CCMT20412 Environmental Monitoring and GIS Summative Assessment Brief | NTU

Grading Matrix

NB: Final grade determined by how well the criteria have been met overall and not the sum of the individual aspects of the work.

Class/ Grade

Assessment Criteria

Fail Low | Mid

Marginal Fail

Third Low | Mid | High

Lower Second Low | Mid | High

Upper Second Low | Mid |High

First

Low | Mid | High

First Exceptional First

Introduction and rationale for environmental variables (20%)

No introduction to the study area or environmental variables selected.

Limited introduction to the study area or environmental variables selected, one of these may be missing.

Basic introduction to the study area and some of the environmental variables have been introduced, but descriptions may be brief, incorrect or missing.

Good introduction to the study area and the environmental variables have been introduced, but descriptions may be brief and with some inaccuracies.

Very good introduction to the study area and the environmental variables have all been introduced, but more detail could be provided.

Excellent introduction to the study area and the environmental variables, only minor changes suggested to improve.

Exemplary introduction to the study area and the environmental variables.

Appropriate selection and presentation of results (25%)

No results or analysis presented for any of the variables.

Data presented incorrectly.

Missing habitat characterization and/or less than three environmental variables presented.

No attempt made to describe data presented.

Basic presentation of the required data, may contain some errors.

Missing results from one Block and/or some of the required elements.

Limited description of the trends and patterns in the data.

A good effort at presenting the variables but may contain some minor errors.

Missing some of the required elements from the results.

Good description of the trends and patterns in the data.

A very good effort at presenting the data.

All results presented, but there may be some minor errors.

Competent description of the trends and patterns in the data.

Excellent presentation of all of the data, only 1-2 minor errors.

Excellent description of the key trends shown.

Exemplary presentation of all of the data.

Outstanding detailed and accurate descriptions of the key trends shown.

Use of GIS to present maps/outputs and correct cartography (20%)

No map(s)/output s submitted or map not created using GIS software.

Map(s)/outputs presented shows little or no evidence of planning to provide a balanced and structured

GIS map(s)/ outputs shows some attempt at planning and creating an adequate balance but structure

GIS map(s)/ outputs shows good evidence of planning and creating a reasonable level of balance but

GIS map(s)/ outputs shows very good evidence of planning, with a clear structure

GIS map(s)/ outputs shows excellent attention to detail, producing a very well

Exceptional professional cartographic presentation.

All the fundamental

cartographic

layout and may not all be created within GIS.

Lack of appropriate cartographic standard elements.

No study area map presented.

could be vastly improved for example balancing relative sizes of objects and standardising font types/size.

Some of the fundamental cartographic elements are presented but a number of elements such as North arrow, scale bar or legend are missing or incorrect.

No inset location map provided on the study area or this is incorrect.

the relative size of objectives or fonts may need improvement.

Some of the fundamental cartographic elements are presented but 1-2 elements such as North arrow, scale bar or legend are missing or incorrect.

Inset location map provided for the study area but this is missing a scale bar, label(s) and/or spatial context.

and overall balance.

Most of the fundamental cartographic elements are presented but elements such as North arrow, scale bar or legend could be improved.

Inset location map provided for the study area but this is missing one of the following: a scale bar, label(s) or spatial context.

structured and balanced output.

All the fundamental cartographic elements are well defined and presented.

Inset location map is provided for the study area but could be improved.

Would require minor amendments to achieve publication standard.

elements are presented and goes beyond expectations by presenting further elements that demonstrate outstanding level of thought.

Overall, a publishable map.

Interpretation and industry recommendations (25%)

No attempt made to evaluate or interpret the data.

No industry recommendati ons provided.

Little evidence of evaluation or interpretation of the data. Only 1-2 Blocks attempted.

Provides no Suggestions for variation.

Industry recommendations

Begins to interpret the data but only in a simplistic manner and may not include all Blocks.

Attempts to quantify and/or describe variations observed.

A good effort at interpreting both habitat types and environmental variables but could go into more detail.

Good quantification and description of variation in

A very good effort at interpreting data, exploring both habitat types and environmental variables.

Competent quantification and description of variation in

An excellent interpretation of the data exploring habitat types and measured environmental variables in detail.

Excellent quantification and description of

Exemplary interpretation of the data, exploring all measured parameters in great detail.

Outstanding detailed description and quantification

provided for only 1-2 Blocks.

Basic industry recommendations provided, that may not cover all Blocks or may not appropriately relate challenges with the findings and suggested improvements.

variables measured.

Some good explanation for variation observed presented but may have missed some key patterns.

Good industry recommendations provided, but these do appropriately relate challenges with the findings and suggested improvements.

observed variables.

Very good industry recommendation s provided, but missing linkage between the challenges identified and suggested improvements.

variation observed.

Excellent industry recommendations provided, which detail linkages the challenges identified and suggested improvements.

of variation observed.

Exemplary industry recommendations provided, that uses literature to enhance the recommendations suggested.

Presentation and Referencing (10%)

No attempt to follow suggested structural and presentation guidelines.

There are significant errors in the use of vocabulary, in punctuation, spelling or grammar and

Minimal evidence of adherence to the suggested structural and presentation guidelines.

Figure(s) and table(s) included but no caption provided.

Communication shows limited clarity, with significant errors in the use of

Attempt made to follow suggested presentation guidelines, but lacking attention to detail and contains many errors.

Figure(s) and table(s) included but no caption, or positioned incorrectly or missing figure/table

A good attempt at following the suggested structural and presentation guidelines.

Communication shows clarity but structure may not always be coherent. May be some inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the use of general and

specific

Very good balanced style of presentation following the suggested structural and presentation guidelines.

Caption includes figure/table number and clear heading with sufficient detail but may not cover all aspects

of the

Excellent style of presentation which follows all of the suggested structural and presentation guidelines.

Caption includes figure/table number and detailed heading that clearly explains the figure or table shown.

Exemplary and professional style of presentation and clear professional structure.

Caption includes figure/table number and highly informative heading with precise detail, enhancing interpretation of the figure or table shown.