APPENDIX A2 (Revised on 18-Sept-2020)

RUBRICS FOR RESEARCH PROJECT

MASTER OF ENGINEERING (BY COURSEWORK)
Faculty of Engineering
Universiti Malaya

EXAMINER

A. PROJECT REPORT (80%)

RANKING MAX
NO. CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5
INDICATORS MARKS
5 (Excellent) :5
Abstract does not Abstract Abstract summarizes
Abstract Abstract is not Abstract summarizes 4 (Good) :4
summarize the summarizes the the project clearly,
1 (CLO3, related to the the project clearly and 3 (Satisfactory) : 3 5
project completely project clearly but completely and
PLO3) project completely 2 (Poor) :2
and clearly not completely concisely
1 (Very poor) :1
Background Define the project Define the project Define the project Define the project 5 (Excellent) : 9-10
No definition of the
and Problem scope, significance scope, significance scope, significance scope, significance and 4 (Good) : 7-8
project scope,
2 Statement and problem and problem and problem problem statement 3 (Satisfactory) : 5-6 10
significance and
(CLO3, statement statement correctly statement correctly correctly, precisely and 2 (Poor) : 3-4
problem statement
PLO3) unclearly but partially clear and sufficiently clear clearly 1 (Very poor) : <3
5 (Excellent) :5
Project Project objectives
Presents the Presents partially Presents sufficiently 4 (Good) :4
Objectives are not related to Presents clear project
3 project objectives clear project clear project 3 (Satisfactory) :3 5
(CLO3, the scope of the objectives
but unclear objectives objectives 2 (Poor) :2
PLO3) work
1 (Very poor) :1
The literature Detailed critical review 5 (Excellent) : 9-10
Literature Parts of the
The literature review is relevant Relevant and current that is relevant and 4 (Good) : 7-8
Review literature review is
4 review is irrelevant to the project and literature review with current and link past 3 (Satisfactory) : 5-6 10
(CLO1, relevant to the
to the project current but with no some critical review literature to current 2 (Poor) : 3-4
PLO1) project and current
critical review research 1 (Very poor) : <3
The methodology The methodology
The methodology
Confusing matches the matches the 5 (Excellent) : 14-15
matches the Very clear and
Methodology description of the objectives but lack objectives, are 4 (Good) : 11-13
objectives, are clearly systematic description
5 (CLO2, methodology, not justification in sufficiently justified 3 (Satisfactory) : 8-10 15
justified in and justification of the
PLO2) in line with the accordance to in accordance to 2 (Poor) : 7-9
accordance to methodology
project objectives research research 1 (Very poor) : <7
research conventions
conventions conventions

1
 APPENDIX A2 (Revised on 18-Sept-2020)
Able to analyze Able to analyze Able to analyze and
and interpret the and interpret the Able to analyze and interpret the data and 5 (Excellent) : 18-20
Results and
Inaccurate analysis data accurately but data accurately, interpret the data and report the results 4 (Good) : 15-17
Discussion
6 and interpretation not enough depth, but unable to report the results accurately, critically, 3 (Satisfactory) : 12-16 20
(CLO4,
of data lacks a critical report the results accurately, critically systematically and 2 (Poor) : 9-11
PLO4)
interpretation of critically and and systematically relate the results with 1 (Very poor) : <9
data systematically relevant theories
Comprehensive and
Good conclusion by
Conclusions Brief conclusion Brief conclusion robust conclusion that 5 (Excellent) :5
answering the
and Future No conclusion and and unrealistic and satisfactory addresses the 4 (Good) :4
research questions
7 Work no recommendations recommendations objectives, research 3 (Satisfactory) :3
and realistic 5
(CLO6, recommendations and implications of and implications of questions and excellent 2 (Poor) :2
recommendations
PLO6) the results the results recommendations and 1 (Very poor) :1
and implications
implications
Satisfactory use of Satisfactory use of
Missing, irrelevant, Good use of relevant Clearly relevant 5 (Excellent) :5
mostly adequate mostly adequate
References too basic or poorly references properly references used, 4 (Good) :4
references in the references in the
8 (CLO4, organized and not referred to in the text skillfully referred to in 3 (Satisfactory) :3 5
correct order but correct order and
PLO4) following the and following the the text and following 2 (Poor) :2
not following the following the
required format required format the required format 1 (Very poor) :1
required format required format
Structure Report partially 5 (Excellent) :5
Report follows the
and Report does not follows the Report follows the 4 (Good) :4
required format Report follows format
9 Formatting follow the required required format required format with 3 (Satisfactory) :3 5
and has many without errors
(CLO4, format and has many few technical errors 2 (Poor) :2
technical errors
PLO4) technical errors 1 (Very poor) :1

B. PRESENTATION (20%)

RANKING MAX
NO. CRITERIA 1 2 3 4 5
INDICATORS MARKS
Very poor slide Poor slide Satisfactory slide Good slide Excellent slide
5 (Excellent) : 9-10
Presentation organization, organization, organization, organization, organization,
4 (Good) : 7-8
Skills intonation, eye intonation, eye intonation, eye intonation, eye intonation, eye
1 3 (Satisfactory) : 5-6 10
(CLO5, contact, confidence contact, confidence contact, confidence contact, confidence contact, confidence
2 (Poor) : 3-4
PLO5) level and body level and body level and body level and body level and body
1 (Very poor) : <3
language language language language language
Unable to Able to understand Able to understand Able to understand all 5 (Excellent) : 9-10
Q&A
understand and some questions but all questions but Able to understand all questions and answer 4 (Good) : 7-8
Session
2 answer most of the answer some answer some questions and answer convincingly with 3 (Satisfactory) : 5-6 10
(CLO5,
questions questions questions convincingly supportive arguments 2 (Poor) : 3-4
PLO5)
convincingly unconvincingly unconvincingly and relevant theory 1 (Very poor) : <3