6G7V0007 Masters Project Individual Assignment - Dissertation

Learning Outcomes of 6G7V0007: 

This assignment will assess your ability to:

Plan and carry out a programme of research or design work using methods appropriate for your degree, involving experimentation and/or implementation;

• Use, evaluate and critically assess relevant literature;
• Analyse relevant legal, ethical, professional and social issues, and the associated risks;
• Apply innovation and/or creativity to solve a computing task within the scope of your degree and synthesise information, ideas and practices to provide a quality solution together with an evaluation of that solution;
• Evaluate the work and the results in the context of other published works and appropriate industry benchmarks.

Note: it is your responsibility to make sure that your work is complete and available for marking by the deadline.

Make sure that you have followed the submission instructions carefully, and your work is submitted in the correct format, using the correct hand-in mechanism (e.g., Moodle upload). If submitting via Moodle, you are advised to check your work after upload, to make sure it has uploaded properly. If submitting via OneDrive, ensure that your tutors have access to the work. Do not alter your work after the deadline. You should make at least one full backup copy of your work.

6G7V0007 Penalties for late submission

The timeliness of submissions is strictly monitored and enforced.

All coursework has a late submission window of 7 calendar days, but any work submitted within the late window will be capped at 50%, unless you have an agreed extension. Work submitted after the 7-day late window will be capped at zero unless you have an agreed extension. See ‘Assessment Mitigation’ below for further information on extensions. Please note that individual tutors are unable to grant extensions to assessments.

6G7V0007 Assessment Mitigation

If there is a valid reason why you are unable to submit your assessment by the deadline you may apply for assessment mitigation. There are two types of mitigation you can apply for via the module area on Moodle (in the ‘Assessments’ block on the right-hand side of the page):

• Non-evidenced extension: does not require you to submit evidence. It allows you to add a short extension to a deadline. This is not available for event-based assessments such as in-class tests, presentations, interviews, etc. You can apply for this extension during the assessment weeks, and the request must be made before the submission deadline. For this assessment, the non-evidenced extension is 2 days.
• Evidenced extension: requires you to provide independent evidence of a situation which has impacted you. Allows you to apply for a longer extension and is available for event-based assessment such as in-class test, presentations, interviews, etc. For event-based assessments, the normal outcome is that the assessment will be deferred to the summer reassessment period.

Further information about Assessment Mitigation is available on the dedicated Assessments page: Manchester Metropolitan University

7V0007 MSc Project - Dissertation

The Project unit has a single piece of work, an exercise to specify, investigate and solve (through the implementation of a product) an agreed problem. This is assessed through two elements; the Dissertation and Viva. The latter element provides students with an opportunity to explain their achievements in person. The requirements and procedures for Project as a whole, and its constitute parts are set out in a separate document (the “Project Handbook”); this document describes the marking criteria for the Dissertation.

The following is a short, indicative, descriptions of the characteristics of the components of this element of assessment.

In each case, longer descriptions are given in the Project Handbook.

• The Dissertation This is a description of the project achievements containing, as a minimum requirement, a discussion of the problem being addressed, a critical review of relevant literature and related work, and a description and critical evaluation of the solution proposed. Normally, a project Dissertation is expected to contain 10,000 - 15,000 words, and should not normally exceed 20,000 words.

The Dissertation must have the project’s Terms of Reference and included with it, as an appendix. The Ethics Approval number must be stated as part of the originality declaration. Failure to do so will be treated as evidence to of an attempt subvert the University’s Research Ethics and Governance regulations and will be treated appropriately.

6G7V0007 Submission Arrangements

Final submission will occur on the evening of Friday 29/08/25, at 21:00. By that point, you must have uploaded your Dissertation materials onto Moodle. Work uploaded after this time will be treated in accordance with the University regulations. Some students may be given an additional period to complete their project, as a consequence of a Personal Learning Plan, or a delayed deadline, as a consequence of Evidenced Extensions.

File names All of the documents you submit should be PDFs and follow a consistent naming convention. They should be identified by your full name, University Identity number and the type of content they contain, in the form: Surname_Firstname_UID_Dissertation. Thus Nicholas Costen, UID 01900261, would in upload a document named Costen_Nicholas_01900261_Dissertation.pdf.

Feedback Formative feedback will be given informally in the supervision sessions, and also formally on the various components. This will occur through Moodle and subject to the normal four-week feedback deadlines.

Content description

The Dissertation will be assessed relative to a set of independent features which will be contained within it. They have the following detailed descriptions, which include the relevant BCS criteria.

The specialist (other than the MSc Computer Science) degrees have additional criteria to the generalist (MSc Computer Science) degree, but the aspects are the same. The criteria can be found in the BCS accreditation documentation.

• Report structure, quality of academic English, quality of referencing. Evidence of effective communication skills complex engineering matters (BCS critera generalist 2.3.2, specalist M17).
• Understanding, clarity of research question. Evidence of understanding and deployment of essential facts, concepts, principles and theories, including mathematical and statistical principles appropriate to the course. Also definition of problem to be addressed, including background and constraints; evidence that work is informed by research at the forefront of the subject (BCS criteria generalist 2.1.9, 2.1.12, 2.2.5, specialist 3.2.1, 3.3.5).
• Literature survey. Evidence of a critical review of appropriately selected parts of the literature, current developments, and available software as well as the associated software processes, with depth being achieved in appropriate areas. Also understanding of facts, concepts, principles and theories as appropriate to the programme, including the social context, constraints and information modelling, management and security and current standards, processes and principles of quality. Intepretation of this evidence to develop opportunities for innovation and design, implement, and test a computer-based system (BCS criteria generalist 2.1.1, 2.1.5, 2.1.7, 2.2.5, 2.3.2, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, specialist 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.6, M4).
• Discussion of research approach, including, as appropriate, professional / legal / ethical issues. Evidence of use of mathematical and/or statistical principles appropriate to the programme (including those from other disciplines), and also legal, social, ethical and professional issues associated with computing and appropriate professional, ethical and legal practices (BCS criteria generalist 2.1.9, 2.1.13, 3.1.3, specialist 3.2.1, 3.3.6, M2).
• Presentation of findings; quality of software produced including security and EDI aspects. Evidence of appropriate knowledge of theory and practice, and strategies, methods, techniques and tools for the modelling, design, development and documentation of computer-based systems including information modelling, management and security. Legal, social, ethical and professional issues should be addressed. Fitness to purpose should be ensured, given the background of the problem, and the outcomes evaluated. This should involve numeracy in analysing, understanding and presenting cases and involve a quantitative dimension. Also, evidence that work applies and is informed by research and developments at the forefront of the area; the complex solution should demonstrate a sound justification for the approach adopted and cope with technical uncertainty. It should apply a comprehensive knowledge of mathematics, statistics, natural science and engineering principles to reach substantiated conclusions, considering the limitations of the techniques employed (BCS criteria generalist 2.1.2, 2.1.7, 2.1.9, 2.1.10, 2.1.11, 2.1.12, 2.1.13, 2.2.1, 2.2.3, 2.2.4, 2.2.5, 2.3.1, 2.3.2, specalist 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.3.3, 3.3.4, 3.3.5, M1, M2, M5).
• Discussion and evaluation of work and finding, and relationship to literature, conclusion. Evidence of a systematic understanding of essential facts, concepts, principles and theories. Analysis of the extent to which the solution meets the criteria defined for its use, in the light of current standards, processes and principles of quality and the most appropriate software support, and possible future developments. Planning of self-learning and improvements to the student’s performance.

And also critical evaluation of the work in the light of research at the forefront of the domain. This should include a self-critical evaluation of effectiveness and a sense of vision about the discipline, including opportunities for innovation. This will be based on comprehensive knowledge of mathematics, statistics, natural science and engineering principles, informed by a critical awareness of new developments and the wider context of engineering. This will involve consideration of applicable health and safety, diversity, inclusion, cultural, societal, environmental and commercial matters, codes of practice and industry standards (BCS criteria generalist 2.1.1, 2.1.11, 2.1.12, 2.2.5, 2.3.2, 3.1.1, 3.1.2, specialist 3.2.1, 3.2.3, 3.3.3, M1, M2, M4, M5).

6G7V0007 Assessment Criteria

The criteria are designed to align with the University’s graduate outcomes. These are:

1. Apply skills of critical analysis to real world situations within a defined range of contexts;
2. Demonstrate a high degree of professionalism, e.g. initiative, creativity, motivation, professional practice and self management;
3. Express ideas effectively and communicate information appropriately and accurately using a range of media including ICT;
4. Develop working relationships using teamwork and leadership skills, recognising and respecting different perspectives;
5. Manage their professional development reflecting on progress and taking appropriate action;
6. Find, evaluate, synthesise and use information from a variety of sources;
7. Articulate an awareness of the social and community contexts within their disciplinary field. Your work will be marked by two members of academic staff; by default these will be your supervisor and one other academic, expert in the area of your work. They will assess your submissions independently, before seeking to agree a mark for each component. If they cannot agree a mark, your work will be given to a third academic to assess. The unit leader will then assign a mark, on the basis of the three assessment reports.

The criteria for different levels of success in the Project are given in the next two pages. Note that the columns are independent, so different boxes may apply to the various components of the overall mark.

6G7V0007 Re-assessment Arrangements

This assignment brief also covers re-assessment. Should a student be determined by the examiners to have failed to meet the pass mark for this assignment (this is 50% overall), they will, in completing the free-text assessment feedback, provide a list of aspects of the assignment which need to be amended to reach the 50% level. Should a student fail to submit the assignment, a mark of zero will be recorded and no feedback given. The feedback will include a recommendation on the nature of the re-assessment process. Deadlines for reassessment of Projects are usually flexible, being set in the light of the examination board dates and a need to maximize the probability of a speedy pass by the student.

6G7V0007 Marking criteria