Criteria

Unsatisfactory

Satisfactory

Effective

Excellent

Exceptional

20


%

Content

Fail


(0


–

49%)

Pass (50 –


64%)

Credit


(65


–

74%)

Distinction


(75


–

84%)

High Distinction (85 –


100%)

Depth of


Content

The explanation is


sufficiently


inaccurate,


incomplete, or


confusing that the


reader gains little


information from the


report. It

appears


that


little

Some difficulty in


reading, structure


lacking in some


parts

Well


written,


structure


not


totally clear

Well written and


structured.

An accurate and


complete explanation of


key concepts and


theories is made,


drawing on relevant


literature. Enough detail


is presented to allow the


reader to understand the


content and make


judgments about it. In


addition, applications of


theory are included to


illuminate issues.

Readers


gain


insights.

4

attempt


has


been

made


to


help the

reader


understand


the

material.

Accuracy




of


Content

Does not directly


answer


question

Directly


answers


most


of


the


question

Directly answers


the


question

Directly


answers


the question giving


additional


insights

Information (names,


facts, etc.) included in


the report is consistently


accurate.

4

Clarity


of

No


support


for


the

Provides some

The


project’s

Provides


excellent

The


project’s


objectives

4

Purpose

project’s


objectives

support


for the

objectives


are

level


of


support


for

are


clearly


stated.


The

taken


in


the


answer.

project’s


objectives

presented.


The

project’s


objectives

motivation


for


pursuing

taken.

motivation


for

taken.

the


project and its

pursuing


the

relevance are


clearly


and

project


and its

persuasively


established

relevance


are

by


relating


the


project


to

addressed.


The

current


engineering

discussion


is

problems.

reasonably


clear

but


not


compelling.

Depth of


Analysis

No analysis


presented

Analysis based on


some


argument

Analysis based on


sound argument

Analysis based on


an extensive


argument

Results are carefully and


objectively


analysed.

Interpretations


are

made


using


appropriate

4

equations,


models,


or

theories.

Use


of

Very little


knowledge of


subject matter


demonstrated.

Adequate

Sound


knowledge

High


level


of

High level


of


knowledge

4

Language:

knowledge


of

of


subject


matter

knowledge


of

of


subject


matter


and

Word


Choice,

subject


matter

demonstrated.

subject


matter

synthesis


with


theory

Grammar,


and

Sentence

demonstrated.

demonstrated.

demonstrated

Structure

Criteria

Fail


(0 –


49%)

Pass


(50


–

64%)

Credit


(65


–

74%)

Distinction


(75

– 84%)

High


Distinction

(85

–


100%)

10%

Visual


appeal

There are many


errors


in


spelling,


grammar,

and





punctuation,


the

slides


are


difficult


to

There are errors in


spelling, grammar,


and punctuation. Too


much text on many


slides. Minimal effort


made to make slides


appealing

There may be some


errors in spelling,


grammar and


punctuation.


Too

much


text


on two or

There are no errors


in spelling,


grammar,

and





punctuation.

Information is clear


and concise on each


slide.


Visually


appealing

and





engaging.

No errors, engagi ng


and professional


looking


presentation

2

read


and contain too

more


slides.

much


text,


poor

Significant


visual

choice


of


fonts


and

appeal.

colours,


no


or


little

visual


appeal,