engineering, Environment and Computer

Coventry University

VTC6000CEM Individual Project Preparation

VTC6001CEM Individual Project

Study Guide for Students

2021-22

INTRODUCTION 3

1. INDIVIDUAL PROJECT -THE BASICS 4
1.1 What is it? 4
1.2 Project support sessions & milestones 4
1.3 Elements of a project 7

2. CHOOSING A SUITABLE PROJECT 8
2.1 Seven golden rules 7

3. PROJECT DELIVERABLES 12
3.1 Project proposal 12
3.2 Prototype 12
3.3 Progress milestones 13
3.4 Final product 13
3.5 Project report 13

4. THE SUPERVISOR’S ROLE 17

5. DOING THE PROJECT 18

6. ASSESSMENT 19

7. PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION 20

8. CITATIONS AND REFERENCES 20

9. DEMONSTRATION 20

10. THE FINAL REPORT 21

11. SUBMIT YOUR REPORT 21

APPENDIX A: MODULE SPECIFICATIONS 22
APPENDIX B: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE AND MARKING CRITERIA 31

APPENDIX C : FINAL REPORT MARKING CRITERIA & GRADING NOTES 37
APPENDIX D : UARC ETHICS APPROVAL LOW RISK PROJECTS 40
APPENDIX E : DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY 48
APPENDIX F: RECORD OF SUPERVISOR MEETING 49

Introduction

The purpose of this study guide is to provide you with a set of guidelines to direct

and support work from topic selection through to completion of an Information

Technology or related Individual Project. This guide will cover the contents which

include 10 credits module “Individual Project Preparation” in semester 1 and 20

credits module “Individual Project” in the following semesters and the

consecutive workload of these two modules contributes around quarter of

your study workload over the academic year. Hence, it will have a dominant influence

on your final degree classification. Please take your own time to read the guide

carefully.

Besides often being deterministic to the classification of your degree, the project is

your opportunity to showcase your skills to potential employers. Many graduates of

this programme shared their experience that at job interviews their interviewers

would most probably ask them to elaborate the major achievements in their final year

project. Therefore, the project is one of the best ways for you to:

i) Provide evidence of your ability to do a substantial piece of work in IT

or related field.

ii) Demonstrate your self-management skills, initiative, and relevant technical skills.

Having a good project can often be a great advantage in an interview. Hence you

should make every endeavor to perform well in your project as it can often make a

fortune to your future job prospects.

1. Individual Project – The Basics

1.1 What is it?
The aim of this module is to allow students to conduct primary research (with secondary

research support) in a topic area relevant to their degree title. Students are expected to

design, implement and critically evaluate a functional or simulated system, object or

concept and to acquire further knowledge of a specialist technical area. To this end,

students will undertake a substantial project which will exercise the in-depth technical,

problem-solving, creative and other skills required of a professional practitioner. Students

will be required to ensure that their work conforms to appropriate codes of practice and

meets the ethical requirements of the University. Successful completion of the project will

require methodical planning, record keeping and self-management and effective

communication, execution and delivery of an agreed artefact.

Support and guidance will be provided by a project supervisor who will be the primary point

of contact for a student on this module. The topic of the individual project will be agreed

between you, your supervisor and the co-marker. Suitable topics may stem from staff, you

and occasionally other outside organisations. You can also refer to Appendix A for details

of module descriptions.

1.2 Project Support Sessions & milestones

Project consultation sessions will be held throughout your study to support your

project work. These sessions cover different aspects of the work you will be expected

to carry out, demonstrate and report on. You are strongly recommended to attend

these sessions to ensure that you are aware of the details of the submission

requirements stipulated in the scheduled milestones.

1.2.1 Full Time Students Project Schedule

Dates Milestones Details
24 Sep 2021 Individual Project Preparation Semester 1 starts, and students

are assigned supervisors
15 Oct 1) Project Summary (1 page A4)

– project preference/proposal
– project statement

Propose project by supervisor or
students – submit project summary
electronically thru email or on e-
platform (e.g. moodle)

29 Oct-12 Nov Students and supervisors meet and
work out a draft project
specification (multipage)

26 Nov -10 Dec 2) Project proposal Presentation students present proposal with
PowerPoints

10 Dec (by
6:00pm)

3) Submit Project Proposal and
Plan (45%), Mini Literature
Review (1,500 word limit)
(45%), SHAPE Ethics Process
(10%)

Individual Project preparation
assessments (soft copy submitted
electronically)

late Jan 4) Review and comments on
specification (Marks given to each
student for the proposal)

Feedback and Formal Mark back by
supervisor to student for project
specification

17 Jan 2022 Implementation of Individual Project Semester 2 starts (Tentative)
21 Jan 5) Interim project progress review Students arrange to meet

supervisors to review & present the
project progress

28 Jan – 4 Mar 6) Literature review, primary &
secondary research results
summary & analysis, design
prototype and implementation

Students report the progress by
drafting and presenting the first few
chapters of the report for comments

18 Mar 7) First draft of final report
8) Brief presentation on report draft

& software/hardware deliverables

Students submit and present first
draft of final report for supervisor’s
comments & review

22 Apr 9) Second draft of report
10) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardware deliverables

Students submit and present
second draft of report for
supervisor’s comments & review

6 May 11) Final draft of report
12) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardware deliverables

Students submit and present final
draft of report for supervisor’s
comments & review

19-20 May 14) Demonstrations/oral presentations Students give oral presentations
and demonstrations of their
projects

27 May 13) Project deliverables submission Submit project
outcome/deliverables (2 copies of
associated documents)

18 June 15) Overall project marks Overall project marks to be
submitted and project reports to be
returned by supervisors and second
markers

1.2.2 Part Time Students Project Schedule

Dates Milestones Details
1 Sep 2021 Individual Project Preparation Project brainstorm and discuss

with supervisors
25 Sep Confirmation of project

supervisors assignment
16 Oct 1) Project Summary (1 page A4)

– project preference/proposal
– project statement

Propose project by supervisor or
students – submit project summary
electronically thru email or on e-
platform (e.g. moodle)

17 Oct-17 Dec Students and supervisors meet and
work out a draft project
specification (multipage)

18 Dec 2) Project proposal Presentation students present proposal with
PowerPoints

31 Dec (by
mid-night)

3) Submit Project Proposal and
Plan (45%), Mini Literature
Review (1,500 word limit)
(45%), SHAPE Ethics Process
(10%)

Individual Project preparation
assessments (soft copy submitted
electronically)

late Jan 4) Review and comments on
specification (Marks given to each
student for the proposal)

Feedback and Formal Mark back by
supervisor to student for project
specification

2 Jan 2022 Implementation of Individual Project Semester 2 starts (Tentative)
26 Jan 5) Interim project progress review Students arrange to meet

supervisors to review & present the
project progress

Jan – early Mar 6) Literature review, primary &
secondary research results
summary & analysis, design
prototype and implementation

Students report the progress by
drafting and presenting the first few
chapters of the report for comments

30 Mar 9) First draft of final report
10) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardware deliverables

Students submit and present first
draft of final report for supervisor’s
comments & review

27 Apr 11) Second draft of report
12) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardware deliverables

Students submit and present
second draft of report for
supervisor’s comments & review

28 May 13) Final draft of report
14) Progress presentation on report draft

60-70% completed project
demonstration& software/hardware
deliverables

Students submit and present final
draft of report for supervisor’s
comments & review

22 Jun, 20 Jul 15) Progress report Progress report demonstration

6 Aug 16) Demonstrations/oral presentations Students give oral presentations
and demonstrations of their
projects

20 Aug 13) Project deliverables submission Submit project
outcome/deliverables

24 Sep 15) Overall project marks Overall project marks to be
submitted and project reports to be
returned by supervisors and second
markers

Remarks: Schedule will be updated according to actual learning pace and environment.

Please refer to updated FT & PT schedule provided by programme coordinator.

1.3 Elements of a Project report
Students are required to write a thesis which tells people about the research you have

done. This can be structured in whatever sensible way you prefer, but it needs to have the

following parts:

 An introduction. What’s your hypothesis? Why is your work interesting? What are

your trying to achieve?

 A literature survey. What have other people done? What new knowledge will your

work add? What is the current state of the art missing and how are you going to

address that?

 Your methodology. How did you go about validating / disproving your hypothesis?

Why is your method sound? Why should anyone trust your results?

 Your results. What did you do? How?

 Your analysis of your results. What do your results mean? Why are they interesting?

Did you validate your hypothesis or disprove it?

 A reflection on the management of your project and the social, legal or ethical

issues that you needed to consider. Your first supervisor may have a very good idea

of how well you tackled your project – however second supervisors may not have any

idea. For this reason, you need to include an account of the conduct of the project.

What problems you encountered, how you overcame them, how diligently you worked,

how you sought advice.

 Conclusions. What did your work contribute and how could it be continued by others?

2. Choosing a Suitable Project

A critical part of the success or failure of any project is the initial choice of what to work on.

This is a surprisingly difficult part of any project, in some ways the most difficult part, and it’s

something that we see students struggle with year on year.

2.1 Seven golden rules:

When deciding on the project topic you wish to work on the first key to success i s :

Know yourself – Do something you are interested in

A final year project is a six month, single person project and in most Universities in the UK.

Students will have to study several other modules concurrently. This is a long time to be

working on a single piece of coursework, so it is important to choose a project which will

hold your attention for that length of time. Moreover, you will be working on other things at

the same time, so ideally you need to choose a project that is compelling enough that you

want to work on it, in preference to doing other things.

Secondly:

Choose a small but difficult project

A “difficult” project is likely to be looked upon favourably because it will be a bigger step

away from what you have already been taught, you will need to be reading more academic

literature, you will be showing more independent learning, and so on. These are some of the

most important factors in getting a good grade, and far outweigh factors such as finishing

every part of your practical work.

Thirdly:

Have a research question

A project proposal should pose a problem, not a solution to a problem. Ideally, it is best to

phrase this as a research question, such as the following:

 Is algorithm X more efficient than algorithm Y?

 Is it possible to implement product Z on the cloud?

 Can feature L be added to programming language P?

 Can theorem T be proven?

 Can algorithm Z be adapted to be used in conditions D?

… and so on. There are several advantages to this. One is that this is a standard form of

writing in academia, and your project will be marked against academic criteria. Secondly, if

the aim of your project is to answer a question then you leave the issue of how to answer

that question reasonably open ended. It may be that you have a very clear idea, at the start

of the project, what you are going to do. That’s fine, but as you progress through the project

you may well find literature that enlightens your views on how your question can be

answered. Thirdly, your answer to the question may not be what you expect. That’s fine, it’s

OK to find out that actually, your algorithm isn’t as efficient as you thought, or the theorem

cannot be proved, so long as you give solid, convincing evidence for your answer.

Fourthly:

Do something practical

If you are working in the sciences, it really is important that you do something practical as

part of your work. For these purposes “practical” can mean experimental work or

mathematical work – it’s OK to prove a theorem, for example, as the main part of the

“practical” content of your work. What you should avoid though, is vague, nebulous,

‘thought-pieces’, which have no clear results and cannot be evaluated. Avoid anything with a

title like “an investigation into X” or “a dissertation on Y”. These sorts of writing are well

accepted in the humanities (BA courses), but for a scientific (BSc Courses) piece of work

you need to propose a question and find some answer to it. Equally, a literature review is not

really a project in itself; it needs some research question and evaluation with it to form a

complete project.

Fifthly:

Focus on evaluation from the start

Evaluating your work will likely be the last practical work you complete before finishing your

project writing. However, you should know from the start of your project how you plan to do

this. As with unit-testing, or usability testing, it is best to have designed you evaluation in as

much detail as possible before you start you practical work. That way, you know that what

you are aiming for is something that can be evaluated in the manner in which you have

planned. Remember, the purpose here is to determine whether your project has answered

your original research question.

In general, your evaluation will fall into one of the following categories:

 Performance evaluation: either testing the speed, memory footprint, scalability, load-

balancing, or other aspect of the performance of a program or system. This is often the

easiest form of evaluation — it can be performed by a program and so automated, the

results can be analysed and presented using a statistics and you will not be reliant on

users. Work in programming languages, networking, operating systems, databases,

and hardware tend to suit this sort of evaluation well.

 User-acceptance testing and usability: if your project involves creating a product for

end-users to test, especially if you have an industrial client, then it is essential that you

perform some sort of user acceptance testing. Good options for this are the talk-aloud

protocol or semi-structured interviews. NEVER, EVER, EVER think that a “heuristic”

evaluation is sufficient. Heuristic methods only catch basic errors; they tell you nothing

about how your users will actually experience your product.

 Formal or semi-formal methods: such as proving a theorem, using a model checker

(such as SPIN), using a formal method such as B or Z to show that your work is free of

particular types of errors.

Sixthly:

Take (academic) advantage of your supervisor

Every student will have at least one supervisor, who will usually be actively involved in

research, consultancy or something similar. This sort of work can provide a wealth of good

ideas for projects and has several advantages. Firstly, your supervisor will propose projects

that have the right scope and difficulty for your degree course. Secondly, if your supervisor

has an interest in what you are doing, they will have a vested interest in seeing you succeed

and of course will have a lot of relevant expertise with which they can advise you. Lastly, it is

likely that your work will be used by other members of a research group which will give you

access to feedback on what you have done.

Seventhly:

Be flexible (within reason)

Remember that a project is a marathon, not a sprint. It may well be that you get part way

along the journey and find out that what you had first set out to do is actually impossible, or

impossible within the scope of the project. Or it may be that you find some other way of

answering your research question, or you uncover some literature which shows that the

question can actually be answered very simply. In this case, you should speak with your

supervisor and find a way to reword or even completely change your original research

question. This is quite a reasonable thing to do and happens often in “real” research

projects, so you should not be worried about it. Your final project does not have to match the

original proposal exactly, but you should be able to explain why the changes you made were

necessary.

Summary

 DO choose a project that will hold your interest for the duration of the project.

 DO NOT choose a project that is the same size or scope as a coursework, or

something that is very similar to work you have been set in a module.

 DO propose a “difficult” problem — it is easier to pass a challenging project than an

“easy” one!

 DO propose a research question, and an idea for solving it.

 DO propose a project with some sort of practical or mathematical component, DO NOT

set out to write a commentary on a topic.

 DO have a very clear plan for how you will evaluate your project. This should clearly

state how you will determine whether or not you have answered your research

question.

 DO NOT evaluate an end-user product with only heuristic methods.

 DO test end-user products with real users.

 DO take advantage of the expertise of your project supervisor and their research

interests.

 DO be flexible, if you find that your original research question cannot be answered, or

if you find that a more “interesting” research question emerges during your project.

Reference and recommended readings:

Awesome Projects in Computing. Every, P and Mount, S. (2016 Document). (n.d.) available

from www.moodlesp.vtc.edu.hk

3. Project Deliverables

3.1 Project Proposal

The objective of the detail project proposal is to help you refine your general research question

down to a well-focused and achievable piece of practical research work.

The first section: “Defining your research project” focuses on your research question and the

plan for conducting your primary method. The second section: “Abstract and Literature

Review” is to help you identify current academic sources of literature that are highly relevant to

your project and to help you get a head-start in producing your literature review.

Your detailed project proposal will be graded in the second semester – however, it is highly

recommended that you submit it as soon as possible in order to obtain detailed supervisor

feedback on your project.

There is no suggested word length for the detailed proposal – although 2000 words would be

in order.

The Detailed Project Proposal is worth 20% of the project mark (Appendix B & D).

3.2 Prototype

The Prototype is intended to be a rough outline of your proposed final

product. It is not expected to be complete or perfect.

However it should demonstrate that you are making satisfactory progress

towards your final project aim and final product.

Prototypes will typically be software, but for some projects may take

other forms.

You will be required to demonstrate your prototype to your supervisor

and second marker as part of the assessment for the module. During the

demonstration you will also be expected to discuss the motivation for the

main features of the prototype and answer questions relating to the

proposed design of your final product.

3.3 Progress Milestones

Progress milestones should be set and presented along with your

Project Proposal.

As with any project, you may find that you need to review your progress

and adapt your plans to meet your final deadline.

Your progress in relation to the milestones you have set will be

assessed during meetings with your supervisor and form a continual

assessment of your project management skills.

You will need to demonstrate to your supervisor that you are making

satisfactory progress and can complete the project in the time remaining.

3.4 Final Product

Your Final Product will be demonstrated during the final meeting with

your supervisor and second marker.

Ideally you will be able to provide a fully completed product, however the

nature of a project such as the one you are undertaking is

unpredictability.

If your product is incomplete, it should be clear which parts are

finished, which are still at a prototype stage and which are yet to be

undertaken.

Again, during the demonstration you will be expected to discuss the

development and testing of the product and answer questions relating to

the project as a whole.

3.5 Individual Project Report (Not least than 10,000 words)

The appropriate structure of the Report varies according to the scientific, engineering, or

business research method that you have used, the features you have chosen to emphasise,

and the degree title you are pursuing. It is your responsibility to make sure that you are clear

about where your project’s contribution (‘novel contribution to knowledge’) lies and that all

work is explained clearly and in the correct format.

The following Report structure should therefore be seen as a guide only. It is probably the

case that few Reports will stick to it rigidly. It is your responsibility to consult with your

Supervisor and adapt to suit your particular project. Types of problem-solving project other

than software development projects are likely to need a different structure.

1. Title page (Mandatory), including title, author, student ID, degree title, name of

Supervisor, name of institution (‘Department of Computing, Coventry University’) Date

of submission.

2. Statement of Originality. (Mandatory) – This is a one page, signed statement. A

pro-forma will be provided. It is your signed statement that you have not plagiarised

the work in part or in full.

3. Preamble, including (a) Table of Contents; (b) Abstract (suggested length: half a

page); (c) Acknowledgements.

4. Abstract should be a succinct and self-standing summary of the basis, context and

achievements of the project. Minimally an abstract does three things: (1) It states the

problem that you set out to solve, (2) It describes your solution and method, (3) It

states a conclusion about the success of the solution. Be straightforward and factual

and avoid vague statements, confusing details and “hype”. Do not be tempted to use

acronyms or jargon to keep within the half-page limit. Consider that search engines,

librarians and non-computer scientists wishing to classify your Report rely on the

abstract. You may if you wish provide a short list of keywords (2-6 is reasonable) at

the end of the abstract.

5. Introduction. In this section, you should describe the problem that you set out to solve

with the project. An introduction might, for example, begin by stating, “The aim of the

work described in this Report was to provide a software tool with which people can

arrange meetings.” Avoid starting a Report with an irrelevant history of information

technology. For example, the following would not be a good introductory sentence,

“Since Bill Gates launched Outlook people have been using technology to arrange

meetings.”

Explain whatever background the reader will need in order to understand the problem.

The background might refer to previous work in the academic literature that provides

evidence that the problem is a real and significant problem worth solving. The

background may identify a community, organisation or set of users that will benefit

from your research. Include a clear and detailed statement of the project aims and

provide an overview of the structure of the solution.

CRITICAL! Use the introduction to define any terms or jargon that you will be using

throughout the rest of the report. Why? Because people define and understand terms

differently from one another. Your definition of ‘cloud computing’ may be different to

your supervisor’s definition of ‘cloud computing’. By stating your definition clearly you

can avoid misunderstandings of your work.

Conventionally, the last part of the introduction outlines the remainder of the Report,

explaining what comes in each section – keep this brief.

6. Literature Review (Mandatory). Please read Chapter 4 of ‘Awesome Projects’. A

lecture will be given on literature reviews.

7. Method: This chapter should describe what you did to answer your research question

(or to support your thesis, if you think of it that way), and how you went about it

(essentially your research design). You should describe your research design in

sufficient detail that another researcher could recreate your work to check your results.

8. Evaluation / Results: In this chapter, you should evaluate what you have done, and

say what answer (to your research question) you have arrived at. It may be that in your

method you describe some experiments, and this section records your results and

analysis of those results. This is an important section — most students gain or lose

marks in either their literature review or evaluation. The key to producing a convincing

evaluation is to plan very early in the project what information or results you will need

to write this section.

9. Discussion. Here you will summarise your achievements and also the deficiencies of

your project. You can also say what you would or could have done, if you had had

more time or if things had worked out differently. It is important to be completely

honest about the deficiencies and inadequacies of your work, such as they are. Part of

your aim is to demonstrate your ability to recognise problems that remain.

10. A reflection on the management of your project and the social, legal or ethical

issues that you needed to consider, including your response to feedback from

your presentation (Mandatory). Your first supervisor may have a very good idea of

how well you tackled your project – however second supervisors may not have any

idea. For this reason you need to include an account of the conduct of the project.

What problems you encountered, how you overcame them, how diligently you worked,

how you sought advice, how you responded to feedback. This chapter will be evidence

driven – which is why you need to keep a log or diary of your project, maybe a project

management timeline with milestones, keep evidence of each supervision meeting

(signed off by your supervisor), Keep notes of supervisor feedback to your

presentation and reflect on them in this chapter.

11. Conclusion. Give a brief statement of how the solution that you have provided

addresses the problem stated in the introduction. Provide an evaluative statement

based on the results. You should not introduce new material.

12. References For your Final Year project it is required that you cite and reference work

to which you owe an intellectual debt. It is required that you cite and reference work

that provides supporting evidence. It is required that you cite and reference work so

that the reader can find the sources that have been quoted. (Remember that we use

the APA referencing system of ‘in text citations’ and a list of references at the back of

the report. There will be a lecture on this)

13. Appendices. (More on these later)

A List of mandatory elements to be included with your report

 Statement of Originality

 Certificate of Ethical Approval

 A copy of your original ‘detailed project proposal’ (appendix)

 Signed supervisor meeting records (appendix)

Feedback notes from your presentation (appendix)

Reference:

https://www.coventry.ac.uk/globalassets/media/global/writing-a-report.pdf

4. The Supervisor’s Role

You will be assigned a supervisor who will meet regularly with you and other

students as a group to help plan and manage the work. It is your

responsibility to research material and techniques appropriate to the subject

of the project. The responsibilities of the supervisor are primarily to provide

guidance on the management of the project, the standard of work required,

what can realistically be achieved in the available time and to give feedback

on work done (including the writing of the report).

Wherever possible you will be assigned a supervisor with an interest in the

project topic but this cannot be guaranteed.

In the initial stages of the project, you and your supervisor will discuss

objectives that must be achieved and appropriate scope for the project. The

relative importance of the various aspects of the project will be defined by

negotiation between the two of you. Projects develop unpredictably, the initial

objectives are only intended as a guide to the level expected and details may

change. One learning objective is concerned with you coming to terms with

creatively and proactively managing the scope of the project.

You and your supervisor will meet regularly throughout the duration of the

project. Your progress will be reviewed and assessed in these sessions and

will include milestone assessment, where simple milestone tasks must have

been completed, i.e. prioritised requirements or research questions. You

should stay in contact with and make use of your peers for support, guidance

and review.

As well as providing guidance, your supervisor will mark your work with the

support of a second marker. You will be expected to attend demonstration

sessions as timetabled or make alternative arrangements to show and

explain your work to your assessors.

The Project Report should be submitted for marking by your supervisor and

co-marker, accompanied by supporting material in the form of software and

documentation; hardware design and build; and any other relevant

documentation and materials.

5. Doing the Project

I. Plan and get start as early as possible.

II. Attend the project consultation Sessions regularly and record the progress and
discussion with supervisor (Appendix F)

III. Think of a project topic and discuss it with your supervisor.

IV. Prepare a proposal and discuss the ethical issues with your supervisor (refer to
Appendix B & D).

V. Conduct literature survey and study similar existing system which is related to
your project/research focus. Submit your proposal and literature review; and
complete the SHAPE Ethical approval checklist before end of semester 1(refer
to Appendix B & D).

VI. Follow your project plan to gather user specifications, design and implement
your systems and evaluate the outcomes.

VII. Start drafting your report early – that way you will be less daunted by the

amount you have to write.

VIII. Let your supervisor see drafts early on. If you have a problem with your writing

style and appropriateness of technical contents, you need to know about it when

you have written the first few chapters, not when you have written the whole

report.

IX. Keep going!! You have only very limited time to complete the project. Keep in

pace with your project plan and review project progress regularly.

X. Do not get stuck in one phase – if the primary research is going slowly see if

you can make progress with secondary research or literature survey. Try and

meet the milestones in your project plan.

XI. If it becomes clear you have chosen a project so difficult that we may not finish

it in time or you think your project may be too simple and lacking challenge,

negotiate revised aims with your supervisor before it is too late.

6. Assessment

Your project will be independently marked by your supervisor and a second-

marker

In case of disagreement between markers the module leader will arrange fo r

a third opinion

A detailed set of criteria that are used by markers to establish the

classification of your project are included in Appendices B and C

These criteria give guidance on the level of achievement we expect you to

have reached to obtain a given class of project

Be aware, however, that all criteria are somewhat subjective (rather than

objective) and are subject to interpretation by markers

Your project will be marked under the following headings. Weightings are

given to indicate the approximate proportion of the total time available for the

project that we expect you to spend on each section and the relative value of

each area and outcomes (Refer to Appendix A: Module specifications for

details).

Modules

Assessments

Individual Project Preparation (10
credits)

Project Proposal and Plan (45%) (1,000 word limit).
Mini Literature Review (45%) (1,500 word limit).
SHAPE Ethics Process (10%)

Individual Project (20 credits) individual written project report (10,000 word limit).

You can also refer to Appendix B & C for details of working template and marking criteria.

7. Plagiarism and Collusion

You will be required to submit an electronic copy of your project by the

deadline. This will be used for checking plagiarism and collusion. Software

tools will be used to check for similarity with other literatures in the academic

database. In addition, all markers routinely check work for signs of assessment

cheating. Supervisors and co-markers are very good at detecting these

academic misconducts! The penalties range from getting 0% and having to

rework and resubmit the project (capped at 40%) to failing your degree

Programme.

You are also required to declare the originality of your project (Appendix E)

8. Citations and References

If you are using anyone else’s work in any way you must reference it. The

standard referencing system used at Coventry/SHAPE is following the standard

stipulated in the “APA 7th Ed referencing format’’ and it is expected that you will

use this style when writing your references.

You can follow this link to see more details:
https://libguides.coventry.ac.uk/referencing

9. Demonstration

You will be required to attend a demonstration/presentation session. The

purpose of this session is to allow your markers to see and discuss with you

what you have done.

The demonstration/presentation will consist of around 20 minutes session with

your supervisor and co-marker in a laboratory. You are expected to prepare a

PowerPoint for the presentation, though you may wish to demonstrate your final

deliverables as well. Hence, you need to plan and manage the flow of your

presentation yourself by prior rehearsals and practices. You may arrange

demonstration with your supervisor and co-marker in earlier session by

appointment in advance.

10. The Final Report / Dissertation

10.1 What is it?

Your Individual Project Report will describe in detail the research you undertook

in support of your project. The Final Report of around 10,000 words covers

everything else you did for the project: what you did, why you did it, how you did

it, what are your achievements, any room for improvements, etc.

You can have a quick reference for report format and structure in section 3.5 of

this study guide or refer to Coventry University Academic writing resources for

report writing style, referencing, report writing skills and procedures in the

following link:

http://www.coventry.ac.uk/study-at-coventry/student-support/academic-

support/centre-for-academic-writing/support-for-students/academic-writing-

resources/

11. Submitting your Project

Submit your Project reports to the SHAPE Office / Moodle

Two copies are required – neither will be returned to you

All projects must be bound in some way (loose sheets in a folder are not

acceptable!)

Many students chose to have their reports hard-bound. This is not obligatory,

but is quick and easy for you and gives a very professional finish to your work

Do not include lengthy printed program listings – put these on a CD/DVD/USB

stick and attach to the report

You are also required to submit an electronic copy of the report in Word

(.doc/.docx) format

Details of how to submit the electronic copy will be given nearer the time

Noted to part time students: Electronic copy through Moodle is fine. If the overall size of
your digital copy of the project is over 1Gb, you need to store it in a media and submit to
SHAPE office)

Appendix A – Module Specifications

Individual Project Preparation

VTC6000CEM
1. MODULE SUMMARY

Aims and Summary

The Level 6 project, taken in the final year of BSc degrees, allows students to
conduct an in-depth investigation on a topic in the domain of computing. This
will usually involve the technical development of a tool / product / algorithm or
piece of software and its evaluation.

The aim of this first module is to prepare students for the primary research to
take place in 6001CEM: including topic selection, supervisor allocation, project
planning, literature review and completion of the Coventry University Ethics
process.

Module credits and availability

Assessment / CATS
Credits

10.0

ECTS credits 15.0

Learning credits 10.0

Open/Restricted Open

Availability on/off
campus

SHAPE

Total student study hours 100

Number of weeks 13

Faculty responsible
Faculty of Engineering, Environment and
Computing

Academic Year 2021–2022

Entry Requirements (pre-requisites and co-requisites)

None

Excluded Combinations

None

Pass requirements

Coursework must be at least 40% and Module Mark must be at least 40%.

Special Features

During the module, project supervisors are allocated and work with students
to develop their project proposals. A series of workshops are provided to be
undertaken by supervisor and student together, to help orient students in the
preparation of their proposal.

Course stages for which this module is mandatory

 BSc Stage 3 Computing at SHAPE

Course stages for which this module is a core option

N/A

2. TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT

Intended Module Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this module a student should be able to:

1. Identify and refine a project topic of interest (which is in the domain of their
degree title) into an achievable primary research question.

2. Critically summarise the state of the art in an area through an initial
literature review using a variety of sources.

3. Scope and produce a detailed and achievable plan for the project using
professional methodologies.

4. Consider and critically reflect upon the impact of social, legal and ethical
dimensions of their proposed research.

Indicative Content

The indicative content will vary widely depending on each student’s choice of
project topic.

But in addition to self-study and supervisor meetings on the topic of the
individual project there will be a series of lectures and self-study exercises
provided by the module leader. These covers topics including the following:

 What is research?
 Research Design

 How to write a Literature Review
 Surveys and Data Analysis
 Coventry University Ethics System
 Report Structure
 Project management
 How to read academic articles
 Avoiding Plagiarism

Teaching and Learning

Learning will be facilitated through a variety of methods which may include
lectures, seminars, lab, workshops, online activities and group work. Students
are expected to engage in both class and online activities and discussions. This
module also requires students to participate in additional guided reading and
self-directed study to reinforce the learning gained from timetabled sessions.
Formative assessment will be used to prepare students for summative
assessment and give students an early indication of their progress towards the
course intended learning outcomes.

As part of this module, you are required to submit an online ethics application
and to obtain ethical approval for the research project that you are proposing
to undertake. At SHAPE, formal ethical approval must be obtained before any
data is collected for a research project. Failure to submit your ethics
application and to gain appropriate ethical approval for the research you will
undertake by the relevant deadlines (and before any data is collected) may
result in disciplinary action and will be subject to the Ethics Misconduct
process which is outlined in the General Regulations, Appendix 1. Penalties can
include zero for your work and possible exclusion for Non-compliance with the
ethics process.

Assessment Components

Component Component Type (Core (P/F)
/ Applied Core (%))

Credits for this
component

Learning
Outcomes
Assessed

Cw Applied Core 10 1, 2, 3 and 4

Method Of Assessment (normally assessed as follows)

The Cw component consists of:

Project Proposal and Plan (45%) assessing learning outcomes 1, 3 and 4
(1,000 word limit).
Mini Literature Review (45%) assessing learning outcome 2 (1,500 word
limit).
SHAPE Ethics Process (10%) assessing learning outcome 4.
Re-assessment is by new coursework.

3. MODULE RESOURCES
Essential Reading
Every, P. and Mount, S. (2016) Awesome Projects in Computing. Self-

published: available from Module Moodle Page.
Recommended Reading
Dawson, C.W. (2015) The Essence of Computing Projects: A Student’s

Guide, Prentice Hall, Prentice Hall, The essence of computing
series, 3rd Edition.

Cornford, T. and Smithson, S. (2006) Project Research in Information
Systems: A Student’s Guide. Chapter 7 – ‘Collecting Research
Data’, 2nd Edition, Palgrave information systems series, Palgrave
Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Required Equipment

Specific to subject area of project
4. MODULE ORGANISATION

Module leader

(Full Time)

Name CY CHENG

Telephone number

E-mail

(Part Time)

Name WONG, Hang-chit

Telephone number 2595-8113

E-mail .hk

Length and month of examination

None

Common Exam(s)

None

Exam Equipment Required

None

Expected teaching timetable slots

Please refer to CU-SHAPE Student Handbook

Subject Quality and Approval information

Board of Study Computing, Electronics and Mathematics

Shortened title

Date of approval by BoS May 2021

Individual Project

VTC6001CEM

1. MODULE SUMMARY

Aims and Summary

The Individual Project allows students to conduct an in-depth investigation on
a topic in the domain of computing. This will usually involve the technical
development of a tool / product / algorithm or piece of software and its
evaluation.

The aim of this second module is for students to build on their preparation in
VT6000CEM and conduct the development, reach relevant and useful
conclusions in its evaluation, and communicate these in a professional
academic report.

Module Credits and Availability

Assessment / CATS
Credits

20.0

ECTS credits 10.0

Learning credits 20.0

Open/Restricted Open

Availability on/off
campus

SHAPE

Total student study hours 200

Number of weeks 13

School responsible
Faculty of Engineering, Environment and
Computing

Academic Year 2021–2022

Entry Requirements (pre-requisites and co-requisites)

None

Excluded Combinations

None

Pass requirements

Coursework must be at least 40% and Module Mark must be at least 40%

Special Features

During the module students will meet regularly with their project supervisors
as allocated during the preparatory module VT6000CEM.

Course stages for which this module is mandatory

 BSc Stage 3 Computing at SHAPE

Course stages for which this module is a core option

N/A

2. TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT

Intended Module Learning Outcomes

On completion of this module the student should be able to:

1. Design and undertake the technical development of a tool / product /
algorithm / piece of software.

2. Report, utilising appropriate academic communication tools, on the
independent research in the evaluation of the above, utilising critically selected
primary methodologies.

3. Contextualise the above against the state of the art through the delivery of
a full literature review, analysing and synthesising appropriate sources.

4. Critically evaluate any legal, social and ethical implications of their research
project.

5. Critically reflect on their own organisation and learning during the conduct
of the project and preparation.

Indicative Content

A limited set of lectures will be provided for signposting the requirements of
the project process.
The majority of interaction on this module will be regular student/supervisor
meetings to review progress and agree future tasks.

Teaching and Learning

Prior to taking this module, you are required to submit an online ethics
application and to obtain ethical approval for the research project that you are
proposing to undertake. At SHAPE, formal ethical approval must be obtained
before any data is collected for a research project. Failure to submit your
ethics application and to gain appropriate ethical approval for the research you
will undertake by the relevant deadlines (and before any data is collected)
may result in disciplinary action and will be subject to the Ethics Misconduct
process which is outlined in the General Regulations, Appendix 1. Penalties can
include zero for your work and possible exclusion for Non-compliance with the
ethics process.

Assessment Components

Component Component Type (Core (P/F)
/ Applied Core (%))

Credits for this
component

Learning
Outcomes
Assessed

Cw Applied Core 20 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5

Method Of Assessment (normally assessed as follows)

The Cw component is an individual written project report (10,000 word
limit).

Re-assessment is by new coursework.

3. MODULE RESOURCES
Essential Reading
Every, P. and Mount, S. (2016) Awesome Projects in Computing. Self-

published: available from Module Moodle Page.
Recommended Reading
Dawson, C.W. (2015) The Essence of Computing Projects: A Student’s

Guide, Prentice Hall, Prentice Hall,The essence of computing
series, 3rd Edition.

Required Equipment

Specific to subject area of project
4. MODULE ORGANISATION

Module leader

(Full Time)

Name CY CHENG

Telephone number

E-mail

(Part Time)

Name WONG, Hang-chit

Telephone number 2595-8113

E-mail .hk

Length and month of examination

None

Common Exam(s)

None

Exam Equipment Required

None

Expected teaching timetable slots

Please refer to CU-SHAPE Student Handbook

Subject Quality and Approval information

Board of Study Computing, Electronics and Mathematics

Shortened title

Date of approval by BoS May 2021

Appendix B – Proposal Template and Marking Criteria

NOTE: This form is only for reference, you should write with your

own document style

VTC6000CEM Detailed Project Proposal

First Name:
Last Name:
Student Number:
Supervisor:

SECTION ONE: DEFINING YOUR RESEARCH PROJECT

1.1 Detailed research question

Help: Your detailed research question is the statement of a problem within the computing domain which you will
address in your project. Refining the research question involves narrowing down an initial question until it is
answerable using a primary research method(s) that you will conduct during the time of your project. The refined
research question must not be so general that it is answerable with a yes or no answer. It must not be so broad that you
would be unable to achieve a solution during your project. The key to this is BEING SPECIFIC: Narrow down the method
or technology you will use, narrow down the group that the question refers to (localize a general question) If the
project is still ‘too big’, can you think of a way to work on a part of the problem? Avoid using words that cannot be
measured, by you, without a huge research budget e.g. ‘effects on society’, ‘effects on business’. Example: The initial
question “Does cloud computing effect business” needs narrowing down (for a start the answer is yes) What is meant
by cloud computing? Or ‘effect’? Or ‘business’, in this question? Refining this first question will involve narrowing it
down to something you, personally, can measure. A refined version of this question might be: “Does implementing a
cloud based voting system improve the speed of decision making in a small company in Coventry?” This refined
question is implementable: You can now identify a small company to work with, document their current decision
making processes, implement a cloud based voting system, compare decision making speeds over a limited time period
(say 1 month) and evaluate your findings. A small piece of genuinely new knowledge is produced.

1.2 Keywords

Help: Include up to 6 keywords separated by a semi-colon; what keywords are appropriate to describe your project in
an online database like Google Scholar? Keywords should include the general research area and the specific
technologies you will be working with. Example. A project that proposes a novel way of visualising large amounts of
twitter feed data may have the keywords: Data visualisation; twitter; hashtags; database design; graphics libraries. For
further help, take a look at the ACM keywords list http://www.computer.org/portal/web/publications/acmtaxonomy

1.3 Project title

Help: The project title is a statement based on your detailed research question. For example, the research question ‘to
what extent does a mobile application reduce the number of errors made in class registers at Coventry University in

comparison to current paper based registers’ may be stated in the project title: “A Wi-Fi driven mobile application for
large group registers using iBeacons”.

1.4 Client, Audience and Motivation:

Help: Why is this project important? To whom is this project important? A research project must address a research
question that generates a small piece of new knowledge. This new knowledge must be important to a named group or
to a specific client (such as a company, an academic audience, policy makers, people with disabilities) to make it
worthwhile carrying out. This is the motivation for your project. In this section you should address who will benefit
from your findings and how they will benefit. Example: If you intend to demonstrate that a mobile application that
automates class registers at Coventry University will be more efficient than paper based registers – the group who
would be interested in knowing/applying these findings would be both academic and administrative staff at Coventry
University and they would benefit by time saved and a reduction in their administrative workload. If you are making a
business case for an organization explain how the organisation will benefit from your findings.

1.5 Primary Research Plan

Help: This is the plan as to how you will go about answering your detailed research question – It must include a primary
research method (an extended literature review is not an acceptable primary method). Think and plan logically.
Primary methods may include experiments, applications or software demonstrators, process models, surveys, analysis
of generated data …

Example: In the class register example above “to what extent does a mobile application reduce the number of errors
made in class registers at Coventry University in comparison to current paper based registers” – the research plan may
involve: 1) Collecting and analysing paper based registers in a given class on five occasions. 2) Identifying the error rate
average on these occasions 3) Designing and implementing a mobile application that automatically records attendance
in class. 4) Deploying the application in the class on five occasions. 5) Identifying the error rate average of the mobile
application on these occasions. 6) Comparison of data and summary of findings.

( 1000 words limit)

This is the end of section one.

SECTION TWO: ABSTRACT AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Abstract

Help: An abstract is a short summary of a research project that enables other researchers to know if your report or
research paper is relevant to them without reading the whole report. It is usually written retrospectively so that it can
include findings and results. It is fully expected that you will rewrite your abstract when you come to write your final
paper. For now, you should write an abstract of about 250 words that define the project described in section one.
Before writing your abstract you MUST read some abstracts from conference or journal papers on Google Scholar or
from portal.acm.org (to understand their style) and then provide your own abstract that outlines what your question is
and what you ‘did’ to answer it.

2.2 Initial/Mini Literature Review ( 1500 words limit)

Help: A literature review is a select analysis of current existing research which is relevant to your topic, showing how it
relates to your investigation. It explains and justifies how your investigation may help answer some of the questions or
gaps in this area of research. A literature review is not a straightforward summary of everything you have read on the
topic and it is not a chronological description of what was discovered in your field. Use your literature review to:

• compare and contrast different authors’ views on an issue
• criticise aspects of methodology, note areas in which authors are in disagreement
• highlight exemplary studies
• highlight gaps in research
• show how your study relates to previous studies

2.3 Bibliography (key texts for your literature review)

Help: Please provide references, in correct APA style, for at least three key texts that have informed your literature
review. If you are implementing an application, select texts which demonstrate how other researchers have tackled
similar implementations? The references should be recent and sufficiently technical or academic. Your markers will be
looking for you to identify technical reports, conference papers, journal papers, and recent text books. Avoid Wikipedia
entries, newspaper reports that do not cite sources, and general or introductory texts.

THIS IS THE END OF SECTION TWO

DETAILED PROJECT PROPOSAL GRADING FORM

The grade sheets for marking the VT6001CEM Detailed project proposal are attached on the next page.
Grading Notes:
The proposal is marked out of 100 divided into 45 marks for the quality, achievability and level of
challenge demonstrated by the student’s research question and proposed primary method of
solution generation and thoroughness of the proposal; 45% for literature review and 10% for
SHAPE Ethics Process .

Modal grading: In awarding marks please consider the following modal template:

Research question and primary research method in

relation to learning outcomes
Thoroughness of the proposal.

>70% A well-considered project proposal that fully satisfies
the Learning outcomes for which there is a succinct
and focused aim with an associated project

A question or hypothesis that is well above norm for
final-year undergraduate project level (approaching
Masters level for >80%);

The project involves improving or developing a
complex programme, tool, application or the
enhancement of a theory or methodology or their
application in a new context.

The project demonstrates a high degree of
innovation and creativity

All fields completed demonstrating a clear blueprint for
the research process and includes the necessary
information with respect to the research question.

Research methods are well-considered with clear
reasoning for choice of those methods over others;

A clear justification of the need for the project in relation
to client or audience.

Projects proposals involving ‘business case’ reports clearly
identify the organisation involved and consider how the
case will be evaluated.

A sound grasp of the means of evidence by which the
conduct and management of the project may be judged.

Threshold
(40%)

A proposal that identifies an activity with some
consideration of a broader context.

A research question which lacks enough substance,
context and scope to allow for depth of analysis, but
which is marginally acceptable against a threshold for
final year undergraduate projects;

A primary method(s) which only just relates to the
production of an appropriate solution to the research
question.

Completion of sections is cursory or minimal with some
cohesiveness and contextualisation.

Sections demonstrate some understanding of the research
process involved which loosely links with idea outlined
(key question, method, audience);

Research methods are discussed but demonstrate little
consideration as to whether they are the most appropriate
and lack refinement and further detail.

Identification of some methods of evidence for conduct
and management of the project but unclear thinking about
planning for reflection or accounting for conduct.

Commentary and feedback:
Please provide the student with commentary and feedback in the three critical areas that will help
them to improve the quality, relevance and scientific validity of their project,

Detailed Project Proposal Grading and Feedback Commentary

Student name:
Supervisor / Second
Marker / Final Agreed
Grading

Project title:

Section One: Numerical Grade

Research question and primary research method & Thoroughness of
the proposal and plan (1,000 word limit). Outcomes 1,3,4

In awarding a grade please consider:

 That the research question is well formed and achievable
 That the research question is specific and free from untestable generalisation
 That the proposed project represents an appropriate level of challenge to a

third year undergraduate
 That the primary method(s) proposed are appropriate and achievable and

demonstrate application of a sound methodology

 That the student has thought through the potential impact and audience for the
project

 That initial references are appropriate, up to date and academic
 That the student has a clear idea of how time and activities will be managed
 That, taken as a whole, the proposal is clear and complete.

/45

Literature review (1,500 word limit). Outcome 2
In awarding a grade please consider:

• Relevance of reference materials
• Scope and depth of selected reference
• Understanding and analysis of reference materials
• Summary of findings and discuss how the reference materials relate to the project

/45

SHAPE Ethics Process. Outcome 4
In awarding a grade please consider:

• Communication with supervisor
• Completion of ethical approval checklist

/10

Total /100

Section Two: supervisor Feedback and commentary
1: Research Question. Please comment on the level of challenge, achievability and refinement of
the research question. Please provide a few suggestions for narrowing down and making specific
the research question or identifying terms that require more specific definition.

2: Primary Method. Please comment on how well the primary research method proposed fits the
research question. Please provide a few suggestions for improving the research plan to make it
scientifically rigorous, appropriate and achievable.

3: Relevance of project and Conduct. Please comment on the student’s identification of audience
or user group for this research. Suggest improvements. Please comment on the student’s plan for
evidencing the management and conduct of the project. Suggest improvements.

Any other comments

Appendix C – Final report Marking Criteria & Grading Notes

Final Project Report Grading and Feedback
Student name:
Supervisor / Second Marker /
Final Agreed Grading

Project Title:
COMPONENT Grades

OVERALL MEETING OF OBJECTIVES IN RELATION TO RESEARCH QUESTION /20
Feedback. Please comment on:

The appropriateness of the project to the degree programme – the scope and level of challenge of the
project – The degree to which the project answers the research question and meets its objectives – The
degree of originality and creativity – The overall academic rigour of the project execution.

Comments:

RESEARCH METHODS & LITERATURE REVIEW WITH DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS /40
Feedback. Please comment on:

 The suitability of the Primary Research Method(s) chosen. The execution of the primary research
method.

 Literature review. The comprehensive of sources and materials used – The range, relevance and
recentness of sourcing correctly cited – The level of critical appraisal of literature – The explanation
of the key concepts and appropriate conclusions in relation to the project.

 Analysis of findings. The extrapolation of facts and/or statistics – The appropriateness of conclusions
drawn from both primary and secondary methods. The development of novel insights or outputs.
The presentation of information in a clear and comprehensive manner.

 Research – Demonstration of a wide range of reading and research for the project through analytical
and reflective discussion in the dissertation. This should be supported by a varied use of in-text
citation (APA Referencing format).

Comments:

CONDUCT OF PROJECT, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, DEGREE OF REFLECTION AND RESPONSE TO
SUPERVISION, CONSIDERATION OF SOCIAL LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL ISSUES. REFLECTION ON
PRESENTATION

/30

Feedback. Please comment on:
 The student’s critical evaluation of project conduct – The appropriateness of methods employed to

manage the project with lessons learnt and effectiveness of the experience – Evidence of project
management (meeting logs / diary) – Evidence of planning and time management – The
consideration of social, professional, legal and ethical issues in relation to the project.

 Evidence of a project management methodology as well as approach to the development of any
website/application etc…for example: Scrum, Iterative Project Lifecycle.

 Evidence of presentation of progress to supervisor (during last two weeks of spring term) Evidence
that feedback at the presentation has been captured by the student and that the report responds to
and reflects on this feedback.

Comments

REPORT STRUCTURE AND CLARITY OF COMMUNICATION /10

Feedback. Please comment on:
 The clarity, conciseness and ease of use of the project report. Overall spelling, grammar, use of APA

citation and referencing. Logical selection and ordering of chapters. The completeness and
presentation of the report, appropriate use of diagrams, charts, figures etc.

Comments

Total

/100

VTC6001CEM Project Report Grading Notes
The project report is marked out of 100. First and Second supervisors should mark the report
independently. First and Second supervisors should then discuss the grading and agree a final
mark. In cases where there is a significant difference of grades (over or under a grade boundary
or >=10 marks – whichever is smaller), and agreement cannot be made, please contact Peter
Every for allocation of a third marker.
A final grade sheet should be prepared by the Project Supervisor including the relevant feedback
from both first and second markers and the agreed final grade. This copy should be uploaded to
Moodle as feedback to the student. Please also enter the final report grade (/100) in the grade
field on Moodle before saving. In all cases, feedback should clearly justify the grade awarded.
Extensions (for students who have been granted) will be input on Moodle – so their work will still
be available from the Moodle link on the due date.
Please zip all three Marksheets (studentname.zip) and upload to https://goo.gl/eG5Ssz (this is a
onedrive link) for archive and moderation. In awarding marks please consider the following
modal guidance:
Academic quality of the project Conduct of the project process
>70% A report which could be, with minor modifications,

suitable for publication – or form the basis for a
postgraduate project.

A project that correctly matches research methods
with a well-chosen research question.

A project which contains original insight or develops
novel methods for the solution of the research
problem.

A project which has challenged the student to extend
the boundaries of their own knowledge and acquire
skills that they did not already possess.

A report that is complete and very effectively
communicates both the process of the project and
delivers mature and pertinent conclusions.

Very clear evidence of project management, time
management, and consideration of social, legal,
professional and ethical issues.

Reflection on process is mature and pertinent.

Strong evidence of reflection upon and response to
supervision.

Original use of recording and tracking methods to monitor
project progress, including accounts of meetings and
decision making.

Threshold
(40%)

A Project with little originality that does not provide
the student with sufficient challenge to demonstrate
academic skills appropriate to a final year BSc
degree.

A project that does not demonstrate clarity of
thinking.

A report that suggests project conduct was chaotic,
with poor project management.

Completion of the report is cursory or minimal with some
cohesiveness and contextualisation.

Some account of project management and conduct but
with little reflection or insight.

Evidence that the project is rushed through some
incomplete sections.

Appendix D – UARC Ethics Approval Low Risk Projects

Low Risk Research Ethics Approval
Read this first

You should only use this checklist if you are carrying out a low risk research project through PSB
Academy : This normally applies to:

 Undergraduate students.
 Taught postgraduate students.
 Members of staff evaluating service-level quality e.g. reviewing course delivery.

The term “project” applies to all research projects within PSB Academy .

Introduction to research ethics
Respect
One of the important qualities of a good researcher is to respect the people and their opinions that
may form part of your research project. People who contribute their views to your research need to
feel comfortable about what will happen to the information they give you, especially if your project
is looking at an area which is confidential. As a general rule all research data should be treated
confidentially and should not be discussed with colleagues, or participants referred to by name or
in a demeaning manner.
Respect also implies that you have taken the time to think through the research, to ensure you
have good internal and external validity for the questions, and that the information you ask for will
fulfil your research objectives. Are you are asking the right people the right questions?

Risk
You need to consider your personal safety during the research project and the safety of any other
people involved in it. The ethical approval process is intended to help you identify risks to you and
others. For example, would the research you are carrying out:

 Endanger you by requiring data to be collected in unsafe places or by giving away
personal data about yourself?

 Upset participants with research material that they may find distasteful?

 Damage the participants’ job prospects by confidential data about them becoming
known to others because your research makes it easy for them to be identify or
because you accidently leaking information about them?

 Be reported and presented in a way that protects you and your participants from
potential criminal or legal action?

Most risks can be minimised by taking sensible precautions. For example, if you are meeting
people who you do not already know, you should always do so in a public place and let your
Supervisor or a friend know who you are meeting, where you are and when you will return.
Similarly, if you need to tell your participants how they can communicate with you, use your
University email address, not your personal one. Is there is a risk to the participant in taking part in
the research. For example, are you are distracting participants from doing their normal job, when
their employer expects them to be doing something more important? You have to limit the risk for
the participant, by making sure they will not experience any come back from their employer
because they helped you with your project.
It is also not normal practice to post up a questionnaire on the Internet. One reason why this is not
a good idea is the fact that you may not know who is replying to your questionnaire, or whether
their responses are valid or reliable. You are not allowed to send e-mail requests to staff,
students or other people to participate in your research unless they have made a specific request.

Rights
As researchers we need to let those involved in our research understand what is expected of them,
their rights including the right to withdraw from the research, and our obligations towards them and
towards the data we collect about them. The responsibility for acceptable behaviour in this area
lies with you and not with the University. Indeed, it is a disciplinary offence to misuse research
data or to fail to abide by the University’s Ethics policy.
This means that you must have ethical approval before you start your research project. If you do

not do this, there will be disciplinary consequences for you and the research will be declared
invalid. Special additional conditions may also apply to research carried out in your Faculty so
check that you have followed those too.

Routes
The questions in the following checklist offers a guided pathway through the various issues
surrounding your research that need to be addressed and researcher behaviour that would be
expected from all of our students and staff. You will need to complete the checklist and receive
approval before you begin to collect any data. It is not acceptable to produce it after you have
collected your data or finished your project and you will be penalised if this occurs.

No living participants
The following diagram gives an overview of the routes through ethical approval. If there are no
living participants involved in the research, then you are likely to be able to complete the Low Risk
Research Ethics Approval Checklist and use Principal Investigator Certification (PIC) to state
that there is no need for ethical approval. You still need to go through the checklist and answer the
questions but the likely outcome is you can use the PIC declaration.

Living participants

If you intend to use living participants in your research, then you need to complete the Low Risk
Research Ethics Approval Checklist and there is no guarantee that you will be able to use the PIC
declaration.
Most projects, especially at undergraduate level, will involve using data that has already been
collected which is called secondary data. In these cases, completion of the questionnaire is very
straightforward.
Some projects might use a survey to collect anonymous data, i.e. data that cannot be traced back
to named or identified individuals either from other students or from other groups of people. In this
case, a participant information leaflet about the project needs to be prepared and offered to all
participants in the study even though you will not take their contact details. The participant
information leaflet needs to be pre-approved by the research Supervisor or the Faculty Research
Leader before any data is collected and will need to be included in the dissertation or report.
Some projects might ask individuals to be interviewed to provide data. In these cases, the
interviewees will need to provide what is called “informed consent”. The researcher will need to
make sure that all interviewees have completed informed consent forms before being
interviewed and they will also need to be given participant information leaflets at the time when
informed consent is requested.
It is not normal practice to collect data for undergraduate or master level research projects from
children under 18 years of age, the mentally ill or participants under medical supervision. There
are special regulations and legal requirements about these groups which must be followed. If you
are planning to use any of these groups as a source of data in your research then this must be
specially cleared with your Supervisor and with your Faculty as participants from these groups
cannot themselves give informed consent.

Routes

Secondary
Data Only

Living
Participants

No Living
Participants

PIC

Other

PIC

Personal Data Other
Secondary
Data Only

?PIC?

This means more work because these two leaflets have to be drafted and approved by research
Supervisors or the Department Research Leader before any contact is made and therefore before
any data is collected so this method of research requires a long development time and very good
advance planning. Data collected in this way has to be stored securely. Again, a conversation
with your Supervisor or the Department Research Leader may be necessary to cover this. It also
needs to be destroyed after the research is completed and again this will need to be confirmed.
You will need to convince interviewees that the information that they share with you will be treated
confidentially and show to us that this is the case. Finally, the findings from research conducted in
this way are normally shared with research participants in two ways:

 Interview transcripts may be sent to interviewees for confirmation.
 Summary findings of the research project should be offered to all participants.

Record keeping
It is also not acceptable to record interviews without getting permission or consent from the
interviewees (so this might form part of your informed consent form). You need to provide details
of how the information collected is confidential or not, how it will be used, stored and the disposal
method. It is not a good idea to interview without seeking the prior informed consent of participants
and having evidence of that consent. It is also not good practice to collect data and not “verify” by
sending back transcripts of interviews to participants. Finally, the issue about the destruction of the
data once the project is completed needs to be clarified.
All of this is intended to protect you. For example, if someone later says that they did not agree to
being recorded or suggests that you have leaked confidential information about them. You need to
be able to show that you have protected yourself and looked after any material very carefully.
In all cases the survey that will be used and the interview questionnaire or protocol needs to be
signed off by Supervisors before they are used. It is also good practice to test them, not least to
find out where the problems might be. In addition, when you write up your research, you can talk
about the testing process as a demonstration of good practice, which for students may count
towards your marks.

Remember

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I begin work before the project is ethically approved?
No. Primary data collection cannot begin until you have established that your project does not
need ethical approval using this checklist or you have received written approval from your Faculty
Research Ethics Leader, Chair of the Research Degrees Sub-Committee or University Applied
Research Committee.

What will happen if I proceed without approval or falsely self-certify
research ethics approval?

Respect

Risk

RightsRoutes

Record
Keeping

Good Ethical
Research
Practice

Collecting primary data in the absence of ethical approval or falsely self-certifying the level of risk
associated with a project will constitute a disciplinary offence.

 For Students – this means disciplinary action resulting in immediate failure in any
module or project associated with the research and potentially dismissal from the
University.

 For Staff – This means disciplinary action, which may potentially lead to dismissal.
If you do not have ethical approval, the University’s insurers will not cover you for legal action or
claims for injury. In addition, you may be debarred from membership of some professional or
statutory bodies and excluded from applying for some types of employment or research funding
opportunities.

What happens if the project changes after approval?
If after receiving ethical approval your project changes such that the information provided in this
checklist is no longer accurate, then the ethical approval is automatically suspended. You must re-
apply for ethical approval immediately and stop research based on the suspended ethical approval.

What about multi-stage projects?
If you are working on a project which involves multi-stage research, such as a focus group that
informs the design of a questionnaire, you need to describe the process and focus on what you
know and the most risky elements. If the focus group radically changes the method you are using
then you need to re-apply for the ethical approval.

What is Principal Investigator Certification (PIC)?
If you answer No to all the questions in the low risk ethical approval checklist then it is likely that
your project has a low ethical risk. You may sign the Principal Investigator Certification part of the
checklist and proceed with your project using good ethical practices. If you are a student, your
Supervisor needs to countersign to show they agree with your judgment. They may require some
restrictions or changes to your project to reduce the ethical or other risks, which would be recorded
on the PIC declaration.

What do I do with the completed checklist?
Students should discuss the checklist as it relates to the project with your Supervisor. Once s/he
countersigns the PIC declaration at the end to say that this is a low risk project then you may begin
your project. However, you must keep hold of the checklist and associated documents, as you
need to bind it in to your final project report.
Staff should complete the checklist. If all your questions have “No” responses, then you need to
sign the PIC declaration and you can proceed with your project. If you were unable to answer all
the questions with a No, then you need to talk to your Faculty Research Ethics Leader. This may
result in changes to your project or research design to maintain it as low risk. If this is the not the
case then you may have to complete either seek approval through the Medium-High or NHS-
Medical ethical approval routes before begin your project.
If you have any questions about the checklist or the questions on it, please consult your:

 Research Supervisor (Students)

 Faculty Research Ethics Leader (Staff).

Who are the Faculty Research Ethics Leaders?
Check the Registry Research Unit Intranet site for the most up to date list of Faculty Research
Ethics Leaders.

Low Risk Research Ethics Approval Checklist
Applicant Details

Name : E-mail :
Department : Date :
Course : Title of Project :

Project Details
Summary of the project in jargon-free language and in not more than 120 words:

 Research Objectives
 Research Design (e.g. Experimental, Desk-based, Theoretical etc)
 Methods of Data Collection
Risk to Participants

1. Will the project involve human patients/clients, health professionals, and/or
patient (client) data and/or health professional data?

Y
e
s

N
o

2. Will any invasive physical procedure, including collecting tissue or other
samples, be used in the research?

Y
e
s

N
o

3. Is there a risk of physical discomfort to those taking part? Y
e
s

N
o

4. Is there a risk of psychological or emotional distress to those taking part? Y
e
s

N
o

5. Is there a risk of challenging the deeply held beliefs of those taking part? Y
e
s

N
o

6. Is there a risk that previous, current or proposed criminal or illegal acts will
be revealed by those taking part?

Y
e
s

N
o

7. Will the project involve giving any form of professional, medical or legal
advice, either directly or indirectly to those taking part?

Y
e
s

N
o

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project.
 If you are a student, please discuss your project with your Supervisor.
Risk to Researcher

8. Will this project put you or others at risk of physical harm, injury or
death? Yes No

9. Will project put you or others at risk of abduction, physical, mental
or sexual abuse? Yes No

10. Will this project involve participating in acts that may cause
psychological or emotional distress to you or to others? Yes No

11. Will this project involve observing acts which may cause
psychological or emotional distress to you or to others? Yes No

12. Will this project involve reading about, listening to or viewing
materials that may cause psychological or emotional distress to
you or to others?

Yes No

13. Will this project involve you disclosing personal data to the
participants other than your name and the University as your
contact and e-mail address?

Yes No

14. Will this project involve you in unsupervised private discussion with
people who are not already known to you? Yes No

15. Will this project potentially place you in the situation where you
may receive unwelcome media attention? Yes No

16. Could the topic or results of this project be seen as illegal or attract
the attention of the security services or other agencies? Yes No

17. Could the topic or results of this project be viewed as controversial
by anyone? Yes No

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this is not a low risk project. Please:
 If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.
 If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics

Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval route.

Informed Consent of the Participant
18. Are any of the participants under the age of 18? Yes No

19. Are any of the participants unable mentally or physically to give
consent? Yes No

20. Do you intend to observe the activities of individuals or groups
without their knowledge and/or informed consent from each
participant (or from his or her parent or guardian)?

Yes No

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project. Please:

 If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.
 If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics

Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval route.

Participant Confidentiality and Data Protection

21. Will the project involve collecting data and information from human
participants who will be identifiable in the final report? Yes No

22. Will information not already in the public domain about specific
individuals or institutions be identifiable through data published or
otherwise made available?

Yes No

23. Do you intend to record, photograph or film individuals or groups
without their knowledge or informed consent? Yes No

24. Do you intend to use the confidential information, knowledge or
trade secrets gathered for any purpose other than this research
project?

Yes No

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project:

 If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.
 If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics

Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval or NHS or Medical Approval
routes.

Gatekeeper Risk
25. Will this project involve collecting data outside University

buildings? Yes No

26. Do you intend to collect data in shopping centres or other public
places? Yes No

27. Do you intend to gather data within nurseries, schools or colleges? Yes No

28. Do you intend to gather data within National Health Service
premises? Yes No

Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval or NHS or Medical Approval
routes.

Other Ethical Issues
29. Is there any other risk or issue not covered above that may pose a

risk to you or any of the participants? Yes No

30. Will any activity associated with this project put you or the
participants at an ethical, moral or legal risk? Yes No

If you answered Yes to these questions, this may not be a low risk project. Please:
 If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.
 If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics

Leader.

Principal Investigator Certification
If you answered No to all of the above questions, then you have described a low risk project.
Please complete the following declaration to certify your project and keep a copy for your record as
you may be asked for this at any time.

Agreed restrictions to project to allow Principal Investigator Certification
Please identify any restrictions to the project, agreed with your Supervisor or Faculty Research
Ethics Leader to allow you to sign the Principal Investigator Certification declaration.
Participant Information Leaflet attached.
Informed Consent Forms attached.

Principal Investigator’s Declaration
Please ensure that you:

 Tick all the boxes below and sign this checklist.
 Students must get their Supervisor to countersign this declaration.

I believe that this project does not require research ethics approval. I have completed
the checklist and kept a copy for my own records. I realise I may be asked to provide a
copy of this checklist at any time.

I confirm that I have answered all relevant questions in this checklist honestly.
I confirm that I will carry out the project in the ways described in this checklist. I will
immediately suspend research and request a new ethical approval if the project
subsequently changes the information I have given in this checklist.

Signatures
If you submit this checklist and any attachments by e-mail, you should type your name in the
signature space. An email attachment sent from your University inbox will be assumed to have
been signed electronically.

Principal Investigator

Signed : ……………………………………………………………………………….. (Principal Investigator or Student)

Date : …………………………………………………………………………
Students storing this checklist electronically must append to it an email from your Supervisor
confirming that they are prepared to make the declaration above and to countersign this checklist.
This-email will be taken as an electronic countersignature.

Student’s Supervisor

Countersigned : ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. (Supervisor)

Date : ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
I have read this checklist and confirm that it covers all the ethical issues raised by this project fully
and frankly. I also confirm that these issues have been discussed with the student and will
continue to be reviewed in the course of supervision.

Appendix E – Declaration of originality

VTC6001CEM Declaration of originality

I Declare that This project is all my own work and has not been copied in part or in whole
from any other source except where duly acknowledged. As such, all use of previously
published work (from books, journals, magazines, internet etc.) has been acknowledged
by citation within the main report to an item in the References or Bibliography lists. I also
agree that an electronic copy of this project may be stored and used for the purposes of
plagiarism prevention and detection.
Statement of copyright
I acknowledge that the copyright of this project report, and any product developed as
part of the project, belong to Coventry University. Support, including funding, is available
to commercialise products and services developed by staff and students. Any revenue
that is generated is split with the inventor/s of the product or service. For further
information please see www.coventry.ac.uk/ipr or contact .uk.

Statement of ethical engagement

I declare that a proposal for this project has been submitted to the Coventry University
ethics monitoring website (https://ethics.coventry.ac.uk/) and that the application
number is listed below (Note: Projects without an ethical application number will be
rejected for marking)

Signed: Date:

Please complete all fields.
First Name:
Last Name:
Student ID number
1st Supervisor Name
2nd Supervisor Name

This form must be completed and included with your project submission to Turnitin. Failure to append these
declarations may result in your project being rejected for marking.

Appendix F– VTC6000CEM/VTC6001CEM Record of supervisor
meeting

VTC6000CEM /VTC6001CEM Record of supervisor
meeting

Supervisor:

Student: _________________________________________

Date of meeting: __________________________________

Record of individual actions completed + notes:

Key topics Discussed:

Individual action points for next meeting (no more than 3)

________________________________________________________________________

Date of next meeting:

Related Posts