Project and Report
Due 16 May by 15:00 Points 100 Submitting a file upload File types pdf, odt, and docx Available 31 Jan at 8:00 – 13 Jun at 15:00 4 months
The goal of this coursework is to help you engage with one of the five topics covered in the module more deeply. It also gives you experience of project work, where you begin with a project outline and a guide, but take charge of your own exploration of the project and write a report about what you did, how you did it, and what you found.
This project is designed to be between similar to a dissertation project from Stage 3, but with a more guided task. It is not expected that you will learn all you need to complete the project and report from the sessions in the taught weeks. To achieve a good mark, you will need to review the existing and new material released on Canvas, undertake your own reading, and attend practal sessions to ask questions.
Copyright By PowCoder代写 加微信 powcoder
Submission
The coursework must be submitted to Canvas by Monday 16th May at 15:00. You must submit:
A PDF document containing your project report (2500 words maximum excluding any references and brief appendices) to this assignment. A zip file containing your artefact to the Project Artefact Submission page.
This coursework is marked out of 100 and contributes 20% to your assessment for CSC2034.
Instructions
The format of the project for each topic is the same: you should develop an artefact (model, design, code, game, notebook, etc.), and write a project report about the work you did. The report carries the majority of the marks for this assessment, but is is important that the markers can access your artefact, so make sure it works. Students achieving higher marks will demonstrate that they have widened their knowledge by going beyond the content of taught material through background reading.
The task description for the topic (see below) describes a scenario and the artefact you should develop. It includes guidance on the core elements that the artefact should include as well as possible extensions and avenues to explore. The task description may also include a starting point (e.g. a data set or framework). The format of the report is the same for all topics. Your report should comprise the following sections:
Cover Page Name
Student number
Abstract (50 – 200 words strict)
A summary of the work done including any results and findings. What Was Done and How
A description of the work done at a high level, including descriptions of design, implementation, testing strategies as appropriate.
A rationale for the approach taken and any decisions made, taking account of the wider context of contemporary topics in computing as appropriate. References, quotes and examples of existing research and practice relevant to the approach taken and the artefact produced. Should use
diagrams, tables, images and code snippets with captions to appropriately support text.
Results and Evaluation
A clear description of the final artefact.
An evaluation of how well the artefact meets the task description.
Conclusions
A summary of the work done.
Suggestions for future work.
Personal reflection on how the project went.
Evaluation and reflections should include positive and negative aspects. References Full references for any quotes, figures, code or other external sources used.
A standard and consistent format will full bibliographic data. Appropriate use
of in-text citations.
Appendices (optional)
Brief appendices may be included that contain additional material such as diagrams and tables.
The report should be 2500 words excluding the cover page, references and (optionally) brief appendices. The standard tolerance of ¡À10% on word count applies. Falling significantly below the word limit makes it harder to include all the required content to achieve the marks. The task description includes guidance on what you might include in the main What Was Done and How section of the report since this varies across topics.
You have been assigned one of these tasks (check your Announcements from 14th March if you are not sure). There are more opportunities to explore all topics further in Stage 3 through specific modules and project work.
Task Description for Modelling and Reasoning Task Description for Human Computer Interaction Task Description for Biocomputing
Task Description for Game Engineering Task Description for Data Science
The task description includes guidance on what to include in the main sections of the report. Coursework Policies
This is an individual piece of work. Guidance on plagiarism, the late submission policy, and other details can be found on the Assessment Information page.
Marking Scheme
The following table indicates the breakdown of marks assigned to each aspect of the report. hese follow the form of the Faculty Marking Criteria (see What Do My Grades
There is a rubric attached which shows how marks are assigned to these categories. You can use the three vertical dots menu on this topic to press Show rubric to see it. A
PDF version can be found here: CSC2034 Project and Report (Rubric).pdf
Description
Percentage Marks
Artefact 10%
Report Elements:
Cover Page and Abstract
What Was Done and How
Results and Evaluation
Conclusions and Future Work
Project and Report Criteria
Remember to submit your report below and your artefact to the Project Artefact Submission page by Monday 16th May at 15:00.
References, Form and Style
10 to >7.5 Pts
Outstanding
As with first
class but demonstrates a particularly comprehensive and wellrounded solution.
7.5 to >6.5 Pts First Comprehensive
solution. Follows good programming practice (e.g., no use of magic numbers). Clear use of structure
encapsulation, design patterns, etc.).
6.5 to >5.5 Pts
Upper Second
Good working solution. Generally, well formatted and commented but may be some errors, inconsistencies or untidiness. Some use of structure.
5.5 to >4.5 Pts Lower Second
Working solution. Some comments but model is otherwise untidy or contains significant errors or inconsistencies.
4.5 to >3.5 Pts Third Some changes to
model but solution not fully realised; pseudocode or comments demonstrate some understanding of concepts / direction.
3.5 to >2.0 Pts
Borderline Fail
Some changes to the model but no working solution.
2 to >0.0 Pts
significant changes to the model.
No comments.
Missing or Inaccessible.
Cover Page and Abstract
5 to >3.75 Pts
Outstanding
A precise and comprehensive overview of the work done including any results and findings. Title page contains all information.
40 to >30.0 Pts Outstanding
As with first class but demonstrates innovative and independent work
significantly beyond taught material.
3.75 to >3.25 Pts First
A comprehensive overview of the work done including any results and findings. Title page contains all information.
30 to >26.0 Pts First
Comprehensive description of work done, with clear evidence of testing, supported by diagrams / tables / snippets. Shows ability to investigate problems thoroughly, demonstrates a thorough understanding of concepts beyond taught material.
15 to >13.0 Pts First
Demonstrates how well the solution works with evidence. Comprehensive and mature evaluation.
3.25 to >2.75 Pts
Upper Second
A clear overview of the work done including any results and findings. Title page contains all information.
26 to >22.0 Pts
Upper Second
description of work done; some evidence of testing, with some relevant tables / diagrams / figures. Shows ability to investigate problems. Demonstrates understanding of concepts beyond taught material.
13 to >11.0 Pts Upper Second
Describes how well the solution works. Sound and logical evaluation.
2.75 to >2.25 Pts
Lower Second
A good overview of the work done but does not mention results and/or findings. Title page may contain errors or omissions.
22 to >18.0 Pts
Lower Second
Okay description
of work done but
some errors or
omissions.
supporting figures.
Shows ability to investigate problems but solutions not fully thought through. Demonstrates some understanding of concepts, mostly derived from taught material.
11 to >9.0 Pts Lower Second
Mentions the solution working. Some evaluation but may not be consistently convincing.
2.25 to >1.75 Pts
Basic overview of the work done but omits results and findings. Title page contains errors or omissions.
18 to >14.0 Pts
Basic description of work done but may contain significant errors or omissions. Irrelevant or missing supporting figures. Shows some ability to investigate problems. Demonstrates some understanding of concepts from taught material but contains significant errors or misunderstandings.
9 to >7.0 Pts Third
Little mention of solution working. Some evaluation but comes to weak or unconvincing conclusions.
1.75 to >1.0 Pts Borderline Fail
Minimal overview of work done, some aspects may be unclear or incoherent. Title page contains significant errors and omissions.
14 to >8.0 Pts Borderline Fail
Contains little material addressing work done and has substantial errors and/or omissions. Shows minimal ability to investigate problems. Shows minimal understanding of concepts from taught material.
7 to >4.0 Pts Borderline Fail
Minimal mention of solution working. Minimal evaluation. Any material included is unsuccessful and unconvincing.
1 to >0.0 Pts
Little to no overview of the work done; entirely unclear or incoherent. Title page missing.
8 to >0.0 Pts
Contains little
addressing
work done and
has substantial
errors and/or
omissions. Shows
minimal ability to investigate problems. No obvious understanding of concepts from taught material.
4 to >0.0 Pts Fail
Little to no evaluation. Any material included is weak or incoherent.
0 Pts Missing Missing.
What Was Done and How?
0Pts Missing Missing.
Results and Evaluation
20 to >15.0 Pts Outstanding
As with first class but arguments are particularly insightful and well evidenced.
0 Pts Missing
Conclusions and Future Work
20 to >15.0 Pts
Outstanding
comprehensive summary of the work done; clear and precise suggestions for future work.
5 to >3.75 Pts Outstanding
Report considered publication quality. No
spelling or grammar mistakes. Comprehensively referenced.
15 to >13.0 Pts First
A comprehensive summary of the work done; clear suggestions for futu work. Demonstrates reflective thinking on how the project went, including positive an negative aspects.
13 to >11.0 Pts Upper Second
A clear summary of the work done; good suggestions for future work. Demonstrates some reflective thinking, may miss positive or negative aspects.
11 to >9.0 Pts Lower Second
A good summary of the work done; okay suggestions for future work. Some reflective thinking with significant gaps.
9 to >7.0 Pts Third
Basic summary of the work done; some simple suggestions for future work. Little or no reflective thinking shown.
2.25 to >1.75 Pts Third
Report is messy and not well structured. Significant spelling and grammar mistakes and improper use of figures. Any references are poorly formatted and miss relevant bibliographic information.
7 to >4.0 Pts
Borderline Fail
summary of work
suggestions for
future work are
unclear or
incoherent.
reflective thinking shown.
1.75 to >1.0 Pts Borderline Fail
Report is unstructured and difficult to read. Substantial spelling and grammar mistakes. No use of references.
4 to >0.0 Pts
Little to no
summary of the work done; suggestions for future work are unclear or incoherent. Little to no reflective thinking.
1 to >0.0 Pts Fail
Report is incoherent and unstructured. Substantial spelling and grammar mistakes. No use of references.
0 Pts Missing Missing.
References, Form and Style
3.75 to >3.25 Pts First
Report is a pleasure to read, nicely presented, well structured, very few spelling or grammar mistakes, proper use of figures, etc. Uses multiple references and consistently follow one of the standard schemes.
3.25 to >2.75 Pts
Upper Second
Report is well
presented and
structured, few
spelling or
mistakes, proper use of figures, etc. Uses at least one reference and follows one of the standard schemes.
2.75 to >2.25 Pts Lower Second
Report is generally well presented but the structure may be unclear. Some spelling or grammar mistakes, or improper use of figures. Any references are inconsistently formatted or missing bibliographic information.
0 Pts Missing
Unreadable,
Total points: 100
程序代写 CS代考 加微信: powcoder QQ: 1823890830 Email: powcoder@163.com