Assessed Posters asan Interim Project Deliverable

1
Assessed Posters as an Interim Project
Deliverable

• Lynette Willoughby
• School of Computing
• Leeds Metropolitan University

2
History and Context

• Leeds Metropolitan University, School of
  Computing
• BSc Computing (MM, SE, DB, AI etc routes) BSc
  Business Computing
• All do final year project, ¼ of final year
• Problem of
• Getting them started (Sept./Oct.)
• Keeping them going (Dec./Jan.)

3
So weve tried -

• 1st and 2nd formal meetings wks 7 and 14
• Problem Statement
• To mark or not to mark?
• 10
• Project Proposal (as in Christian Dawson The
  Essence of Computing Projects pp 34-35)
• More emphasis on evaluation
• 10
• (Importance of product ongoing debate)

4
Variations on a theme

• Problem definition and context
• Evidence of need for a solution
• Methodology
• Description of the product
• Project plan
• Evaluation
• Management
• Presentation and communication

5
Using Posters in Assessment

• Used in final year elective (Cyberspace and
  Society) for many years - 50 of assessment
• LTSN Workshop, May 2003 _at_ Leeds Met
• Examples and experiences from
• Ulster, Leeds Met, Durham, Warwick, Sheffield,
  Keele, Edge Hill, Newcastle

6
Posters as Interim Project Deliverable

• (Initial Project Proposal, week 7, unmarked)
• 20 of final project marks
• Hand-in in week 11
• A2 (approx.) physical poster handed in rolled or
  folded

7
Guidance given (part of 1 lecture)

• Summarises project extended project proposal
  with reporting of research progress and more
  critical analysis
• Title and Aims
• Introduction to subject area (initial research,
  Harvard referencing)
• Identify the gap/justification for project
• Objectives
• Evaluation
• Should not spend a lot of time producing poster

8
Marking

• Introduction/initial research - 20
• Justification 20
• Objectives 20
• Evaluation 20
• Communication 20
• 4 staff marking (170 posters) double marking
  pinned-up laid out in one room

9
Examples
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
Initial reactions

• WOW
• Then tempered by concerns

19
Issues

• 20 of final project marks
• Too much just for a poster? Too little for all
  the work expected?
• External examiner moderately supportive
• Confusion/uncertainty staff and students
• Consistency of guidance
• No previous examples
• Time spent - design rather than research/content
• Cost/printing pressures
• Marking time, consistency

20
Future

• Initial reaction very positive, including from
  initially sceptical staff - likely to continue,
  but marking not yet finished and staff not yet
  seen all results
• Quality very good
• Clearer, consistent guidance
• Changes to spec. esp. headings and weightings