You are tasked with co-ordinating and delivering a showcase project which demonstrates your ability as a software/web developer or cyber security specialist.

LO1

Specify, analyse, design, implement, test and document a medium to
large scale project in the chosen area of specialisation under the
supervision of a project co-ordinator

LO2

Explain and justify the use and application of technology for a
project

LO3

Develop and enhance communication and presentation skills

H1

H2.1

H2.2

Pass

Fail

Communication (10%)

The presentation comprehensively
outlined the project. The speaker was poised and enthusiastic.

Questions were excellently answered.

The presentation outlined the project in
detail. The speaker was poised and enthusiastic. Questions were very well
answered.

The presentation outlined the project. The
speaker was poised and enthusiastic. Questions were answered.

The presentation somewhat outlined the
project. The speaker was poised and enthusiastic. Questions were reasonably
well answered.

The presentation is unorganised and
unclear. Questions were unanswered/poorly answered.

Writing & Presentation of Results (20%)

The dissertation is written in a formal
academic style; with very clear statements and conclusions and discussion of
the project findings and implication, and use proper Harvard Referencing
Style (HRS).

Excellent statements and clear
presentation of results. Excellent use of illustrations, code samples, etc.
Conclusions are clearly supported by the results.

The dissertation is written in a formal
academic style with clear statements and conclusions, and use proper HRS;

Very good statements and clear
presentation of achievements. For some results more appropriate means of
presentation could have been utilised. Conclusions are clearly supported by
the results.

The dissertation is written in a formal
academic style but missing in conclusions and discussions not perfect HRS

Good statements and clear presentation
of achievements. For some results more appropriate means of presentation
could have been utilised. Conclusions drawn could be more clearly supported
by the results.

The dissertation is not well structured
and does not use proper academic style; there are very few references and
proper HRS is not used

There is a statement and presentation of
results (perhaps incomplete), however, there is a lack of clarity and less
effective use of illustrations, code samples, etc. Conclusions are not
clearly supported by the results.

The dissertation is poorly written and
the statements are unclear and lacks conclusions and discussions and proper referencing
style (HRS).

Grossly inaccurate or incomplete
presentation and statement of results. Lack of clarity and usage
illustrations, code samples, etc. Conclusions are not supported by results.

Complexity / Coding Skills (10%)

A project
that addresses complex issues, using sophisticated software development.

A project that
partially addresses some complex issues.

Wide scopes
of issues are addressed, but the implementation lacks depth.

A project
that does not implement effectively or bypasses some of the more difficult
aspects of the proposal.

A project with very
little innovative software development.

Innovation (10%)

An
innovative solution based on novel research to produce a commercially viable
software tool.

An innovative
concept or a novel extension of existing software applications.

An idea that
merges ideas from a number of existing sources

A project
with limited functionality but with some innovative features

A project that
reproduces, without extension, ideas of existing sources

Technology (20%)

Exploits
leading edge features of new or emerging technologies or exploits chosen
technologies to the fullest extent possible appropriate to the application.

A project that uses
complex or difficult features of technology appropriately.

Exploits many
features of the chosen technology

A project
that uses less complex technology to a high standard or Integrates a number
of technologies

The project
uses standard technologies with little innovation

The project uses a
standard technology in a very basic and rudimentary manner.

Completeness (10%)

Project is
close to commercial implementation.

Project is excellent
but would need more work to attain commercial implementation.

Project
demonstrates a good deal of work by the learner, but where the project
contains few innovative features.

Functionality
is partly complete or obvious extensions are not implemented.

The learner does not
understand aspects of the functionality or the implementation.

Testing/ Evaluation
(10%)

End user
testing/ Evidence of Evaluation/ System testing

Demonstration of
System testing.

Demonstration
of testing a main component of the solution.

Demonstration
of testing part of a main component of the solution.

No evidence of
testing or evaluation.

Project Management
(10%)

Clear,
concise and detailed project planning throughout the life of the project.
Reference to document trail for revisions to the project scope. Evidence of
contingency plans activated in response to pre-planned triggers. Response to
scope changes demonstrated clear prioritisation of project goals.

Good evidence of
planning, management of risks and reporting procedures, with a nearly
complete document trail and evidence of contingency planning and
prioritisation.  Outcome of project is
close to planned outcome

Documentary
evidence of realistic and useful planning and continuous monitoring and
reporting risks and changes to project scope. Limited prioritisation and use
of contingency planning in responding to issues and problems affecting the
scope of the project.

Brief
Commentary on management process but limited references to documentation
trail evidencing project planning, management of risks or management and
reporting changes to project scope.

No documentary
evidence that project was subject to any serious planning, management of
risks or management and reporting of changes to project.