|
|
|
|
| IMPORTANT:If you are conducting your project using your own computing facilities make sure you back up you work regularly. The Department cannot be held responsible if you lose all your work as the result of, for example, your laptop being lost or stolen, or a hard disk failure. Work done on Departmental machines is backed up regularly by our technical staff and is therefore much safer. |
1. OVERVIEW |
COMP702 is the MSc 60 credit project module that will run over the summer from the week after the semester 2 exams to (roughly) one week before the start of the next academic year.
This web page is designed to offer some specific guidance about the conduct of MSc projects within the Department of Computer Science at the University of Liverpool.
Each project will be handled by a team of three people, modelled on the way on which research degrees (PhDs and MPhils) are supervised within the University:
2. BASIC PHILOSOPHY |
|
The main aim of an MSc dissertation project is for a student to develop and demonstrate autonomy in the management and development of realistic projects in computer science, either research or application oriented. Although new technical skills may be acquired, this is not the main aim. At the end of the project a student should have demonstrated the ability to initiate, plan, manage and deliver a complete IT project for a customer or research supervisor. The delivery of the project will include giving interim presentations describing important stages of the project, and a final dissertation describing the project as a whole. With reference to:
there is a requirement that the dissertation should be intellectually demanding and involve the original application of knowledge gained in the programme of study. Level M Projects are therefore not expected to involve original research in the sense of making new scientific discoveries (this would be unrealistic). However, at level M there should be some degree of scholarly added value attached to the project (not in the sense of "what new subject a student may have learned from undertaking the project" but "what contribution the project makes to the knowledge of others") regardless of whether the project is a practical one or a research oriented one. |
Thus MSc projects are not required to be fully fledged research projects in their own right; but should add some seed of original thinking, innovative approach, interesting or beneficial contribution to the existing body of knowledge. The aim is not "to do something that has never been done before", but to present a new "angle" or "view point" on something that has been done before. For example:
Whatever the case the key characteristics of the work carried out should be:
|
|
The objectives of the module (from the module specification) are:
|
|
After completing the module students should be able:
|
|
3. SUGGESTED PROJECTS |
A list of suggested projects will be made available by Easter during the current academic year.
Note that 2nd supervisors and assessors may change after the allocation of projects so as to maintain a balance amongst the Computer Science Department staff.
A list of project allocations for 2011 session is available (local access).
4. TIME TABLE FOR SUMMER 2011 |
| Important Date | Activity |
|---|---|
| Monday 06 June 2011 | MSc projects officially begin (week 1) |
| Friday 01 July 2011 | Short specification document (end of week 4) |
| Friday 29 July 2011 | Design oral presentation + short report (end of week 8) |
| Friday 26 August 2011 | Final presentation + software demo when appropriate (end of week 12) |
| Tuesday 20 September 2011 | Dissertation hand in (Tusday in week 16, Firm deadline) |
Table 1: COMP702 Project Timetable
Note: Given the nature of the MSc projects and because staff are likely to be absent over some of the summer period there is some flexibility regarding dates for the oral presentations and the demonstration. Your dissertation must be submitted by 12:00 (noon) on Tuesday 20th September 2011. All students who take resit exams are granted one week extension.
5. CONDUCT OF PROJECT |
An excellent general book on how to tackle Computer Science projects is:
| Christian W. Dawson, "Computing Projects: A Student's Guide", Prentice Hall, 2000. |
There are many valuable writing guides, either in book form or on the WWW, one example is provided by the university of Kansas. There, you can find information on: (i) study strategies, (ii) writing-up your research, (iii) citing and documenting your sources, (iv) grammar and usage, and (v) theses and dissertations. You are encouraged to also use other sources --- look at computer science published journal and conference papers to get an idea of the required style. Remember that you are writing a scientific work and not an extended essay so do not be afraid of using lists, tables, diagrams, etc. --- whatever best gets your ideas across to the reader. However, try to be consistent in your approach to your project, and writing your dissertation.
A Word template is available that students may use if they wish. This template is reproduced here by permission of Laureate Online Learning, the University of Liverpool's eLearning partner.
It is good practice when undertaking a project to keep a log of your activities. This should provide a record of what you were doing and when, and record all key events in the project.
If you have a technical question or request (like whether you can run specific software from the labs, or whether it is possible to use two seemingly incompatible applications) you are advised to contact Phil Jimmieson. Please bear in mind that Mr. Jimmieson has a busy schedule, so preferably make an appointment and try to clarify your requirements in advance, so that time and resources allow to look for alternatives.
Below is a typical project work plan for a project involving some software implementation:
| Weeks | Activity |
|---|---|
| 1 and 2 | Background reading literature review. |
| 3 and 4 | Project specification. |
| 5, 6, 7, and 8 | Project design. |
| 8, 9, 10, and 11 | Software implementation and testing. |
| 11, 12, 13, and 14 | Software experimentation and analysis of results. |
| 13, 14, and 15 | Write up of dissertation. |
6. PROFESSIONAL ISSUES |
You need to conduct your project in compliance with the British Computer Society (BCS) Code of Conduct and the BCS Code of Good Practice. As part of your dissertation you will need to discuss how your project and its conduct relates to these two Codes.
7. ASSESSMENT |
An overview of the assessment stages is presented in Table 2. All assessments are done by two markers as indicated in the table. Each of the components of assessment will be graded using the CS Department's standard MSc grade descriptors, i.e., assessors will attempt to assign grades, which most closely correspond to the description given in Table 3.
| Activity | Mode | Deliverables | # marks (%) | 1st Assessor | 2nd Assessor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Specification | Specification document | Short specification document (recommended <10 sides A4) | 10 | Assessor | 2nd supervisor |
| Design | Oral presentation | Short report (recommended <10 sides A4) and copy of slides | 10 | Assessor | 2nd supervisor |
| Final presentation | Oral presentation (incl. software demo) | Short report (recommended <10 sides A4) and copy of slides | 20 | Assessor | 2nd supervisor |
| Dissertation | Written work | Two bound copies | 60 | Supervisor | 2nd supervisor |
Table 2: COMP702 project assessment stages
| Grade | Classification | Percentage | Qualitative Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| A+ | Good Distinction | 80+ | Factually almost faultless; perceptive and focused treatment of all issues. Clearly directed; logical; comprehensive coverage of topic; strong evidence of reading/research outside the material presented in the programme; substantial elements of originality and independent thought; very well written. critical and scholarly presentation. |
| A | Distinction | 70+ | Logical; enlightening; originality of thought or approach; good coverage of topic; clear, in-depth understanding of material; good focus; good evidence of outside reading/research; very well written and directed. |
| B | Good Pass | 60+ | Logical; thorough; factually sound (no serious errors); good understanding of material; evidence of outside reading/research; exercise of critical judgement; some originality of thought or approach; well written and directed. |
| C | Pass | 50+ | Worthy effort, but undistinguished outcome. Essentially correct, but possibly missing important points or inadequate treatment. Largely derived from material delivered in the programme, but with some evidence of outside reading/research; some evidence of critical judgement; some weaknesses in expression/presentation. |
| D | Compensatable Fail | 40+ | Incomplete coverage of topic; evidence of poor understanding of material; Poor presentation; lack of coherent argument. Very basic approach to a narrow or misguided selection of material. Lacking in background and/or flawed in structure |
| F | Fail | 0 .. 40 | Serious omissions; significant errors/misconceptions; poorly directed at targets; evidence of inadequate effort. Shallow and poorly presented work showing failure in understanding. |
| G | Fail | 0 | No work submitted |
Table 3: COMP702 project marking descriptors
The purpose of this stage is to ensure that there is a clear idea of what the project comprises, and that there is a well defined plan showing how the project will be developed in time.
TWO copies of the specification document (of recommended size: two sides of A4 + one side with the timetabled schedule of work) when printed must be submitted to the student office by Friday, July 1st 2011, 12 noon. The specification document will be assessed the second supervisor and the assessor. A grade will be given for the project specification, and this will be made available on Tuesday July 13th, i.e., roughly a week after the submission deadline. This grade will count for 10% of the final mark. The suggested structure of the specification document is as follows:
|
For your guidance a copy of the feedback form that will be used to assess your presentation is available.
By this stage of the project students should have completed the preliminary research and analysis required for the project and so have a clear idea of how they will carry out their projects. Typically this understanding will be recorded in a design using some standard methodology. The purpose of this stage is to present this design.
Assessment will be performed by presentation to the two markers. Students are asked to arrange (with the markers) a convenient time for their presentations. The presentation is expected to take place during week 8 July 25th-29th, 2011. A report of no more than ten sides of A4 when printed must be delivered directly to the two markers (2nd supervisor + assessor) two working days prior to the presentation. Students may use electronic (recommended) or OHP slides, and one copy of these slides must be handed in at the beginning of the presentation. It is expected that the presentation should take about 15 minutes followed by further discussion (questions + comments) with the markers. A grade will be given for the design, and this will be made available within five days of the presentation. This grade will count for 10% of the final mark. The presentation and report should be structured as follows:
|
With respect to 2 (design):
It is expected that the presentation must clearly show a design method that have been followed, and that the design has been carried out with sufficient attention to detail to inspire confidence that it can be realised, tested and evaluated in the time remaining for the project.
For your guidance a copy of the feedback form that will be used to assess your presentation is available.
The final presentation is intended to provide an overview of what has been achieved during the tenure of the project. Assessment will be performed by presentation to the two markers. Students are asked to arrange (with the markers) a convenient time for their presentations. The final presentation is expected to take place during week 12 August 22nd-26th , 2011. One copy of the slides must be given to each marker before the presentation. A report of an appropriate (reflecting the content of the project) length, but not more than 10 sides of A4, when printed must be given to the markers two working days prior to the presentation. The presentation is expected to last 15 minutes, including questions. The presentation should give an overview of the all aspects of the project. Normally this will include:
|
Posters:
Some projects may not result in the production of demonstrable software,
either due to the nature of the project, because the project has been
developed externally, or because of problems encountered in due course.
The principle of an informal presentation remains, however, important.
In such cases students will be expected to produce a poster which
they will use to talk about their project, and will be expected to answer
questions and respond to their audience as for a software demonstration.
Software demonstration:
Most projects, however, are expected to contain an integral software component.
After a more formal presentation students are asked to engage into a less formal
and more interactive demonstration where the student and the markers should talks through
the developed software. In such a situation flexibility to respond to the person
to whom one is demonstrating, and the ability to answer questions is important.
Each student is expected to approach their assessors (see
the project allocation WWW page) and make
an arrangement for the demonstration either in the
assessor's office or, by default, in one of the available laboratories.
Further use of supporting material, such as diagrams, tables, etc is recommended
if this improves presentation of the project and the work that has been performed.
The demonstration should be focused on functionality of the working software, and
students should be prepared to answer questions about the software, and to explain
implementation of requested fragments of the software (e.g code listings etc).
The final presentation (including demonstration) will be assessed by the
assessor and the second supervisor allocated to the project. A grade will be given
which will count for 20% of the final mark, and this will be made available
within five days of the presentation. For your guidance a copy of the feedback
form that will be used to assess your presentation is
available
ONE COPY of the dissertation must be submitted to the student office (Janet Lowry).
Also, you must submit all files including the dissertation and appendices in the PDF
format as well as the original source code via the project management system available at:
http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~comp702/.
7.4. Dissertation
The submission deadline is on Tuesday September 20th, 2011, 12 noon.
Students who took resit exams are allowed to submit their work by
Tuesday September 27th, 2011, 12 noon. Please note that these deadlines are strict.
I.e., no further extensions will be granted.
NOTE: In the current version of the system being a student you can submit files
and overwrite files on the system. You cannot, however, remove previously uploaded
files. So I strongly recommend each student to create and submit a text file with
the table of content (toc) of their submission. In particular, if your names is
John Smith, please submit also a text file with the name:
John-Smith-toc.txt
that contains the list of files that need to be assessed. This is to avoid
assessment of files that are submitted by mistake.
This dissertaion will count for 60% of the marks, and
is marked by two members of staff, who may not have seen the previous
presentations. The dissertation must be self contained, and include a complete
record of the work carried out. A target size of 7,000 words is recommended,
with a maximum of 10,000 words. Appendices will not be included in the maximum,
but assessors will not normally expect to read appendices in detail, so they
are intended to supply supporting and illustrative material. The content of the
dissertation is at the discretion of the student, and will depend on the nature
of the project, but for a typical project involving the development of a piece
of software, the following elements of the dissertation would be expected:
| IMPORTANT:A CD-ROM/DVD or a pen drive containing all files related to the project including the source code of developed software, the specification document, the content of presentations, the disseration and all related documents, must be submitted in addition to the hard copies of the dissertation. If necessary, you can use the CD/DVD writers in the help desk area. |
A dissertation "word" template is available, it is recommended that you use this.
The dissertation should be bound between standard card binders using thermal binding. A thermal binder is available for use by MSc students in the student office.
For your guidance a copy of the feedback and mark forms that will be used to assess your dissertation are available from here: [feedback form] and [mark form]
8. PLAGIARISM |
All student should be aware that they are responsible for what they write. One of the pillars of progress in research is that authors can benefit from each other's earlier work. Arguments made in a dissertation should be supported by facts. One way of doing this is to refer to the existing body of work. For example one can argue that X is true because Y and Z demonstrated it was true in a number of articles published in reputable journals (and then give references to the publications in question). If readers want to disagree with you they also have to take issue with X and Y!
However, it is important for students to make clear, when writing their dissertation, what their original contribution is and what is not. If a student is unable to make a point more clearly than a source that they have found (a book, a paper, or a document on the web), they should use quotations: put the quoted sentence(s) in between quotes " and ", and make clear in the running text where the reference is taken from. Then, cite that source in your bibliography and/or list of references. There are many standards to do citation, students are free to use any style, but should make sure that they make citations in a consistent way.
It does not make sense to quote more than 3 or 4 sentences at one occasion. If readers really have to literally read another source, students should tell them in their introduction, and say that they assume that the reader has read that source before starting reading the students dissertation.
Apart from using somebody else's text, students may also come across figures, pictures and diagrams, which they think illustrate their point better than they could do otherwise. Again, if this is the case (and students should first check that they are not acting against any copyright law), students should state that the figure/picture/diagram is taken from a particular source, and give the full details of that source in their bibliography.
The University of Liverpool has written its own statement on plagiarism and collusion. This can be found in section 8.1 of the Code of practice on Assessment students will be expected to have read this (see below).
To make sure that you have read these codes of practice regarding quotation, referencing and plagiarism, you have to fill in a declaration on plagiarism form and attach it to your dissertation when submitting it.
9. RECOVERY OF PROBLEM PROJECTS |
A small number of projects may have difficulties, particularly in the early stages. Appropriate action will be suggested for all projects which score below grade C on any of the assessment stages. Specific actions may be recommended for other projects also.
Remember that if you are conducting your project using your own computing facilities you should make sure that you back up you work regularly. The Department cannot be held responsible if you lose all your work as the result of, for example, your lap top being lost or stolen, or a hard disk failure. Work done on Departmental machines is backed up regularly by our technical staff and is therefore "safe".
Maintained by Leszek A. Gasieniec. Last updated February 2011.