Unit convenor and teaching staff |
Unit convenor and teaching staff
Unit convenor
Manolya Kavakli-Thorne
Contact via 029850 9572
E6A 372
Tuesday - Thursday 10am-12 noon
|
---|---|
Credit points |
Credit points
4
|
Prerequisites |
Prerequisites
(Admission to MInfoTech or MEng or MSc) and 16cp from units at 800 level
|
Corequisites |
Corequisites
|
Co-badged status |
Co-badged status
|
Unit description |
Unit description
The content and availability of this unit will vary subject to developments in the information and communications technology discipline and the availability of particular (often industrially-based) expertise. Special topic units present novel material of current interest and provide a context within which students may engage with emerging technologies and trends as they arise. As a requirement of this unit students must participate in an ethics workshop and satisfy the related assessment requirements.
|
Information about important academic dates including deadlines for withdrawing from units are available at https://www.mq.edu.au/study/calendar-of-dates
On successful completion of this unit, you will be able to:
Milestone and Final Report Format and Structure
Make sure your submission meets the following requirements.
1. Use formatting guidelines described on iLearn.
2. The length of your report depends on whether you are doing a management (i.e. analysis) or a IS/Networking/Security/Web Engineering (i.e. development) project. The table below suggests typical lengths for each situation, but note that these should be treated as indicative only: Your report needs to be long enough to describe in detail the work that you have done, but not so long that it discourages someone from reading it.
Milestone report is expected to be 10 to 12 pages in length. Final reports are expected to be 20 to 30 pages in length:
Management Projects @30+ pages IS/Networking/Security/Web Engineering Projects @20 pages The shorter report length requirement for the latter projects is a consequence of the requirement for these projects also to deliver a working piece of software, which is to be demonstrated to the supervisor's satisfaction at the conclusion of the project.
3. The document should have a separate title page, and begin with an abstract or summary of 150-200 words in length that is able to stand alone as a concise and comprehensive description of the research problem, your project's objectives, significance, approach (methodology) and outcomes.
4. The body of the document should consist of a series of numbered sections and subsections; the exact nature and content of these will depend on the specifics of your project, as will the proportion of the available space accorded to each. Typically, you would have an introductory section that outlines the problem you are aiming to solve, and provides a road-map of the remainder of the document; this would then be followed by a background section that describes related work; then a number of sections which describe the work you have carried out, followed by a conclusion section which summarises what has been achieved, and what future work might be pursued.
5. Finally, you should have a consistently formatted reference list or bibliography that contains full details of all materials cited in your paper. Ensure that you follow appropriate conventions here.
Please ensure that your final report is submitted with a file-name that has the following format: • ‹FamilyName_Givenname›_FinalReport.pdf
Assessment of Reports
Report marks represent not only the written content of your report, but also the project work that underlies it. Note that for management projects, the report should be more than a literature review, and should provide some real analytical content. For IS/network/security/web engineering projects, a working demonstration of the constructed software may be a component of the marking. Please take note of the following requirements:
• A listing of your code should be provided as an appendix to your final report. If there is some reason why this is not feasible or practicable, you should discuss this with the unit convener no later than one week before the final report is due.
• You should arrange a time to demonstrate the software you have developed to your supervisor, so that he or she can take account of this when marking your work. This demonstration should preferably happen during the last week of semester, or in extreme cases during the week following the last week in semester, when the reports are being marked.
It is not necessary to demonstrate your software during your final presentation, although you may do so if you wish. The final report will be assessed by your supervisor according to the following rubric:
Levels of Attainment
Assessment Attributes: Unsatisfactory (U), Functional (F), Proficient (P), Advanced (A)
Comprehensiveness of Abstract
U: Incomplete, in that it does not provide a brief statement of all three of the problem, approach and outcomes; or, all three are expressed, but the description is muddled and generally unclear. F: Conveys the problem, the approach, and outcomes, but a little less clearly than might be expected, or at an inappropriate level of detail. P: Stands as a surrogate for the full report: a clear summary of the problem, approach and outcomes; but may require some rewording to make it accessible to a nonspecialist. A: An excellent summary of the work carried out, clearly stating the problem, the approach taken, and the outcomes, in a manner that is accessible to a technical but non-specialist audience.
Clarity of Problem Statement U: The introduction to the report does not clearly state the problem the project set out to solve. F: The introduction does state the problem to be solved, but it takes a little effort to disentangle. P: The introduction states the problem clearly, and its significance is clear. A: The introduction provides an exceptionally clear and well-motivated problem statement, presented in a way that makes the reader eager to learn about the details of how the problem was solved.
Review of Related Work
U: Patchy or badly organised review of related work; unclear exactly why the work cited is relevant to the problem addressed. F: The material covered seems comprehensive and relevant, and some attempt has been made at clustering the materials reviewed in a thematic manner. P: Thematic organisation of the review, demonstrating a considered extraction of key ideas from sources and how they impact on the problem at hand. A: Thoughtful analysis of the material that goes beyond the themes identified explicitly by the sources, concisely drawing out the key points to set the stage for the work that follows; leaves no doubt about what's been done already and what hasn't.
Description of Work Carried Out
U: Hard to work out what was done; the description of the work carried out seems disorganised or incomplete. F: The report indicates what work was carried out in reasonable detail. P: The report indicates clearly indicates the work that was carried out at a level of detail that allows replication of the results, avoiding vague and imprecise abstractions. A: The report clearly describes the work carried out, at an appropriate level of detail for a report of this length, and delivers a sense of maturity in the way in which the work was carried out.
Clarity of Outcomes
U: Unclear what was achieved in the project. F: The report indicates the outcomes of the work, if a little unclearly. P: The report clearly indicates the outcomes of the work carried out. A: The report clearly describes the outcomes of the work, indicates how these relate to the originally stated outcomes, and realistically appraises the scope for future work.
Overall Quality of Writing
U: Very poor; problems with coherent presentation of ideas. F: Understandable, but with some problems in grammar, style and spelling. P: Grammar and style of an acceptable standard; could be safely given to an external party with only minor editing. A: High quality prose; well written; could comfortably be made available via a corporate website.
Appropriate Use of Referencing Conventions
U: The information in the bibliography is incomplete, or there is a lack of consistency in formatting. F: The information in the bibliography is formatted consistently, but with a few missing details. P & A: All references are complete and consistently formatted.
Name | Weighting | Hurdle | Due |
---|---|---|---|
Milestone report | 25% | No | Week 6&7- Friday 5pm |
Ethics assignment | 15% | No | Week 8-Friday 5pm |
Final report | 50% | No | Week 13- Friday 5pm |
Presentation | 10% | No | Week 13- Friday 3-9pm |
Due: Week 6&7- Friday 5pm
Weighting: 25%
A report due in week 6 that provides a detailed review related to the topic. Its presentation is due in week 7. Presentation is compulsory and is worth 5% of the Milestone report mark.
Due: Week 8-Friday 5pm
Weighting: 15%
A report covering the ethical issues related to the project and exploring how to obtain a Human Ethics Committee approval to conduct research on humans working with computers and IT systems.
Due: Week 13- Friday 5pm
Weighting: 50%
The final report will be due at the end of week 13; drawing results from the literature review and presenting a critical analysis of the methodologies available.
Due: Week 13- Friday 3-9pm
Weighting: 10%
A presentation to the supervisor and other interested personnel in the outcome of the project.
Resources (within reason), as provided by the Department of Computing for the student to undertake their project.
ITEC812 is an independent research unit that requires reading and reporting. there are only 3 official lectures in week1 (Friday 6-9pm), week7 (Friday 6-9pm) and week13 (Friday 3-9pm) including presentations. Presentations will be held together with itec897 and itec898 (internship) presentations and timing may change depending on the schedule on the day. The feedback that you receive from your supervisor plays also a crucial role in your learning. Make sure you are completely familiar with the content of the official Unit Outline. You are expected to regularly meet your supervisor by making an appointment. You should attend the lectures in week1, week7 and presentations in week13 at dates and times declared on ilearn. In week1 we will cover basics about the unit, research methodology and ethical conduct. You should submit the reports on ilearn. Note that we will be using iLearn as the central web-based communication point for this unit. If you are enrolled in the unit, it is essential that you check the iLearn site once a day, since important information will always be posted there in the News Forum. You should be able to login to iLearn using your MQ student ID and password; if you experience any problems, contact the Faculty of Science IT Help Desk. The IT help desk website is located at http://web.science.mq.edu.au/it/doc//helpdesk/.
A lecture on Introduction to Independent Research in week1 (Friday 6-9pm).
Weekly meetings with the academic supervisor.
A lecture on Ethics and Milestone Report Presentations in week7 (Friday 6-9pm).
Final Report presentation in week13 (Friday 3-9pm).
There is no official exam in this unit, but you must submit a final report. If you apply for Disruption to Study for your final report, you must make yourself available for the week of July 24 – 28, 2017. If you are not available at that time, there is no guarantee an additional examination time will be offered. Specific examination dates and times will be determined at a later date.
There are no hurdles in this unit. Second-chance hurdle examinations will also be offered in the week of July 24 - 28. Results will be released on July 13. You will be notified shortly after that date of your eligibility for a hurdle retry and you must also make yourself available during that week to take advantage of this opportunity.
Macquarie University policies and procedures are accessible from Policy Central. Students should be aware of the following policies in particular with regard to Learning and Teaching:
Academic Honesty Policy http://mq.edu.au/policy/docs/academic_honesty/policy.html
Assessment Policy http://mq.edu.au/policy/docs/assessment/policy_2016.html
Grade Appeal Policy http://mq.edu.au/policy/docs/gradeappeal/policy.html
Complaint Management Procedure for Students and Members of the Public http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/complaint_management/procedure.html
Disruption to Studies Policy (in effect until Dec 4th, 2017): http://www.mq.edu.au/policy/docs/disruption_studies/policy.html
Special Consideration Policy (in effect from Dec 4th, 2017): https://staff.mq.edu.au/work/strategy-planning-and-governance/university-policies-and-procedures/policies/special-consideration
In addition, a number of other policies can be found in the Learning and Teaching Category of Policy Central.
Macquarie University students have a responsibility to be familiar with the Student Code of Conduct: https://students.mq.edu.au/support/student_conduct/
Results shown in iLearn, or released directly by your Unit Convenor, are not confirmed as they are subject to final approval by the University. Once approved, final results will be sent to your student email address and will be made available in eStudent. For more information visit ask.mq.edu.au.
Macquarie University provides a range of support services for students. For details, visit http://students.mq.edu.au/support/
Learning Skills (mq.edu.au/learningskills) provides academic writing resources and study strategies to improve your marks and take control of your study.
Students with a disability are encouraged to contact the Disability Service who can provide appropriate help with any issues that arise during their studies.
For all student enquiries, visit Student Connect at ask.mq.edu.au
For help with University computer systems and technology, visit http://www.mq.edu.au/about_us/offices_and_units/information_technology/help/.
When using the University's IT, you must adhere to the Acceptable Use of IT Resources Policy. The policy applies to all who connect to the MQ network including students.
Our postgraduates will demonstrate a high standard of discernment and common sense in their professional and personal judgment. They will have the ability to make informed choices and decisions that reflect both the nature of their professional work and their personal perspectives.
This graduate capability is supported by:
Our postgraduates will be able to demonstrate a significantly enhanced depth and breadth of knowledge, scholarly understanding, and specific subject content knowledge in their chosen fields.
This graduate capability is supported by:
Our postgraduates will be capable of utilising and reflecting on prior knowledge and experience, of applying higher level critical thinking skills, and of integrating and synthesising learning and knowledge from a range of sources and environments. A characteristic of this form of thinking is the generation of new, professionally oriented knowledge through personal or group-based critique of practice and theory.
This graduate capability is supported by:
Our postgraduates will be capable of systematic enquiry; able to use research skills to create new knowledge that can be applied to real world issues, or contribute to a field of study or practice to enhance society. They will be capable of creative questioning, problem finding and problem solving.
This graduate capability is supported by:
Our postgraduates will be able to communicate effectively and convey their views to different social, cultural, and professional audiences. They will be able to use a variety of technologically supported media to communicate with empathy using a range of written, spoken or visual formats.
This graduate capability is supported by:
Our postgraduates will be ethically aware and capable of confident transformative action in relation to their professional responsibilities and the wider community. They will have a sense of connectedness with others and country and have a sense of mutual obligation. They will be able to appreciate the impact of their professional roles for social justice and inclusion related to national and global issues
This graduate capability is supported by:
Students will have to find a supervisor and a topic to investigate in week1. We do not allocate supervisors to students. We added an Ethics lecture and Presentation of Milestone Reports in week7. Ethics assignment aims to provide a basis for the research project in the following semester in itec810. Obtaining Ethics approval takes time, if the student's project requires that. We also combined presentations of itec812 and itec897 and itec898 to arrange a Postgraduate Workshop in week13.
We will use standards based assessment to reflect the level of performance students achieve in this unit. Five standard levels for the assessment tasks during the semester (excluding the final exam) are: unsatisfactory (F), developing (P), functional (CR), proficient (D) and advanced (HD). These standard levels summarize different levels of achievement in relation to learning outcomes and are defined below.
Grade |
LO 1 |
LO 2 |
LO 3 |
LO 4 |
|
Plan and self-manage projects demosntrating advanced project management abilities with occasional input from academic staff assigned to supervise them |
Produce a lengthy technical document explaining systems analysis and design, as well as coding work completed - specifically for individuals who may have no technical understanding of the topic. |
Present a technical topic area to experts and non-expects using appropriate software, tools and techniques available |
Discuss and debate questions posed, in the given topic area |
HD |
The student will be effectively self-managing – asking the supervisor for minimal guidance only. |
The report is very well written, in a scholarly style, having drawn extensively upon the literature. The report will be understandable by expert and non-expert alike. |
The student is very confident in their speech and manner of presentation without necessarily being arrogant. The student clearly knows the subject material very well, interacts with the audience and gets the message across. |
The student will have eye contact with the questioner, will involve the wider audience in the answering of the question, and provide an excellent answer -understandable to most people in the room. |
D |
The student will generally manage themselves but guidance will occasionally be necessary for fear of the project tracking incorrectly. |
The report is well structured, but expression may occasionally be clumsy or literature drawn upon may have been more extensive. |
The student may occasionally appear nervous, but the presentation is professional, well delivered and understandable by the audience. |
The question will be answered correctly, but perhaps only the questioner and speaker are involved in a private conversation. |
CR |
The student requires fairly constant guidance from the supervisor. |
The report is solid, literature is referred to, but the report lacks the sort of polish that would make turning the report in to a conference paper quite an effort. |
The presentation presents the material, the slides will be good, but the talk may not be that smooth or may appear dry. |
The question will be answered mostly correctly, but there may be a slight flaw. The audience may be slightly disengaged with the response given. |
P |
The student only progresses with input from the supervisor. Progress is made, but typically driven by the supervisor. |
The report explains the work conducted but there is relatively little recourse to the literature, and the writing style and grammar may contain numerous problems or errors. |
The talk will be quite boring. The material will be covered, tools will be used in aiding the presentation but there is little audience interaction. |
The student only just addresses the questions. There may be some incorrect answers given, or answers presented to different questions. The student is likely to be relatively nervous. |
Each assessment task submitted will be given a numerical mark, and an indication of the standard level reached (according to the above table).
At the end of the semester, you will receive a final grade that reflects your overall achievement in the unit. The different possible final grades are defined in general terms below.
Your final grade depends on your performance in each part of the assessment. For each task, you receive a mark that reflects your standard of performance regarding each learning outcome assessed by this task. Then the different component marks are added up (with appropriate weightings applied) to determine your total mark out of 100. Your grade then depends on this total mark and your overall standards of performance. Concretely, in order to pass the unit, you must obtain a total mark above 50% to demonstrate satisfactory understanding of development or analysis methods in IT applications, have a basic understanding of the lecture material, successfully implement or conduct an IT project and demonstrate satisfactory level of achievement in the final report. In order to obtain a grade higher than a Pass, you have to fulfill additional conditions. See below the grade standards made specific for this unit:
High Distinction (A total mark of 85+): Outstanding quality IT projects with the addition of originality and/or creativity achieved by an outstanding understanding of concepts. Students are expected to go beyond the limits of lecture material.
Distinction (A total mark of 75+): Superior quality IT projects achieved by superior understanding of concepts. Students are expected to master the lecture material. They are expected to successfully achieve all the goals defined in the IT project.
Credit (A total mark of 65+): Good understanding of concepts and good quality IT projects. Students are expected to have good understanding of the lecture material. They are expected to successfully achieve most of the goals listed in IT project.
Date | Description |
---|---|
21/02/2017 | no changes made. |