1. Final technical paper details • One or more reputable journals are identified. • Repute is demonstrated via an appropriate scheme – e.g. impact factor, 5-year impact factor • Criteria for submission to journal – e.g. word-length – is relevant to this project. • Very high relevance of journal to the research area of the topic is demonstrated. • Example technical paper from this journal is attached. • One reputable journal is identified. • Repute is demonstrated via an appropriate scheme – e.g. 5-year impact factor. • Criteria for submission to journal – e.g. word-length – is relevant to this project. • High relevance of journal to the research area of the topic is demonstrated. • Example technical paper from this journal is attached. • One reputable journal is identified. • Repute is commented on. • Criteria for submission to journal – e.g. word-length – is relevant to this project. • Relevance of journal to the research area of the topic is demonstrated. • Example technical paper from this journal is attached.

1. Modified Project Plan and Timeline • Provided with excellent detail and justification. • Timeline is provided and justified. • Provided with very good detail and justification. • Timeline is provided. • Provided with good detail and justification. • Timeline provided. • Provided with excellent detail and justification. • Timeline is provided. • No modified plan or timeline provided.

1. What challenges are you facing, and how do you propose to address these? • Challenges are very clearly identified. • Highly plausible actions are identified to address each challenge. • Challenges are clearly identified. • Plausible actions are identified to address each challenge. • Challenges are clearly identified. • Relevant actions are identified to address each challenge. • Challenges are identified. • Relevant actions are identified to address most challenges. • Challenges are not identified or are unclear. • Actions to address challenges are not stated or, if stated, are unworkable.

1. Outline your interaction with your supervisor & your group so far • Described the number of meetings and highlighted the main points discussed with the supervisor clearly and distinctly. • Identified the group. Described in detail the interaction with students, and discussed what and how it has been helpful. • Described the number of meetings and highlighted the main points discussed with the supervisor clearly. • Identified the group. Described in detail the interaction with students, and discussed what and how it has been helpful. • Described the number of meetings and highlighted the main points discussed with the supervisor clearly. • Identified the group. Described in detail the interaction with students, and discussed what and how it has been helpful. • Described the number of meetings and highlighted the main points discussed with the supervisor satisfactorily. • Gave some description of group interaction. • Did not give any details of meetings with supervisor. • Did not give any details of interaction with group members.

1. Literature Review • What do we already know about this topic? (i.e. What have others said and provided evidence for?) ? • Situate your research within the literature and identify gaps if any. • Excellent grasp of research, concepts and theories relevant to the topic. • Highly relevant examples or evidence to illustrate the topic. • At least 20 relevant and appropriate references are cited. • Very good grasp of research, concepts and theories relevant to the topic. • Relevant examples or evidence to illustrate the topic. • At least 15 relevant and appropriate references are cited. • Good grasp of research, concepts and theories relevant to the topic. • Relevant examples or evidence to illustrate the topic. • At least 11 relevant and appropriate references are cited. • Fair grasp of research, concepts or theories relevant to the topic. • Limited relevance of examples or evidence to illustrate the topic. • At least 10 relevant and appropriate references are cited. • Limited or misguided grasp of research, concepts or theories relevant to the topic. • Limited relevance of examples or evidence to illustrate the problem. • Less than 6 relevant references cited.

1. Progress so far • Described how and what has been achieved so far. • Excellent description with details about investigation, methodology, results so far and discussion. • Described how and what has been achieved so far. • A very good description with details about investigation, methodology, results so far and discussion. • Described how and what has been achieved so far. • Good description with details about investigation, methodology, results so far and discussion. • Described to some extent how and what has been achieved so far. • Satisfactory description with very little detail about investigation, methodology, results so far and discussion. • Did not provide any description or what is provided is not significant to understand what the progress is so far. • No description with details about investigation, methodology, results so far and discussion.

1. Objectives and Scope: Any changes • A statement is made that no changes are necessary OR • Changes to objectives and scope are clearly identified. • Highly appropriate reasons for the changes are given. • A statement is made that no changes are necessary OR • Changes to objectives and scope are identified. • Appropriate reasons for the changes are given. • A statement is made that no changes are necessary OR • Changes to objectives and scope are identified. • Reasons for the changes are given. • A statement is made that no changes are necessary OR • Changes to objectives and scope are mentioned. • Some reasons for the changes are given. • No statement is made about changes to objectives or scope. OR • Confused or inappropriate reasons for the changes are given.

1. Outline of activities undertaken so far. • Does this expand on the achievements to date? ? • How have the activities been time-framed? • Outline of activities undertaken is detailed, clear and sequential. • Activities are time-framed in terms of ‘when?’ and ‘how long?’ • Outline of activities undertaken is clear and sequential. • Activities are time-framed in terms of ‘when?’ and ‘how long?’ • Outline of activities undertaken is clear. • Activities are time-framed in terms of ‘when?’ and ‘how long?’ • Outline of activities undertaken to date is provided • Some time-framing is provided. • Outline of activities undertaken to date is unclear or confused. • The time-framing is unclear or non-existent.

Progress Report Assessment Rubric HD 85-100% D 75-84% C 65-74% P 50-64% F 0-49% 1. Executive Summary • What is the paper about? ? • Why is this an important topic? ? • Summary of what has been achieved so far and the challenges that remain. • Excellent identification of the topic and its importance. • A concise and well-structured summary is included. • Achievements to date and the challenges to come are both covered. • Very good identification of the topic and its importance. • A well-structured summary is included. • Achievements to date and the challenges to come are both covered. • Good, clear identification of the topic and its importance. • A good summary is included. • Achievements to date and the challenges to come are both covered. • The topic is identified and mention is made of its importance. • A summary is included. • Achievements to date and the challenges to come are both covered. • Identification of the topic is unclear or confused. • Little or no mention is made of its importance.

Self- assessment: Students are required to assess their progress report and bring a copy of this sheet to the Progress Report Feedback session. Please read each section (1-9) of the Progress report, and make a judgement & circle the grade (HD – F) that is appropriate for each section. You will find a comment box on page 4; please add any comments for improvement, change or relevance.