Applied Statistics & Data Visualization Assessment Guidance 2026/27 | UoS

•  Pre-recorded Dashboard Demo
• Type of assessment: Presentation  

• 06 November 2026 at 16:00 UK time

• This assessment is worth 35% of the module mark

• Demonstrate your ability to design and build an effective interactive dashboard, applying appropriate data visualisation principles, dashboard design theory and functionality to communicate data clearly to an intended audience.
• Develop and demonstrate practical competency with Power BI, including data modelling, visualisation and interactive features. These reflect skills used by Data Analysts to transform data into accessible, user-focused tools that support exploration and decision-making.

 This assessment is designed to assess the following learning outcomes:

• Discuss the fundamental concepts of data visualisation, including the use of various types of graphs, the principles of effective data visualisation, dashboard design, and the art of storytelling. 

• Design effective data visualisations, taking into consideration theories of visual perception.
• Use industry standard tools, such as PowerBI, to process and analyse structured data

 You should select one of the provided dashboard scenarios provided in the Assessment folder and create a single-screen interactive dashboard in Power BI that is appropriate for the audience and purpose described.

You must submit:

• Your completed Power BI (.pbix) file.
• A pre-recorded dashboard demonstration of no more than 10 minutes.
• A short Word or PDF reference document containing full references for any sources cited in your demonstration.  

Your recording should use screen sharing to demonstrate the published version of your dashboard. You may use any suitable screen-recording software, including recording a solo Microsoft Teams meeting.

You must publish your dashboard and demonstrate the published version, rather than demonstrating it from the Power BI report-building canvas. This allows the dashboard to be assessed as it appears and functions for an intended user.

Your demonstration should focus on explaining, demonstrating and critically justifying your dashboard design and functionality. You should:

• Briefly explain the purpose, intended audience and key question(s) your dashboard is designed to address.
• Demonstrate how a user can interact with the dashboard to explore or answer these questions.
• Explain and justify your choice of visualisations, including why they are appropriate for the data, audience and questions being addressed.
• Explain and justify your layout, formatting, composition and interactive features.
• Draw explicitly on relevant data visualisation and dashboard design theory and best practice when explaining your decisions. You should mention important sources during the recording where appropriate – for example, The Big Book of Dashboards by Wexler

et al. – and provide full references in your accompanying Word/PDF document.

• Discuss important design alternatives or trade-offs. For example, could another visualisation or interaction have been used, and why did you choose your approach?
• Identify any limitations or drawbacks associated with your design choices. 

• Conclude with a brief critical evaluation of the completed dashboard, considering how successfully it achieves its intended purpose and what could be improved. Your evaluation should focus primarily on your own dashboard and design decisions, rather than simply identifying inherent limitations of the supplied dataset.

Important Additional Guidance:

• Focus of the demonstration: This is not primarily a presentation of findings or insights from the dataset. You may use data examples to demonstrate functionality, but your focus should be on what the dashboard is designed to do, how the user can interact with it, and why you designed it in this way. Higher marks require well-justified decisions drawing on relevant theory and best practice, alongside critical evaluation of the completed solution.
  
  
• Single-screen design: Your dashboard must have one main report page and should function as a coherent single-screen experience, rather than a collection of separate dashboard pages. You are encouraged to use tooltips, drill-down/drill-through, filters, slicers, bookmarks, buttons and other interactions to create an effective information hierarchy and provide detail on demand. Supporting pages used solely for features such as drill-through or report-page tooltips are permitted.
  
  
• Technical ambition and sophistication form part of the assessment. Higher marks require evidence of Power BI skills beyond basic chart creation and filtering. Consider how calculated measures, data transformations, interactions and other appropriate functionality could create a more meaningful and effective analytical experience. Complexity should not be added for its own sake – technical features should contribute to the dashboard's purpose and usability.
  
  
• Use of DAX: DAX is not assessed simply because it has been used, and you should not create calculations merely to demonstrate complexity. However, the supplied data may not contain the measures required to address your dashboard's objectives, so appropriate use of DAX may be necessary. Where used, you should be able to explain why the calculation was required and how it improves the dashboard.

• Your presentation should be no more than 10 minutes long
• If your recording is more than 10 minutes, only the first 10 minutes will be considered when marking the submission.

A quick checklist of how to use this is on this site with more detailed information if you need it.  

Note: Information on getting to grips with the core academic skills needed in assessment can also be found on this site: Supporting students to develop academic skills.  

Note: Ensure this is included on your Blackboard site and ensure that all reference guides in all modules of a programme are current and using the same referencing style correctly.  

Can I use generative artificial intelligence

(GAI) in this assessment? 

• Generative artificial intelligence may be used in this assessment in a restricted and transparent way. You are not required to use GenAI, and you will not be disadvantaged if you choose not to use it. However, where you do use GenAI, it must support your learning and thinking rather than replace your own data visualisation and dashboard design knowledge and skills.
  
  
• You may use GenAI tools in a limited way to help you understand data visualisation concepts and theory, clarify specific doubts, explore possible approaches, or check your understanding of Power BI functionality and DAX expressions. For example, you may ask GenAI to explain how to use a specific DAX expression, to explore a particular data visualisation theory, or troubleshoot specific problems you are facing in building the dashboard.
  
  
• Any use of GenAI must follow the University’s Generative AI in Learning, Teaching and Assessment Policy. It states that using GenAI to misrepresent your own abilities, understanding or authorship may be considered academic misconduct.

• You must critically evaluate any information provided by GenAI. GenAI outputs can be inaccurate, incomplete, biased or unsuitable for the context of your dataset. Where GenAI suggests factual information, statistical claims, definitions, sources or references, you must verify these using original, reliable academic or technical sources. GenAI tools or outputs must not be cited as sources in your report.
  
  Only the original sources that you have checked and used should be referenced and cited. The University policy also expects students to develop the ability to evaluate GenAI outputs, identify inaccuracies and apply discipline knowledge when using these tools.
  
  
• You must include a clear GenAI declaration in your submission. This declaration should state whether you used GenAI, which tool or tools were used, and the nature and extent of the support received, such as concept clarification, idea generation, coding troubleshooting or language editing. Your declaration must also 

What is academic integrity and how do I ensure that I follow the

University rules on this?

Academic integrity is about being honest about your academic work. This means acknowledging the work of others and giving credit where other people's ideas have been used, being fair, open and honest about academic work submitted for assessment, including information on  research methods and data used. It also means avoiding any means which will give you an unfair advantage over other students completing that or similar assessments.

The university uses similarity detection tools to check the originality of your work.

Get further information on academic integrity and referencing and the Academic Integrity Policy and Academic Misconduct Procedure.

Submitting my assessment

You should submit the following files:

• Recorded dashboard demonstration as an mp4 file
• The dashboard as a pbix file
• A Word/PDF document which provides your references. You only need to include references mentioned in your demonstration • Name each file as "visu_yourstudentid.pbix" (for example, "visu_00123456.pbix" and "visu_00123456.docx” ).

You should submit all these files in the Blackboard submission area. Please upload all files before submitting.

Who can I contact if I am

having difficulties uploading and submitting my assessment

• Nathan Topping – N.J.Topping@salford.ac.uk  

• You have the opportunity to seek formative feedback in the dedicated weekly Drop-In sessions which will take place from week 3 onwards

Can I get additional academic skills support to help me with my work? 

• You can access information about available support including:

• Academic Skills Support
• Understanding your assessment guidance/assessment tips for success
• Develop your academic and digital skills

Our aim is to make assessment as inclusive as possible. However, you may have additional learning support needs. Reasonable adjustments can be made to ensure that students with disabilities have fair and equal access to assessment and equal opportunities to do well. These adjustments can include modifications to teaching methods, assessment arrangements, and physical access to facilities/resources. 

Speak to the Disability and Learner Support team about a reasonable adjustment plan (RAP) which is a personalised support plan which provides adjustments for individual support needs.

There may be times when you need to let us know of factors impacting your ability to complete assessments. Information on this can be found at the following links. Please speak to your module lead about this if you think you need guidance on this.

Access information about the  Exceptional Circumstances Procedure or speak to Salford SU Advice Centre.

• Your assessment will be marked and moderated as described in the Assessment and Feedback Policy.  You have find further information in the Assessment FAQs

• Anonymous marking is not used in the marking process. This is because students are identifiable at the point of assessment.

• You will receive feedback within 15 working days of the assessment. Feedback will be mapped against the rubric provided for this assessment.

Needs significant improvement

0-39

Needs improvement 

40-49

Satisfactory

50-59

Good

60-69

Very Good

70-79

Exceptional

80-100

Knowledge &

Understanding   

Shows some awareness of relevant data visualisation and dashboard design principles, but understanding and application are inconsistent or underdeveloped. Design choices receive limited theoretical justification and do not yet demonstrate

a satisfactory application of relevant theory and best practice.

Objectives and design decisions are poorly defined or largely

descriptive. Little meaningful

justification, consideration of alternatives, or

critical evaluation of the completed dashboard.

Provides sound justification of key choices with some consideration of alternatives and trade-offs.

Evaluation identifies relevant strengths, weaknesses and improvements in the

Provides clear, analytical

justification of design and functionality. Alternatives and trade-offs are considered meaningfully, with good critical evaluation of how

Demonstrates strong analytical judgement throughout. Design decisions are compared with credible alternatives

and evaluated

critically in relation to audience,

Needs significant improvement

0-39

Needs improvement 

40-49

Satisfactory

50-59

Good

60-69

Very Good

70-79

Exceptional

80-100

Dashboard is incomplete, technically weak or difficult to use, with limited evidence of Power BI competency.

Functionality is largely basic and/or does not effectively support the intended questions.

Produces a partially effective or basically functional dashboard, but demonstrates limited Power BI competency beyond straightforward chart creation and filtering. Technical development, measures, transformations, interactions and/or information hierarchy are underdeveloped, resulting in a solution that does not yet demonstrate 
satisfactory practical competency.

Produces a competent, functional dashboard with appropriate visualisations and interactions. Shows

sound Power BI skills and some purposeful use of measures, transformations and/or additional functionality where required.

Produces a highly effective dashboard demonstrating very good technical ambition and mastery.

Sophisticated Power BI functionality is integrated purposefully, with strong information hierarchy and userfocused interaction.

Produces an
exceptional, polished analytical solution demonstrating
extensive technical
mastery and ambition. Advanced functionality,

calculations/
transformations and interactions are integrated seamlessly and substantially enhance analytical capability and user experience.

Communication and Presentation Skills

Communicates some dashboard features and design rationale, but the demonstration lacks sufficient clarity, structure, focus or justification.

Explanation may be predominantly

Highly clear, polished and engaging demonstration. The published dashboard

is used effectively to communicate a strong design rationale without drifting into a

Needs significant improvement

0-39

Needs improvement 

40-49

Satisfactory

50-59

Good

60-69

Very Good

70-79

Exceptional

80-100

Limited evidence of

initiative, professional

judgement or reflection. The solution appears minimally developed and shows little adaptation to audience or purpose.

Shows some independent decision-making and reflection, but professional judgement, initiative and user focus are underdeveloped. The solution may rely heavily on obvious or minimally developed choices and does not yet demonstrate

satisfactory critical reflection on its effectiveness.

Sound independent

judgement and reflection are evident. The dashboard is appropriately developed for its stated audience and purpose, with sensible consideration of improvement.