.The report rubrics.

Ownership & concept

Owner:
Individual reports of Chapter One , Two etc is assessed by
Supervisor
Final report (all chapters) is assessed by Supervisor and Panel

Objectives:
To perform academic assessment on the written report

Scoring concept:
Refer report rubric
Marks are given at :
every milestone /submission of each chapter (SV only)
Final report assessment is based on all chapters (SV and Panel)

Report Rubric per milestone

M1FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric
(CHAPTER ONE)
M2FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric
(CHAPTER TWO)
M3FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric
(CHAPTER THREE)
M4FYP Final Project 1 Report Rubric
(FYP1 REPORT)
M5FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric
(CHAPTER FOUR)
M6FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric
(CHAPTER FIVE)
M7 Final Project 2 Report Rubric
(FYP2 REPORT)

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric (CHAPTER ONE)

CRITERIA
DETAILS

5 EXCELLENT

Introduction
Topic worthy,
problem
statement,
objectives,
scope and
limitations

Concise lead-in
to the report,
problem is well
identified,
precise and
relevant
explanation

Writing Format
(10%)
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice

Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

SV name :
TOTAL MARKS

4 GOOD

3
COMPETENT

2 I
NADEQUATE

Almost
concise leadin to the
report,
problem is
well
identified,
adequate and
relevant
explanation
Almost
precise
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Moderate
lead-in to the
report,
problem
partially
identified,
adequate but
limited
explanation

Poor lead-in
to the report,
problem
barely
identified,
inadequate
and limited
explanation

Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

1
Marks
INCOMPETEN
T

No lead-in to

the report,

problem not

identified,

inadequate
/40
and limited or
no
explanation at
all
Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
limited errors
in grammar,
no variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

/10

/50

Student name :

CRITERIA
DETAILS

FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric (CHAPTER TWO)

5 EXCELLENT

Literature
Review

Literature
writing task,
topic
understanding
, sources
reliability and
argument of
research
question

Writing Format Precise format,

tables and
Compliance to figures
UMP format,
according to
tables and
standard,
figures,
perfect
grammar,
grammar,
sentence
variance in
structure and
sentence
word choice
structure and
word choice
TOTAL MARKS

SV name :

Student ID :

Writing task
clearly
matched,
complete
understanding
of topic,
variety of
sources,
complete
understanding,
research
question
clearly argued

4 GOOD

Writing task
matched,
good
understandin
g of topic,
some variety
of sources,
good
understandin
g of topic,
research
question
adequately
argued
Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure
and

word choice

3
COMPETENT

Writing task
adequately
matched, fair
understandin
g of topic,
some variety
of sources,
moderate
understandin
g, research
question
partially
argued

2 I
NADEQUATE

1
INCOMPETE
NT
Writing task

Writing task
loosely
not matched,
matched,
poor
minimum
understandin
understanding
g of topic, no
of topic, some
variety of
variety of
sources, poor
sources,
understandin
acceptable
g, research
understanding, question not
research
argued
question
insufficiently
argued
Acceptable
Acceptable
Minimum
format,
format, tables
acceptable
tables and
and figures
format,
figures
according to
tables and
according to standard,
figures
standard,
acceptable
according to
acceptable
grammar,
standard,
grammar,
limited
limited errors
some
variance in
in grammar,
variance in
sentence
no variance
sentence
structure and
in sentence
structure
and word
choice

structure and
word choice
word choice

Marks

/40

/10

/50

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric (CHAPTER THREE)

CRITERIA
DETAILS
5

5 EXCELLENT

4 GOOD

Methodology

Description of
research
design and
approach,
tools and
procedures,
compliance to
standard

Excellent
logical
approach, well
laid out design,
complete
logical tools,
complete
procedure,
strictly comply
to a standard

Logical
approach,
adequately
laid out
design,
mostly
logical tools,
complete
procedure,
almost
comply to a
standard

Writing Format

Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence

structure and
word choice

Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,

variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
TOTAL MARKS
word choice

SV name :

3
COMPETENT

2
INADEQUATE

Slightly
logical
approach,
partially laid
out design,
mostly
logical tools,
partly
complete
procedure,
loosely
comply to a
standard
Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some

variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Barely logical
approach, no
laid out
design,
unclear logical
tools, partly
complete
procedure,
barey comply
to a standard

1
INCOMPETE
NT

Misleading

logical
approach,
no laid out
design, no
logical
tools, no
complete
procedure,
non
compliance
to any
standard
Acceptable
Minimum
format, tables acceptable
and figures
format,
according to
tables and
standard,
figures
acceptable
according to
grammar,
standard,
limited
limited
variance in
errors in

sentence
grammar,
structure and
no variance
word choice
in sentence
structure
and word
choice

Mark
s

/40

/10
/50

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Final Project 1 Report Rubric (FYP1 REPORT)

CRITERIA
DETAILS

5 EXCELLENT
(80-100%)

4 GOOD
(65-79%)

3 COMPETENT
(50-64%)

Introduction
(25%)

Topic worthy,
problem
statement,
objectives, scope
and limitations
Literature
Review (35%)

Literature
writing task,
topic
understanding,
sources
reliability and
argument of
research
question

Concise lead-in to
the report, problem
is well identified,
precise and relevant
explanation

Almost concise
lead-in to the
report, problem is
well identified,
adequate and
relevant
explanation

Moderate lead-in
to the report,
problem partially
identified,
adequate but
limited
explanation

Writing task
matched, good
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources, good
understanding of
topic, research
question
adequately
argued

Writing task
adequately
matched, fair
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources,
moderate
understanding,
research question
partially argued

Methodology(30
%)

Description of
research design
and approach,
tools and
procedures,
compliance to
standard
Writing Format
(10%)

Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures, grammar,

Excellent logical
approach, well laid
out design,
complete logical
tools, complete
procedure, strictly
comply to a
standard

Logical approach,
adequately laid
out design,
mostly logical
tools, complete
procedure,
almost comply to
a standard

Precise format,
tables and figures
according to
standard, perfect
grammar, variance
in sentence
structure and word

Almost precise
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,

SV name :

Writing task clearly

matched, complete
understanding of
topic, variety of
sources, complete
understanding,
research question
clearly argued

2 I
NADEQUATE
(40-49%)
Poor lead-in to
the report,
problem barely
identified,
inadequate and
limited
explanation

1
INCOMPETENT
(0-39%)
No lead-in to the
report, problem
not identified,
inadequate and
limited or no
explanation at
all

Marks

Writing task not

matched, poor
understanding of
topic, no variety
of sources, poor
understanding,
research
question not
argued

Slightly logical
approach,
partially laid out
design, mostly
logical tools,
partly complete
procedure,
loosely comply to
a standard

Writing task
loosely matched,
minimum
understanding of
topic, some
variety of
sources,
acceptable
understanding,
research
question
insufficiently
argued
Barely logical
approach, no
laid out design,
unclear logical
tools, partly
complete
procedure, barey
comply to a
standard

Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar, some

Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,

Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard, limited
errors in

Panel name :

Misleading
logical approach,
no laid out
design, no
logical tools, no
complete
procedure, non
compliance to
any standard

/25

/35

/30

/10

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric (CHAPTER FOUR)

CRITERIA
DETAILS

Results &
Discussion
Explanation
and
presentation,
reasoning
discussion,
critical view
and
intepretation

Writing Format
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice

TOTAL MARKS

SV name :

5 EXCELLENT

4 GOOD

Comprehensive
result
presentation,
informative
tables and
figures,
limitations
mentioned,
critical view
and reasoning

Sufficient
result
presentation,
informative
tables and
figures,
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning

Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and

word
choice

3
COMPETENT

2
INADEQUATE

Insufficient
result
presentation,
somehow
informative
tables and
figures, few
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning
Acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Improper
result
presentation,
less
informative
tables and
figures, no
limitations
mentioned,
adequate
view and
reasoning
Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

1
INCOMPETE
NT

No result
presentatio
n, no
informative
tables and
figures, no
limitations
mentioned,
minimum
view and
reasoning

Marks

Minimum
acceptable
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
limited
errors in
grammar,
no variance
in sentence
structure
and word
choice

/10

/40

/50

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Progressive Project Report Rubric (CHAPTER FIVE)

CRITERIA
DETAILS
9

Conclusion
(15%)
Addressing the
objectives,
connection of
recommendati
on to
conclusion

10 Writing Format
Compliance to
UMP format,
tables and
figures,
grammar,
sentence
structure and
word choice

5 EXCELLENT

SV name :

3
COMPETENT

2
INADEQUATE

Clear and well

developed,
addressing all
objectives,
excellent future
research
strategy

Sufficiently
developed,
addressing
all
objectives,
useful future
research
strategy

Not sufficiently
developed,
addressing
most
objectives, not
useful
recommendati
on

Weak
conclusion,
addressing few
objectives,
unrelated
recommendati
on

Precise format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
perfect
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Almost
precise
format,
tables and
figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
variance in
sentence
structure and

word
choice

Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
some variance
in sentence
structure and
word choice

Acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
acceptable
grammar,
limited
variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

TOTAL MARKS

4 GOOD

1
INCOMPETE
NT

No
conclusion,
not
addressing
the
objectives,
bad
recommendat
ion
Minimum
acceptable
format, tables
and figures
according to
standard,
limited errors
in grammar,
no variance in
sentence
structure and
word choice

Marks

/40

/10

/50

Student name :

Student ID :

SV name :

Panel name :

FYP Final Project 2 Report Rubric (FYP2 REPORT)

CRITERIA DETAILS

5 - EXCELLENT
(80-100%)

4 - GOOD
(65-79%)

3 - COMPETENT
(50-64%)

2 - INADEQUATE
(40-49%)

1INCOMPETENT
(0-39%)
Barely any
statement of
problem, lack of
organization of
methods, no
results, methods
and conclusion

Abstract (15%)
Clear statement of
Clear statement of Adequate statement Poor statement of
Objectives of
problem, well
problem, adequate
of problem, not
problem, bad
study, brief
discussed and
organization of
clear organization
organization of
problem
organized methods,
methods, results
of methods, results
methods, no
statement,
results being
somehow
lacking connection
connection of
methods,
connected to
connected to
to methods and
results to methods
procedures and
methods and
methods and
conclusion
and conclusion
expected findings
conclusion
conclusion
Introduction
Concise lead-in to
Almost concise
Moderate lead-in to
Poor lead-in to the No lead-in to the
(10%)
the report, problem
lead-in to the
the report, problem
report, problem
report, problem
Topic worthy,
is well identified,
report, problem is
partially identified,
barely identified,
not identified,
problem
precise and relevant
well identified,
adequate but
inadequate and
inadequate and
statement,
explanation
adequate and
limited explanation limited explanation
limited or no
objectives, scope
relevant
explanation at
and limitations
explanation
all
Literature Review Writing task clearly
Writing task
Writing task
Writing task loosely Writing task not
(15%)
matched, variety of
matched, some
adequately
matched, some
matched, no
Relationship to
sources, complete
variety of sources,
matched, some
variety of sources,
variety of
problem
understanding,
good
variety of sources,
acceptable
sources, poor
statement,
research clearly
understanding,
moderate
understanding,
understanding,
sources and
argued
research adequately
understanding,
research
research not
research question
argued
research partially
insufficiently argued
argued
argued
Methodology
Excellent approach,
Logical approach,
Slightly logical
Barely logical
Misleading
(15%)
well laid out design, adequately laid out approach, partially
approach, no laid
logical
Description of
complete logical
design, mostly
laid out design,
out design, unclear
approach, no
research design
tools, complete
logical tools,
mostly logical tools, logical tools, partly laid out design,
and approach,
procedure
complete procedure
partly complete
complete procedure no logical tools,
tools and
procedure
no complete
procedures
procedure
Insufficient result
No result
Results &
Sufficient result
Improper result
Comprehensive
presentation,
presentation, no
Discussion (30%)
presentation,
presentation, less
result presentation,
somehow
informative
Explanation and
informative tables
informative tables
informative tables
informative tables
tables and
presentation,
and figures,
and figures, no
and figures,
and figures, few
figures, no
reasoning
limitations
limitations
limitations
limitations
limitations
discussion,
mentioned,
mentioned,
mentioned, critical
mentioned,
mentioned,
critical view and
adequate view and
adequate view and
view and reasoning
adequate view and
minimum view
interpretation
reasoning
reasoning
reasoning
and reasoning

Mark

/15

/10

/15

/15

/30

.The presentation rubrics.

Student name :

Student ID :

FYP Final Year 2 Project Poster Rubric

EXCELLENT

CRITERIA DETAILS

COMPETENT

Marks

Poster lacks a clear

organization.Components and
content are difficult to identify
and find.
Presentation may be
informational or educational, and
may be creative or
appealing, but it does not reflect
a scholarly
presentation.

../10

Content reflects scholarly knowledge

(theory and/or research), but no
original research conducted by the
student(s).

Content may report information

but includes little or no
scholarly knowledge
(theory and/or research);
includes no original research
bystudent(s).

../30

Some lack of clarity.Some connections may

be unclear. Some information not
presented concisely (.e.g., presents raw
data or output rather than summarizing
results succinctly).

Fails to convey key ideas and/or

information; or
information does not clearly
convey the pragmatics of the
topic/project.

..../20

Poster reflects minor inaccuracies. One or

two minor grammatical or spelling errors

Poster contains substantial

Inaccuracies. Three or more
errors in grammar &/or
spelling.

./10

Only one or two errors in citing

references (failures to cite sources or
include a reference in list of
references). Presentation is neat in
appearance but lacks professional polish

No citations in text
and/or no list of
references, or cited
references missing
from reference list. Presentation
is neither
neat nor professional
looking

./10

./100

Organization
of Content

Components and content are easy to

identify/find and follow .Appropriate, logical
organization

Most components and content can be

found,but they are not clearly identified
and/or not logically organized.

Scholarly
Presentation

Reflects a scholarly
presentation, includes components common to
scholarly presentations in the discipline (i.e.,
abstract, research question, review of the
literature, methods, results, etc.).

Poster contains some elements of a

scholarly presentation, but does
not consistently reflect a scholarly
approach to presenting content
throughout.

Scholarly
Knowledge

Content includes scholarly knowledge

(theory and/or research), and reports on original
research conducted by the student(s).

Clarity of
Information
Presented

Information is presented clearly and

concisely (e.g., effectively synthesizes
scholarly knowledge and summarizes results of
the research project).Provides a clear picture
of the pragmatics of the topic/project.

Accuracy of
Information

Poster contains no discernable

inaccuracies. No grammatical or spelling
errors.

References and
Aesthetics

All references are cited in the text and included

in a list of references Presentation is neat and
professional in appearance

TOTAL

SV name :

INADEQUATE

Panel name:

/20

Student name :

Student ID :

Final Year Project 1 Oral Viva Rubric

CRITERIA DETAILS
Subject
Knowledge
10%

5 EXCELLENT
(80-100)%

Evident throughout
presentation,
listeners gain many
new insights

4 GOOD
(65-79)%

3 COMPETENT
(50-64)%

Evident in most of
the presentation,
listeners gain good
new insights

Evident to more than

few or so-so,
listeners gain some
new insights

Outstanding
technical content,
with excellent
hypothesis and
reasoning
Very appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background

Very good technical

content, with fine
hypothesis and
reasoning

Moderate technical
content, with
acceptable
hypothesis and
reasoning
Quite appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background

Effects (Graphics /
Audio / Video) 5%

Items used very

effectively,
enhancing the
message

Writing Mechanics

Very clearly written,

no significant errors

Items used
effectively,
enhancing the
message
Clearly written, a few
errors

Referencing /
Bibliography
10%

All sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style

Organization

Technical Content
20%

Layout
10%

Delivery
20%
Eye Contact
5%
TOTAL

SV name :

1 INCOMPETENT
(0-39)%

Evident to only few

part, listeners dont
gain insights

Not evident or
listeners may be
misled

Marks

_______ /10

Very poor technical

content, hypothesis
and reasoning
disconnected/absent

_______ /20

Not appealing,
inappropriate font,
color, background

Very poor,
inappropriate font,
color, background,
not visible

_______ /10

Items used quite

effectively,
enhancing the
message

Items not used

effectively, not
enhancing the
message

Not present or
irrelevant effects

_______ /5

Quite clearly written,

some errors

Not clearly written, a

lot of errors but
understandable

Very poorly written,

errors seriously
affects meaning

_______ /10

Most sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style

Some sources
acknowledged,
relevant, follows
proper style

A few sources
acknowledged,
relevant, not follow
proper style

No sources
acknowledged,
relevant, not follow
proper style

_______ /10

Very well organized

and in sequence,
slide run very
smooth and in order

Well organized and in

sequence, slide run
smoothly and in
order

Quite well organized

and in sequence,
slides run fairly
smoothly

Not well organized

and not in sequence,
slides not run
smooth

Very poorly
organized and not in
sequence, slides
mixed up badly

_______ /10

Very articulate,
smooth, perceptible
and clear

Articulate, smooth,
loud, perceptible and
clear

Quite articulate,
smooth, perceptible
and clear

Interrupted, not
understandable, not
perceptible

_______ /20

Very confident, good

eye contact

Confident, good eye

contact

Quite confident,
some eye contact

Interrupted, very few

understandable, not
so perceptible
Not confident,
occasional eye
contact

Not confident, no eye

contact

_______ /5

_______ /100

Appealing,
appropriate font,
color, background

10%

10%

2 INADEQUATE
(40-49)%

Poor technical
content, with weak
hypothesis and
reasoning

Panel name:

.The blog & video presentation

rubrics.

Student name :

Student ID :

Final Year Project Blog Rubric

CRITERIA
DETAILS

EXCELLENT

Make memorable
headers/title enticing
Fun, ironic, bold,
expressive, unique
Clear and presentable

Headers/titl
e

COMPETENT

Make memorable
headers/title
interesting

INADEQUATE

Marks

Make
memorable
headers/title
formal , no
catchy words
used

/10

Comments
Section

Make Blog
Unique

Comments section is made

available. This shows the
readers that the blogger
care about their
thoughts/comment
Invite readers to share
their ideas
Have a discussion forum

Comment section
available but no
comments are visible
No discussion forum

No comment
section is
made available

/10

The blog tells a story that

makes people want to read
the blogs/posts
Show creativeness through
writing and designs

The blog has some

stories with mediocre
attempt to impress
readers

The blog has

hardly any
interesting and
relevant stories

/10

Blog content is frequently

updated > 3 x per
academic semester. Blog
content is diversified

Blog content is
updated minimum 3
x per academic
semester

Blog content is
updated < 3 x
per academic
semester

/20

Content
Should
Always Be
Fresh

SV name :

Student name :

Student ID :

Final Year Project video presentation Rubric

CRITERIA
DETAILS

EXCELLENT

Time
managemen
t

Within the specified time frame

given with good content
organisation

less or more than the

specified time frame with
moderate content
organisation

Technical
Content

Outstanding technical content,

with excellent hypothesis and
reasoning

Moderate technical
content, with acceptable
hypothesis and reasoning

Effects
(Graphics /
Audio /
Video)
Organization

Items used very effectively,

enhancing the message

Items used quite

effectively, enhancing the
message

Very well organized and in

sequence, slide run very
smooth and in order

Quite well organized and

in sequence, slides run
fairly smoothly

Delivery

Very articulate, smooth,

perceptible and clear

Quite articulate, smooth,

perceptible and clear

TOTAL

SV name :

COMPETENT

INADEQUATE

Marks

Far too less or far

too much than the

/20
specified time
frame, with poor
content
organisation
Poor technical

content, with weak

hypothesis and
/30
reasoning
Items not used

effectively, not
/20
enhancing the

message
Not well organized

/10
and not in
sequence, slides not
run smooth
Interrupted, very

few understandable,
/20
not so perceptible

./10
0