Department of Computer Science and Technology

Guidelines for Assessors

The following two pages show the Guidelines issued to Assessors of Part II dissertations. The marking scheme is included. Study these Guidelines carefully.

Guidelines for Assessors - Project Dissertations

Here is a dissertation for marking. The notes below should be read in conjunction with sections 12 and 13 of this year’s Briefing Document (“Pink Book”). These sections give details of how the candidates have been asked to organise their dissertations and how these are to be assessed.

Candidates have been asked, in section 12, to structure their dissertations strictly as follows:

  Cover Sheet
  Declaration of Originality
  Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Preparation
Chapter 3 Implementation
Chapter 4 Evaluation
Chapter 5 Conclusions
  Project Proposal

The marking scheme is described in section 13 and corresponds to a maximum of 100 marks being assigned as indicated in the following table:

Professional Practice and Presentation 14
Introduction and Preparation 26
Implementation 40
Evaluation and Conclusions 20


  • Professional Practice and Presentation: Check that a structured design and evaluation approach has been followed, including consideration of evaluation accuracy, conformance with legislation and awareness of any commercial and societal impact. Check that the dissertation has the required structure and that the Cover Sheet, Proforma and Project Proposal are present and correct. Give credit for literacy and narrative quality but evidence of desk-top publishing skills should gain only marginal credit.

  • Introduction and Preparation: consider how well the candidate understood the task and analysed it. Give credit for a good introduction to the technical background, a coherent discussion of the problems and sensible planning. Effort spent getting to grips with obscure documentation can be counted!

  • Implementation: seek evidence of skill, clear thinking and common sense. Consider how much work was carried out and take into account how challenging this was.

  • Evaluation and Conclusions: consider what was and what was not achieved. Give credit for a proper professional and repeatable approach to evaluation and for an interesting conclusion.

  • Overall: No marks are explicitly assigned for difficulty but clearly challenging projects should be rewarded more generously than undemanding projects. Give credit for background work such as learning a new system, new algorithms or a new body of theory. Anything which is not part of ordinary course work is ‘new’ (for example BCPL is not now included in any lecture course). Projects need not break new ground nor be original in concept.