LD7083 Computing and Digital Technologies Project Dissertation Report Assessment Brief 2025-26

Published: 23 Dec, 2025

Category	Assignment	Subject	Computer Science
University	Northumbria University Newcastle	Module Title	LD7083 Computing and Digital Technologies Project

LD7083 NUL Assessment Brief

Module Code	LD7083	Module Title	Computing and Digital Technologies Project
Statement of task	This assessment invites you to address the following task: You will need to develop a project relevant to the program of study, providing a detailed explanation of each stage and a critical analysis of the results obtained. All your stages have to be thoroughly documented and presented as a single dissertation report.
Word Limit	The total word limit for this assessment is up to 12000 words.
Weighting	This assessment is worth 100% of the total marks available for this module
Submission Time and Date	14 Jan 2025 16:00
Submission of Assessment	This assessment should be submitted electronically, online via Turnitin. You will find a Turnitin link to submit your assessment on the module eLP Blackboard site. It is your responsibility to ensure that your assessment is submitted by the submission deadline stated. Penalties apply for late submissions
Provision of feedback	Written feedback will be provided on 20 working date

Guidance for this assessment

1. You have to give an overview of the area of the project
2. The chosen topic should be supported by a detailed literature review
3. You need to explain a research design and thoroughly discuss the proposed methodology
4. All your results must be critically analysed and verified
5. The report must be supported with a link to the working projects
6. The dissertation report should start with a Cover page including

Module: LD7083 Computing and Digital Technologies Project
Supervisor Name: Assignment title: Dissertation Report
Student name + university identifier (always underline the surname/family name by which you are recorded in the university systems)

Programme or course of study: Word Count:

7. Your report must be written to a professional standard using MS Word and show appropriate and consistent use of type, fonts and line spacing (for this assignment, use Arial 12 and single spacing) and page layouts. Add a footer to each page that includes your name, the module code, and a page number.

8. The project will be finalized with a viva. The viva will usually last no more than 30 minutes, with 10-15 minutes of presentation and 10-15 minutes of questions. The viva can also be used to demonstrate any practical products/applications/experiments that have formed part of the project. The viva is compulsory but does not carry any allocated marks. It will help your second marker and supervisor to understand your dissertation work.

The dissertation will be evaluated based on the following four elements.

Description	Marks
Abstract, Introduction and Literature Review – 25%
The abstract should clearly state the main question/aim addressed, the broad methodology employed, and the key findings. The introduction should include a discussion of the context and potential benefits of the work, an explanation of the main aims, a list of objectives, and a breakdown of the report's structure. If you have changed or added any objectives since the research proposal review, these changes should be made clear. You will be expected to consider and outline here the main professional, ethical, legal and social issues related to this academic research project. The literature review chapter should assess your presentation of a suitable range of literature relevant to the research. This section is a critical review, not a summary. This means that you should discuss the literature, explaining the range of validity, its relevance to the project, the strength of the findings, and so on, rather than simply paraphrasing. You can be given credit for a clear explanation of complex concepts. You should discuss the relevance and applicability of the literature to your own work. You should demonstrate the ability to evaluate the research of others critically and to assess the strength of the evidence/discussion presented.	25
Research Development/ Description of Practical Research Work Undertaken – 25%
Primary research may or may not be conducted. You may undertake primary research (qualitative or quantitative) or undertake some analysis of secondary data (e.g., network traffic data or other archival documents and material, etc). Your dissertation may also include the discussion of the practical work you have done, such as requirements analysis, design, construction, installation, and experimental work. You’re testing and/or data collection approach should be included in this section, although the results from this form are part of the next section. You should clearly outline what you have done and include rationales for the approaches and techniques used, as well as how you have addressed any ethical, social, and legal issues in your approach. You should also include a discussion of any ideas that have been rejected.	25
Results and Analysis– 25%
This section should assess your results/findings and your analyses of these. Examples of techniques you may use include reasoned evaluation, thorough product testing, scientific testing, data analysis, internal and external validation and statistical survey. You would typically make use of more than one technique, and your use of the methods should reflect the postgraduate nature of the research. You should also justify your choice of techniques and ensure that they are applied ethically and professionally, taking into account any data protection issues.	25
Critical Evaluation, Conclusions and Recommendations – 25%
Your critical evaluation should assess your own research outcomes and how your findings contribute to the broader academic body of knowledge, including any comparison of your results/ findings/hypotheses with those of others. You should assess the strength of the key findings, the limits of their applicability and their probable usefulness. You should discuss the extent to which the main aim has been achieved, and which objectives have been satisfactorily met. There should also be a critical assessment and evaluation of your own work and your professional approach to this research project, including an appraisal of how you have addressed any ethical, legal and social issues. In the conclusions and recommendations, assess the strength and presentation of the findings and recommendations. You should present your answer to the original research aim/question and discuss how well the original problem has been solved. This should include a reference to the results obtained by you. You should also discuss any interesting additional discoveries that have been made. Recommendations may include suggestions for further research, suggestions for improved practice based on your findings and suggestions for practical application of any new concepts that have been investigated.	25
Total	100

Rubric - Grading criteria for the Assessment

You should refer to these assessment criteria within this rubric for detailed guidance on how you will secure marks for this assessment

Masters level

*80-100%*	Does not meet Standards			Meets Standards		Exceeds Standards
Assessment Criteria	Completely insufficient	Insufficient	Insufficient	Good	Very Good	Excellent	Outstanding
Assessment Criteria	0-29%	30-39%	40-49%	50-59%	60-69%	70-79%	80-100%
Abstract, Introduction and Literature Review – 25%	Absent or completely inadequate abstract and introduction No meaningful literature review or critical analysis	Major deficiencies in abstract and introduction Literature review lacks coherence and critical thinking Minimal consideration of ethical, legal, or professional issues	Abstract unclear or incomplete Introduction lacks depth or misses key components Literature review primarily descriptive with minimal critical evaluation Poor integration of literature with research aims	Abstract present but may lack clarity or completeness Introduction covers basic requirements but may be superficial Literature review tends toward summary rather than critical analysis Limited connection between literature and research	Abstract covers required elements adequately Introduction addresses most key components with reasonable consideration of relevant issues Literature review demonstrates adequate critical thinking with some evaluation of sources Shows reasonable connection between literature and own work	Abstract effectively communicates the main elements with good clarity Introduction shows strong understanding of context and objectives with good consideration of key issues Literature review provides good critical analysis of relevant sources with solid evaluation of evidence Shows strong ability to relate literature to own research	Abstract clearly articulates research question, methodology, and key findings with exceptional clarity Introduction demonstrates comprehensive understanding of context, benefits, aims, and objectives with sophisticated analysis of professional, ethical, legal, and social issues Literature review provides critical, insightful analysis of highly relevant sources with excellent evaluation of validity, relevance, and strength of evidence Demonstrates exceptional ability to synthesize complex concepts and relate literature to own work
Research Development/ Description of Practical Research Work Undertaken – 25%	No clear research methodology or practical work described	Major gaps in describing research undertaken Inadequate methodology explanation	Unclear or incomplete description of research work Poor justification of methodology Minimal consideration of ethical issues	Basic description of research work Limited justification of approaches Some consideration of ethical issues	Adequate description of research work undertaken Reasonable justification of approaches with some consideration of key issues Methods clearly explained	Clear description of research work with good justification of approaches Strong consideration of ethical and professional issues Good documentation of methodology and rationale	Exceptional description and justification of research methodology and practical work undertaken Sophisticated rationale for approaches with comprehensive consideration of ethical, social, and legal issues Clear documentation of rejected ideas with thoughtful analysis Demonstrates advanced understanding of research design principles
Results and Analysis– 25%	No meaningful analysis or results presented	Major deficiencies in analysis and results presentation Inadequate analytical approach	Poor or superficial analysis Inappropriate or inadequate analytical techniques Limited demonstration of analytical skills	Basic analysis present but may lack depth Limited use of analytical techniques Some evidence of analytical thinking	Adequate analysis with reasonable use of analytical techniques Some justification of approaches Demonstrates competent analytical skills	Strong analysis using appropriate techniques with good justification Clear postgraduate-level analytical work Good application of multiple analytical approaches	Comprehensive, sophisticated analysis using multiple appropriate techniques Exceptional justification of analytical approaches with rigorous application Advanced postgraduate-level analysis demonstrating deep understanding Exemplary consideration of ethical and data protection issues
Critical Evaluation, Conclusions and Recommendations – 25%	No meaningful evaluation, conclusions, or recommendations	Major deficiencies in evaluation and conclusions No clear recommendations or self-assessment	Poor critical evaluation Conclusions don't adequately address research aims Limited self-reflection or recommendations	Basic evaluation of results Limited critical reflection Simple conclusions with minimal recommendations	Adequate critical evaluation of outcomes Conclusions reasonably address research objectives Some self-reflection and practical recommendations	Strong critical evaluation with good assessment of research contribution Clear conclusions addressing research aims with practical recommendations Good self-reflection on research approach	Exceptional critical evaluation of research outcomes and contribution to knowledge Sophisticated comparison with existing research and assessment of findings' strength and limitations Outstanding critical self-reflection on professional approach and ethical considerations Compelling conclusions that directly address research aims with insightful recommendations

Assessment Guidance Session

Detailed assessment guidance will be given in Week 1 Seminar. The Seminar will provide advice on

i)Requirements for the assessment
ii) Assessment structure
iii) Assessment deadlines
iv)Requirement for the submission
v) How the assessment will be graded against the rubric

You are reminded that recorded assessment guidance will be provided on the eLP Blackboard site for this module after Week 6 Seminar.

Buy Custom Answer Of This LD7083 Assessmemt & Raise Your Grades

Get A Free Quote

Request Answer of this Assignment

Share this with your Friends

Facebook

Instagram

For the LD7083 Computing and Digital Technologies Project Assessment, students can use assignment help online to understand topics and manage tasks better. Trusted dissertation writing services offer guidance, editing, and clear explanations, while free dissertation writing examples help students learn structure and format. All support focuses on AI-free work, supported by clear AI reports for transparency. Every project is checked to ensure plagiarism-free work and original ideas. This approach helps students improve skills, save time, and meet academic rules. With simple support and ethical practices, students can complete their projects with confidence, clarity, and strong academic quality, and success overall.