DD221X, DD225X, DD226X, DH224X, DM228X, DT220X: Grading criteria

The grading is based onAt final grading, the following criteria are used:

1 ReportThe content • Iof the report¶

•¶

Does the project content ofhave interesting and of non-trivial scientific or engineering relevance? • Does the work contain a clearengineering and scientific¶

content?¶

•¶

Is there a clear and comprehensible problem formulation? ¶

•¶

• Has the choice of methodology been described, motivatjustified and discussed in a scientifically and¶

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

•¶

Is there an external analysis that comprises previous research, articles and other¶

relevant information?¶

2 The process¶

•¶

Has the specification functioned as a guiding document throughout the process? ¶

•¶

Have the supervisor and examiner been informed of deviations from the original specification and have these¶

deviations also been entered in the specification? ¶

•¶

Are there satisfactory explanations for deviations, primarily in relation to time spent and results? ¶

•¶

Has the degree project student kept the supervisor up to date on what is happening during the project's¶

duration? ¶

•¶

Has the degree project student demonstrated independence during the project?¶

•¶

Has the degree project student accepted the comments and advice of the supervisor and examiner in a¶

conscious and constructive manner during the process? ¶

•¶

Has the degree project student independently been able to achieve a high quality of presentation without several attempts with the supervisor? ¶

•¶

Has any criticism received during the oral presentation led to improvements in the report?¶

3a Written presentation¶

•¶

Does the report describe the project in a fair and clear manner? ¶

•¶

Does the report fulfil established requirements regarding form and content as well as good language use? ¶

•¶

Does the report clearly and comprehensibly describe the different steps in the project? ¶

•¶

Does the report contain the project's questions, methodology, results and a critical¶

reflection?¶

3b Oral presentation and defence¶

•¶

Have the presentation and subsequent discussion been clear, comprehensible and¶

adapted for the audience?¶

•¶

Has the presentation been well prepared and kept within the specified time frame? ¶

•¶

Have questions from the audience and opponent been answered satisfactorily?¶

Public discussion and examination¶

•¶

Has the degree project student filled in the opponent record in a clear and complete manner?¶

•¶

Has the degree project student critically examined and evaluated the respondent's report, identified¶

strengths and any weaknesses, and proposed how the report can be further developed?¶

•¶

Is the criticism provided considered realistic and constructive?¶

•¶

Has the opposition led to an interesting and constructive discussion?¶

Each question is assessed on a scale of 1-3 and a weighted total determines the final grade. Content is weighted 3, process is weighted 1.5 and the public discussion and examination is weighted 0.5. Written presentation and oral presentation are weighted 1. The weighted value of the content can be adjusted by +1 or -1. All elements must be passed for the degree project to receive a passing grade . The point total for a passing grade on a degree project is 6-22. 18p gives an A, 15p gives a B, 12p gives a C, 9p gives a D and 6p gives an E.