Written Report Guideline
The research project report is to be presented in the form of a scientific manuscript
potentially suitable for publication in a professional journal.
The exact length and structure of your report may vary across disciplines – please
seek specific advice from your supervisor regarding your interpretation of these
guidelines. Broadly speaking, we anticipate the report consisting of:
o Title,
o Abstract (< 300 words),
o Introduction / Background / Literature Review,
< 600 words for science reports
Longer, more comprehensive literature review for social science and
agribusiness
o Methodology including statistical analysis (< 2000 words),
o Results (< 2000 words),
o Discussion (< 1500 words),
o Conclusions (< 200 words)
o References.
In general concision is encouraged, the upper word count limits are to be considered
guidelines only and represent a conversation starter for discussion with your
supervisor.
Two independent markers who specialise in your area of research will grade your
work. The average of your marks from both markers will be used as your grade. In the
event that there is a difference of more than 15% between markers your report will be
sent to an independent marker for assessment and an average of the 3 markers used
to generate the final grade.
1|P a g e
Breakdown of Marks for Written Report
Maximum
Section Description
Marks
Background, methods, results, and implications
Abstract 15
concisely and accurately summarised.
Background material presented in a manner
Introduction / demonstrating wide, deep, and appropriate
Background / 20 reading of the published literature, knowledge
Literature Review gap identified.
Research objectives stated.
Appropriate methods clearly described in a
logical order with subheadings where
Methodology 15 appropriate.
Statistics clearly described in a separate
section.
Results presented in a logical order using the same
Results 15
subheadings as the methodology section
Interpretation of findings in relation to the published
Discussion 20 literature, statement of support or refutation of
hypothesis where appropriate
Clear conclusions articulated, areas for further
Conclusions 5
research identified where appropriate.
Appropriate referencing, use of formal scientific
Format and
10 language, judicious use of illustrations, diagrams,
Presentation
tables, and figures
2|P a g e
Assessment Rubrics
Excellent Average Unsatisfactory
Criterion
(100% - 80%) (79% - 50%) (49% - 0%)
A concise, compelling summary of A reasonable summary of the A poor summary of the project.
the project. project. Little executive judgment has
A high level of executive judgment Some executive judgment has been exercised in determining which
Abstract
has been exercised in determining been exercised in determining which details are important to the
(15 Marks)
which details are important to the details are important to the communication of the main
communication of the main communication of the main message.
message. message.
Introduction / A sophisticated understanding of An intermediate understanding of An inadequate understanding of
Background /
the background discipline, the background discipline, the background discipline,
Literature Review
experimental / research techniques experimental / research techniques experimental / research techniques
(20 Marks)
and analysis methods is clearly and analysis methods is and analysis methods is
demonstrated. demonstrated. demonstrated.
The aims and / or hypotheses are The aims and / or hypotheses are The aims and / or hypotheses are
clearly articulated. reasonably articulated. not clearly articulated.
The choice of literature cited The choice of literature cited The choice of literature cited
3|P a g e
Excellent Average Unsatisfactory
Criterion
(100% - 80%) (79% - 50%) (49% - 0%)
demonstrates broad and deep demonstrates an intermediate level demonstrates an unsatisfactory level
background reading that has been of background reading that has been of background reading that has often
well understood and correctly placed understood to some extent and been misunderstood and not
into a broader context. partially placed into a broader convincingly placed into a broader
context. context.
A clear logical structure has been A less clear logical structure has An unclear structure has been
used. been used. used.
The technical details of how the The technical details of how the The technical details of how the
Methods (15) project was implemented are in project was implemented are project was implemented are not
place and allow the methodology to partially in place and allow the satisfactorily in place and do not
be replicated. methodology to be replicated to allow the methodology to be
some extent. replicated.
Results (15) A clear logical structure mirroring A less clear logical structure that An unclear logical structure that
the methods section has been used. may or may not always mirror the may not always mirror the methods
methods section has been used. section has been used.
Data has been presented in a
transparent, technically correct Data has been presented in a Data has been presented in a
manner with appropriate use of manner that is somewhat clear. Use manner that is not clear. The data
4|P a g e
Excellent Average Unsatisfactory
Criterion
(100% - 80%) (79% - 50%) (49% - 0%)
statistics where appropriate. of statistics may be inconsistent. may not have been analysed
correctly, and statistical rigour may
be absent.
Discussion (20) Outcomes are communicated in a Outcomes are communicated in a Outcomes are communicated in a
manner that talks directly to the manner that does not always talk manner that is not clearly related to
research question. directly to the research question. the research question.
There is clear evidence of There is some evidence of There is little evidence of
background reading, synthesis, and background reading, synthesis, and background reading, synthesis, and
comprehension. comprehension. comprehension.
The choice of literature cited The choice of literature cited The choice of literature cited does
convincingly demonstrates a partially demonstrates an awareness not demonstrate an awareness of
sophisticated awareness of how the of how the project results contribute how the project results contribute to
project results contribute to filling the to filling the knowledge gap filling the knowledge gap identified in
knowledge gap identified in the identified in the introduction. the introduction.
introduction. The student sees the subject There may be factual and / or
The student sees beyond the matter at face value, with only some logical errors.
obvious, making connections that evidence of genuine insight and
There is no evidence of genuine
show genuine insight and
5|P a g e
Excellent Average Unsatisfactory
Criterion
(100% - 80%) (79% - 50%) (49% - 0%)
perspective. perspective. insight and perspective.
A concise summary of the main A summary of the main findings and A summary of the main findings and
Conclusions (5) findings and implications that shows implications that shows an implications that shows little
a high level of judgment intermediate level of judgment judgment
Formatting is in line with Formatting is only partially in line Formatting is not in line with
professional standards of scientific with professional standards of professional standards of scientific
writing, appropriate use of scientific scientific writing, some appropriate writing, inappropriate use of
language, judicious use of use of scientific language, scientific language, poor judgment
illustrations, diagrams, tables, and intermediate use of illustrations, exercised in the use of illustrations,
Format And
figures that are clearly alluded to in diagrams, tables, and figures that diagrams, tables, and figures that
Presentation (10)
the text. are not always clearly alluded to in are not clearly alluded to in the text.
the text.
In text citations and the reference In text citations and the reference
list have been presented correctly. In text citations and the reference list have been inadequately
list have been presented somewhat presented.
correctly.
6|P a g e
