For all assessed items, hand-in dates, weighting information and word count information see the Assessment Information & Deadlines.
Until official project marks are released at the end of the project, all component marks, such as the Interim Report mark, will be provisional and subject to moderation and adjustment.
Detailed marking criteria for each of the project deliverables are provided below.
Marks are provided under various criteria based on the given guidelines. The overall mark will reflect these individual marks but may not be simply the average. The overall mark will reflect the relative balance of the different criteria for the particular project and may vary between projects. For example, the relative importance of the literature review may vary depending on whether a project is more research or design focused. The comments by the marker should reflect how the project has been marked to ensure that the student can understand the mark given.
Penalties for Late Submission
Late submission will result in a deduction of 5% of the total mark awarded for the piece of work for each working day after the submission date. Standard mathematical rounding rules should be applied and marks should be rounded up. The 5 working day deadline for late submission is absolute and any work submitted after the 5 working day period without a special dispensation will receive zero.
For further information see www.shef.ac.uk/ssid/exams/policies.
Where an assessment is marked by two markers the overall mark for that assessment will be weighted as shown in the Assessment Information & Deadlines table. Moderation of the mark for any of the assessments by a third assessor will be required in the following cases:
- The two independent marks differ by 10 or more: In this case the supervisor and assessor will review their assessments; if, following review, the assessments still differ by 10 marks or more, a third assessor will be assigned by the module leader for the assessment of the report.
- If following any moderation the average mark for the assessment of the dissertation is borderline pass (defined as a mark of 37-39) a third assessor will be asked to independently mark the dissertation with the view to determining whether the dissertation can be considered as a pass. In the event that a third marker has already been used for the case that the first two assessments differ by 10 marks or more, this mark will be used for the consideration of borderline cases.
Applications for extensions to the submission date for any assessed component of the project must be made directly to Aerospace Support (email@example.com). This email must contain the reason for the requested extension. Before an extension is formally granted a completed extenuating circumstances form (available from the SSID pages of the university website) must be submitted.
Please note that extensions will only be granted if a student cannot reasonably submit the specified assessed component within the original deadline and can provide a valid reason supported by appropriate evidence. Typically extensions will only be granted in the event of medical and/or personal circumstances beyond the control of the student. Failure to have backed-up your data and poor planning so that everything is being done at the last minute are not valid reasons. The decision of the module leader will be final in all requests for extensions.
See the University guidance on Plagiarism & Unfair Means
The University expects its graduates to have acquired certain attributes. (See the Sheffield Graduate). Many of these relate to good academic practice:
- a critical, analytical and creative thinker
- an independent learner and researcher
- information literate and IT literate
- a flexible team worker
- an accomplished communicator
- competent in applying their knowledge and skills
- professional and adaptable
Throughout your programme of study at the University you will learn how to develop these skills and attributes. Your assessed work is the main way in which you demonstrate that you have acquired and can apply them. Using unfair means in the assessment process is dishonest and also means that you cannot demonstrate that you have acquired these essential academic skills and attributes.