Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Coursework Specification
Module Details
Module Code UFCFLJ-15-M
Module Title Linked, Open Data and the Internet of Things
Module Leader Steve Battle
Module Tutors Steve Battle
Year 2022-23
Component/Element Number Project – Component A RESIT
Total number of assessments 1
for this module
Weighting 100%
Total Assignment Time 40 hours
Element Description Coursework (2000 words)
Dates
Date issued to students 22/06/2023
Date to be returned to 14/08/2023
students
Submission Date 17/07/2023
Submission Place Blackboard
Submission Time 14.00
Submission Notes
Feedback
Feedback provision will be Summative feedback provided via Blackboard.
Contents
1
Section 1: Overview of Assessment
This assignment assesses the following module learning outcomes:
This individual assignment is worth 100% of the overall mark for the module.
You will design and build a smart thing, a sensor node, using an Arduino and
sensor(s) of your choosing. Data recorded over a representative period of time will
be uploaded to ThingSpeak where it can be visualised. You will also add suitable
“thing description” metadata to augment the data. This will be accompanied by
a 2000 word write-up, explaining your approach and your reflections upon it.
This coursework will demonstrate your ability to work practically with hardware,
software, and metadata. You will submit your coursework via Blackboard by the due
date. The assignment is described in more detail in section 2.
All the technologies that you will need for your coursework will be explained during
the practical sessions. If you have questions about this assignment, please post them
to the discussion board on Blackboard.
This coursework is about creating your own IoT smart sensor node, uploading your
data to the cloud, and making it available as Linked Open Data using suitable
metadata. Your report will cover the following points:
• Describe the hardware design of a smart thing that you have constructed,
using the Arduino and a specific sensor (or sensors).
• Include photographs of your hardware setup.
• Include your Arduino code Create in an appendix to your report.
• Upload a representative set of data to the cloud, using ThingSpeak
(MathWorks, Inc, 2021), and share a link to your channel.
• You will use the W3C Web of Things (WoT) JSON-LD Thing Description
(W3C, 2020) to create channel metadata.
• Your report should include data visualisations from ThingSpeak.
• Use UWE/Harvard referencing throughout.
• Use reflective writing practice.
2
Section 3: Deliverables
You will be assessed on your ability to express your design in a report of approximately
2,000 words excluding references. This should be written in accordance with the word
count policy http://www1.uwe.ac.uk/aboutus/policies.aspx assuming a ±10%
tolerance. References should be provided and presented in UWE/Harvard style. you
should explain your design choices clearly and succinctly.
In submitting this assignment you are making a declaration that it is your own work
and has not (either in whole or part) been submitted towards the award of any other
qualification either at UWE or elsewhere. To reassure yourself please refresh your
knowledge of what constitutes as plagiarism and how to avoid it, check this link:
https://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/studysupport/studyskills/readingandwriting/plagiarism.aspx
• Hardware design of a smart thing that you have constructed, using Arduino and
sensor(s) (20%)
• Clear, commented Arduino software (20%).
• Your data will be available in the cloud, in a ThingSpeak channel (20%).
• Your thing description metadata, added as ThingSpeak metadata (20%).
• Clarity of your write-up and reflections (20%).
3
Appendix 1 – Individual Marking Criteria
INDIVIDUAL Needs work (0-49%) Pass (50-59%) Merit (60-69%) Excellent (70-100%)
Hardware Little or no attempt at Reasonable hardware Good explanation of your Great introduction and
(20%) describing the hardware design, no pictures. hardware design, including background. Excellent
design. pictures. description of your hardware
design.
Software No link to software, poor Poor software design or Good software and Software design evidencing
(20%) designed or uncommented. weak comments. Little comments. Good thinking outside the box.
explanatory text. description.
Data No data available. Some data available, but Good data available with Representative data from
(20%) small unrepresentative good visualisations. Good multiple related sensors.
sample. Little explanatory accompanying explanation. Great explanatory text.
text.
Metadata No metadata available, or Reasonable metadata Good metadata thing Excellent thing description
(20%) formatting issues. available on ThingSpeak, description, fully described. describing your smart thing
no formatting problems. Good accompanying and its sensors, published on
Perhaps incomplete. explanation of the
ThingSpeak.
underlying RDF model.
Write-up Poorly explained, or way off Reasonable explanatory Good explanatory text Excellent explanatory text
(20%) word count. text, but weak on throughout, and structured and Harvard referencing.
reflection. reflection.
4
References
bristolapproach.org, 2018. Citizen Sensing: The Bristol Approach. [Online]
Available at: https://www.bristolapproach.org
[Accessed 25 06 2021].