X

Project Evaluation Guidelines & Rubrics

Project Evaluation Guidelines

These are to guidelines for successful completion of the B. Tech. projects in effective and uniform conduction of projects to be carried out by undergraduate students in Semester VII and Semester VIII.  It is expected that these guidelines will help in overall improvement in the quality of B.Tech. Projects along with improvement in the evaluation process. The B.Tech. project is a partial requirement for successful completion of the degree. It can be two types: Projects based on implementation of any application oriented problem, which will be more or less experimental in nature, and the others will be based on some innovative/ theoretical work.

In order to monitor the overall functioning of the activities related to the B. Tech projects and to have academic bridge among the various groups, it is proposed to create Department Evaluation Committee (DEC).

DEC will comprise the Head of the Department as the Convener along with four senior faculty members of the department. The Head will form the cell by the middle of the odd semester and will inform the Director of the Institute accordingly.

Roles of Department Evaluation Committee (DEC):

  • This committee will be responsible for evaluating the timely progress of the projects and communicating the progress report to the students.
  • At the end of third year second semester (VI semester) the Department Evaluation Committee should float the list of projects to be offered by department along with the concerned supervisor’s name.
  • In case it is observed by the DEC that any group of students is not performing well, this committee should take special care to improve their performance by means of counseling them.

Each project activity must be supervised by the faculty members of the department. These faculty members are termed as Supervisors. There can be at most two supervisors for a B. Tech Project; out of which at least one has to be from the Department and other can be from outside the Department/ Institute.

It is the responsibility of the Department to provide the Supervisor(s) for each B. Tech Project. Supervisors may be assigned to each project group either by the choice of student groups or by faculty expertise. A faculty member of the department can supervise B. Tech projects only if he/ she is having at least 2 years teaching experience in an engineering college. However, a faculty member not having sufficient teaching experience can be a co-supervisor. An eligible faculty member can supervise at most 4 B. Tech projects in an academic year. However, as a special case the Director of the institute can permit a faculty member to supervise at most 6 such projects.

Role of Supervisor is given below:

  • By the middle of third year second semester (VI semester) the supervisor should send the detailed information about the projects to be offered by him/ her to the Department Evaluation Committee.
  • The supervisor must monitor the progress being carried out by the project groups on regular basis. In case it is found that progress is unsatisfactory it should be reported to the Department Evaluation Committee for necessary action.
  • It is expected that the supervisor looks into the project report for desired format before the final submission.

Each B. Tech Project has to be carried by a group of students of that Institute. In order to ensure participation of each student, the group size should be preferably at least 2 but not more than 4 students. Formation of project groups should be done such that each group has representation of students with varying academic merit from best to average.

In view of this following practice may be followed:

  • Decide total number of feasible groups. Any left out student(s) should be randomly attached to any group.
  • Enlist the students in the order of their previous year merit.
  • Depending upon number of groups to be formed identify the group members in order of merit.

For example; If in a class of 31 students 10 groups are to be formed with at most four students in each group. First prepare the list of students in order of their merit. Assign group leaders for each group such that he/she is out of the top 10 students and other members of the group may be decided by the group leaders in consultation with Project Coordinator. Any left out student(s) may be assigned to any group.

In case the project is on multi-disciplinary nature, the Project group can be formed consisting of the students from other Departments. But there must be at least one student from the Department who is offering the Project.

Evaluation Procedure:

To ensure proper conduction of each project, progress of each project should be monitored on continuous basis first by the supervisor and than by the Department Evaluation Committee. In order to do so, it is planned to hold 4 presentations to be made by each project group in each semester.  In Semester VII, the first presentation will be purely synopsis presentation, which will be taken by the Department Evaluation Committee (DEC) in the second week after the institute opens after vacation. The project is assumed to be already selected by the students. In this presentation they are required to show a brief power point presentation describing the main Aim/ Objective of the project, the methodology to be used, the pert chart and the references in not more than 10-15 slides. This presentation shall be made before the respective project supervisor first and on his approval it should be made before the Department Evaluation Committee. The project is considered to be approved only if it is passed in this presentation. If the presentation is not up to the mark either the Committee will ask the students along with their supervisor to modify the project slightly within a week and present again or change the project (in case the committee finds the project not of sufficient standard or not feasible). The list of all the finalized projects should be send to the Institute Project Cell. The DEC should meet the Institute Project Cell within a week after the first presentation is made to discuss the quality of the projects taken by students and any changes required should be communicated to the supervisors and there after the students immediately. In this presentation the DEC is supposed to mark each student/ group based on their project synopsis content, presentation made, queries answered and attendance out of 10 marks (the break up can be decided by DEC).

The Second presentation of this semester will be planned by the DEC after about one month from the first presentation. This presentation will review the progress of the students. Each group will first show their progress to their respective supervisors first and get the brief project report signed from them and present the same before the DEC. The groups are also required to make a power point presentation (not more than 10-15 slides) and present before the DEC. They are also required to clearly state the agenda for the next one month in their presentation. In this presentation the DEC is supposed to mark each student/ group based on their project content, presentation made, project progress, queries answered and attendance out of 20 marks (the break up can be decided by DEC). The DEC shall finalize the marks just after the presentation and these marks should be displayed along with the comments within two days from the date of the presentation. The record of the same should be circulated to all the concerned supervisors and one copy should be sent to the Institute Project Cell.

After about one month from the date of the second presentation, DEC should plan for the Third presentation. It shall be made on the same way as the 2nd presentation was conducted and the groups should be evaluated in the same manner.

Final presentation at the end of seventh semester will be organized by the DEC according to the date given in the project calendar. This presentation will be taken by DEC, all supervisors and co-supervisors present in this presentation. The Committee will review the progress of the students. Each group is required to make a project report showing the complete six month progress of the project. This report should be brief (spiral bound) and should mainly contain the detailed methodology/ algorithms adopted/ studied during the entire semester and should clearly state the agenda for the next semester (by means of PERT chart). This report should be signed by the supervisors and should be submitted to the DEC at least two days before the final presentation. The groups are also required to make a power point presentation (not more than 15-20 slides) and present before the final Committee. In this presentation the DEC is supposed to mark each student/ group based on their project content, presentation made, project progress, queries answered and attendance out of 50 marks (the break up can be decided by DEC).

In the next semester, DEC will announce dates of 4 presentations in the Departmental Academic Calendar well in advance. First two presentations are to made to understand the progress of the work. They shall be made on the same way as the second presentation conducted in the Semester VII and the groups should be evaluated in the same manner.

Each project group has to prepare the project report and to submit it to the Department after duly certified by the Supervisors at least 3 days before the final internal presentation. This report has to be prepared based on the format mentioned in Appendix A.

Final Internal presentation will be taken one week before the date of final external presentation which will be given in the project calendar already by the DEC. This presentation will be made before the DEC, supervisors and co-supervisors should be present in this presentation. All the sessional marks for Semester VIII will be mainly given in this presentation and the marks given in the first two presentations should also be added to make the final score. The final project report should be extensively checked and signed by the supervisors and also by the DEC. The groups are also required to make a final power point presentation and present before the final Committee. This presentation shall demonstrate the complete working project. In this presentation the DEC is supposed to mark each student/ group based on their project content, presentation made, project progress, queries answered and attendance out of 50 marks (the break up can be decided by DEC). The sessional marks of each student shall be decided within two days from the date of final presentation by the DEC and the copy of the same should be circulated to all supervisors and co-supervisors and to the Institute Project Cell.

Normalization of Marks:

There is a possibility that the marks obtained in B. Tech Projects by various groups across the department may not be uniform because of the involvement of many examiners. Hence it is suggested to introduce the concept of normalizing these marks. For this we need to formulate a proper normalization scheme. These reports can be selected at random. Another possible scheme could be to use the minimum and maximum marks obtained by the various projects of different departments.

Awards:

DEC will nominate at most one project for the Best B. Tech Project of the department. The project group may be given an award along with a certificate at the time of Institute Annual Function.

Project Evaluation Rubrics

Review # Agenda Assessment Review Assessment Weightage
Review 1 Project Synopsis / Proposal Evaluation Rubric R1 10% (10)
Review 2 1st Mid-Term Project Evaluation Rubric R2 20% (20)
Review 3 2nd Mid-Term Project Evaluation Rubric R3 20% (20)
Review 4 End Semester Internal Project & Project Report Evaluation and Evaluation by Guide Rubric R4, R5 & R6 50% (50)
Total 100% (100)

Rubric #R1: Project Synopsis/Proposal Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 10

Level of Achievement

Excellent (10) Good (8) Average (6) Poor (4) Score
a Identification of Problem Domain and Detailed analysis of Feasibility, Objectives and Methodology of Project Proposal
  • Detailed and extensive explanation of the purpose and need of the project
  • All objectives of the proposed work are well defined; Steps to be followed to solve the defined problem are clearly specified
  • Detailed and extensive explanation of the specifications and the limitations of the existing systems
  • Good explanation of the purpose and need of the project
  • Collects a great deal of information and good study of the existing systems;
  • Good justification to the objectives; Methodology to be followed is specified but detailing is not done
  • Average explanation of the purpose and need of the project;
  • Moderate study of the existing systems; collects some basic information
  • Incomplete justification to the objectives proposed; Steps are mentioned but unclear; without justification to objectives
  • Moderate explanation of the purpose and need of the project
  • Explanation of the specifications and the limitations of the existing systems not very satisfactory; limited information
  • Only Some objectives of the proposed work are well defined; Steps to be followed to solve the defined problem are not specified properly

Rubric #R2: 1st Mid-term Project Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 20

Level of Achievement

Excellent (20) Good (16) Average (12) Poor (8) Score
a Design Methodology
  • Division of problem into modules and good selection of computing framework
  • Appropriate design methodology and properly justification
  • Division of problem into modules and good selection of computing framework
  • Design methodology not properly justified
  • Division of problem into modules but inappropriate selection of computing Framework
  • Design methodology not defined properly
  • Partial division of problem into modules and inappropriate selection of computing framework
  • Design methodology not defined properly
b Planning of Project Work
  • Time frame properly specified and being followed
  • Time frame properly specified but being followed partly
  • Time frame properly specified, but not being Followed
  • Time frame not properly specified
c Demonstration and Presentation
  • Objectives achieved as per time frame
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate and well arranged
  • Proper eye contact with audience and clear voice with good spoken language
  • Objectives achieved as per time frame
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate but not well arranged
  • Satisfactory demonstration, clear voice with good spoken language but eye contact not proper
  • Objectives achieved as per time frame
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate but not well Arranged
  • Eye contact with few people and unclear Voice
  • Objectives not achieved as per time frame
  • Contents of presentations are not appropriate
  • Demonstration not satisfactory

TOTAL MARKS= (a+b+c)/3

Rubric #R3: 2nd mid Term Project Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 20

Level of Achievement

Excellent (20) Good (16) Average (12) Poor (8) Score
a Incorporation of Suggestions
  • Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and new innovations added
  • Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and good justification
  • All major changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation
  • Suggestions during mid term evaluation are not incorporated
b Project Demonstration
  • All defined objectives are achieved
  • Each module working well and properly demonstrated
  • All modules of project are well integrated and system working is accurate
  • All defined objectives are achieved
  • Each module working well and properly demonstrated
  • Integration of all modules not done and system working is not very satisfactory
  • All defined objectives are achieved
  • Modules are working well in isolation and properly demonstrated
  • Modules of project are not properly integrated
  • Only some of the defined objectives are achieved
  • Modules are not in proper working form that further leads to failure of integrated system
c Presentation
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered
  • Proper eye contact with audience and clear voice with good spoken language
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered
  • Clear voice with good spoken language but less eye contact with audience
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate but not well delivered
  • Eye contact with only few people and unclear voice
  • Contents of presentations are not appropriate and not well delivered
  • Poor eye contact with audience and unclear voice

TOTAL MARKS= (a+b+c)/3

Rubric #R4: End Semester Internal Project Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 20

Level of Achievement

Excellent (20) Good (16) Average (12) Poor (8) Score
a Incorporation of Suggestions
  • Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and new innovations added
  • Changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation and good justification
  • All major changes are made as per modifications suggested during mid term evaluation
  • Suggestions during mid term evaluation are not incorporated
b Project Demonstration
  • All defined objectives are achieved
  • Each module working well and properly demonstrated
  • All modules of project are well integrated and system working is accurate
  • All defined objectives are achieved system working is not very satisfactory
  • Each module working well and properly demonstrated
  • Integration of all modules not done and
  • All defined objectives are achieved
  • Modules are working well in isolation and properly demonstrated
  • Modules of project are not properly integrated
  • Only some of the defined objectives are achieved
  • Modules are not in proper working form that further leads to failure of integrated system
c Presentation
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered
  • Proper eye contact with audience and clear voice with good spoken language
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate and well delivered
  • Clear voice with good spoken language but less eye contact with audience
  • Contents of presentations are appropriate but not well delivered
  • Eye contact with only few people and unclear voice
  • Contents of presentations are not appropriate and not well delivered
  • Poor eye contact with audience and unclear voice

TOTAL MARKS= (a+b+c)/3

Rubric #R5: Project Report Evaluation

Maximum Marks*: 20

Level of Achievement

Excellent (20) Good (16) Average (12) Poor (8) Score
a Project Report
  • Project report is according to the specified format
  • References and citations are appropriate  and well mentioned
  • Project report is according to the specified format
  • References and citations are appropriate but not mentioned well
  • Project report is according to the specified format but some mistakes
  • In-sufficient references and citations
  • Project report not prepared according to the specified format
  • References and citations are not appropriate
b Description of Concepts and Technical Details
  • Complete explanation of the key concepts and strong description of the technical requirements of the project
  • Complete explanation of the key concepts but in-sufficient description of the technical requirements of the project
  • Incomplete explanation of the key concepts and in-sufficient description of the technical requirements of the project
  • Inappropriate explanation of the key concepts and poor description of the technical requirements of the project
c Conclusion and Discussion
  • Results are presented in very appropriate manner
  • Project work is well summarized and concluded
  • Future extensions in the project are well specified
  • Results are presented in good manner
  • Project work summary and conclusion not very appropriate
  • Future extensions in the project are specified
  • Results presented are not much satisfactory
  • Project work summary and conclusion not very appropriate
  • Future extensions in the project are not specified
  • Results are not presented properly
  • Project work is not summarized and concluded
  • Future extensions in the project are not specified

TOTAL MARKS= (a+b+c)/3

Rubric #R6: Evaluation by Guide

Maximum Marks*: 10

Level of Achievement

Excellent (4) Good (3) Average (2) Poor (1) Score
a Technical Knowledge and Awareness related to the Project Extensive knowledge and awareness related to the project Fair knowledge and awareness related to the project Lacks sufficient knowledge and Awareness Poor knowledge and no awareness related to project

Level of Achievement

Excellent (6) Good (5) Average (3) Poor (1) Score
b Regularity and Attendance Reports to the guide regularly and consistent in work Reports to the guide very often but not very consistent Reports to the guide but lacks Consistency Irregular and inconsistent in work

TOTAL MARKS= a+b