Grading
This page gives you an overview of the grading method we apply at the ASE Bachelor project. We follow the VU science faculty and Computer Science department guidelines as closely as possible.
This page (and the docs) are updated to reflect the VU Faculty of Science Thesis and Placement Regulations as published on August 2024. In case of any discrepancies between the project site and the regulations, the regulations document is leading.
Deliverables
The work you do is group-based, which means that you will develop the demo together with your group. The following deliverables must be submitted to make individual assessement possible:
At the start of the project
Before you can get started with your research, the following deliverables need to be explicitly approved by your supervisor. Approval is given through Canvas.
Per group
- A research proposal, formalizing the research question(s) that your team will be working on
- An individual contribution proposal, formalizing how the available work is delegated among the team memnbers. This will be ued for grading later.
At the thesis deadline
Individually
- One thesis document (PDF)
- A personal assessment document (PDF)
- In this document you describe your contributions and the working environment of your group
Per group
- All developed code and software (ZIP)
- Including all
.gitfolders and commit history
- Including all
Rubric
Even though you submit most of the work as a team, you will be graded individually, based on the VU Amsterdam Computer Science Bachelor Project grading rubric. This rubric is also used to grade your independence, contributions and level of academic thinking.
Per faculty of Science regulations, you need to pass all individual parts of the rubric in order to pass the thesis project. This includes your presentation.
Advisory Rubric for Executed Work
Below you can find the rubric that the on-site supervising team uses to advise your domain expert and first reader on the executed work (50% of the final grade). 10 points correspond to a perfect 10.
This is not a formal rubric: your supervisor can set the grade to their own insights, possibly (partially) disregarding on-site supervisor input and this rubric.
| Topic | Points | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Quality | 0 - 3 | Quality of the achieved results. |
| Insight | 0 - 3 | Level of academic thinking, creativity and critical reflection on the work. |
| Planning | 0 - 1 | Timeline and meeting of deadlines. Contact with the supervisor(s). Response to feedback. |
| Independence | 0 - 1 | Independence and initiative shown during the project. |
| Malus: missed meetings | max. -1 | For every missed meeting, 0.5 points will be deducted |
Malus: improper use of git | max. -1 | Not using proper branching, not using isolated commits, no clear separation of repositories, not following conventional commits |
| Bonus | max. 2 | Bonus for extraordinary results beyond the expectations of the supervising team |
Advisory Rubric for Presentations
Below you can find the rubric that the on-site supervising team uses to advise your domain expert and first reader on the presentation (10% of the final grade). 10 points correspond to a perfect 10.
This is not a formal rubric: your supervisor can set the grade to their own insights, possibly (partially) disregarding on-site supervisor input and this rubric.
| Topic | Points | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Storytelling | 0 - 2 | Includes the way your story is organized and how you convince the audience that your research is worth their time |
| Slide design | 0 - 2 | Are the slides well-designed, keeping in mind accessibility? Do they focus on your story? |
| Audience interaction | 0 - 1 | Do you proactively involve the audience? Or do you just read up to them? |
| Use of media | 0 - 1 | Do graphs, charts, tables, videos and photos actually support your story? Or do they distract your audience? |
| Mastery of the subject | 0 - 2 | |
| Response to questions | 0 - 2 | |
| Bonus | max 1 | Bonus for extraordinary results beyond the expectations of the supervising team |
| Malus | max -1 | Malus for basic issues that were discussed before but not taken into account |
Method
All grades will be provided and signed by your domain expert and the second reader. Your on-site supervisors will advise them on independence, contributions and academic thinking. A second assessor is chosen for you by your first assessor and may change due to availability.
You will be required to use a professional software development workflow with git. Commit data from the repository will be tracked and taken into account as part of the grade.
Feedback
You will receive the full grade breakdown (including feedback) per mail.
Resits
With frequent check-ins, progress meetings and practice moments, you can rest assured that the ASE team will try to steer you in the right direction well before the final grade will be determined. However, resits with ASE are not guaranteed. We will assess each case individually to determine if a resit is permitted and to find a fitting opportunity and timeline.
If your final report was insufficient
Per Faculty of Science regulations, you have the right to resubmit your report within 10 working days after receiving your final grade. Your supervisor or another appointed supervisor will then grade your report again. You do not have to ask approval for resubmission beforehand.
If your executed work was insufficient
You will need to ask the ASE team for a possible resit, which is not guaranteed.
If your presentation was insufficient
You will need to ask the ASE team for a possible resit, which is not guaranteed.