University of Exeter Handbook (Physics) Questions/Comments Department (Physics)

Professional Experience - Assignments and Marking Criteria

The Professional Experience module descriptor (PHY3306) specifies the assignments and their deadlines. It should be read in conjunction with the notes below which describe the assignments in greater detail, along with the criteria that will be used to assess them. The relative weighting of these assignments is given in the module descriptor.

In accordance with the Department's Marking Strategy, each task should be assessed independently by two assessors. Each should complete an individual report, recording their comments and proposed marks. These, along with a further report of 'agreed marks' are to be returned to the Professional Experience Co-ordinator. All marks are subject to moderation at a meeting of assessors/supervisors which will be convened by the Professional Experience Co-ordinator as soon as possible after the assessment. The marks for this assessment contribute to the overall module mark in proportion to the weighting indicated in the module description.

The Professional Experience Co-ordinator will give each student qualitiative feedback about their performance.

Stage 3 Preliminary Report (PHY3306)

The word length for the preliminary report is specified on the module descriptor for PHY3306. It should normally contain:

Marks are given for to the following three areas:

Mark RangeQualities of Report
28 - 34A report that is difficult to fault, with the possible exception of one or two minor errors.
23 - 27Outcome at excellent level. No significant deficiencies, but a number of minor errors. Clear text and diagrams with a well defined focus, reflecting a good knowledge of material and good competence in its critical assessment.
20 - 22Outcome at focal level. Only one or two significant deficiencies. Expected components present, with good content, structure and presentation.
17 - 19No major flaws, but a number of significant deficiencies. Expected components present in an acceptable form.
13 - 16Outcome at threshold level. Only one or two major flaws. Expected components present in a recognisable form.
7 - 12A number of major flaws. Lacking in overall structure. Evidence of a lack of basic knowledge and critical ability.
0 - 6Nothing approaching an acceptable report.

Project Work and Notebooks

Project Work and Notebook assessments apply the standard criteria for Assessment of Physics Project Work and Notebooks used for other MPhys programmes. In this case, the second assessor will normally be an appropriately qualified member of the placement organisation agreed with the Professional Experience Co-ordinator.

Stage 3 Oral Presentation (PHY3306)

The presentation lasts 30 minutes for questions. The audience will comprise two academic staff acting as assessors plus those Stage 2 students who are hoping to undertake Physics with Professional Experience studies in their Stage 3 year. It will be scheduled at a suitable time during weeks T3:03-05 bearing in mind the examination timetables.

The presentation will be in the form of a 25 minute talk illustrated with good-quality slides prepared using appropriate software (e.g. PowerPoint, etc.) mormally divided approximately as follows:

Following the talk there will be a period of approximately 5 minutes for questions.

The overall mark for this assessment (out of maximum 100) relates to the following four areas each of which is marked out of 25 using the scale below:

21 - 25At the standard expected for a polished, high quality conference review talk, perhaps with one or two minor deficiencies.
18 - 20Outcome at excellent level. Could reach the standard above if several minor deficiencies were attended to.
15 - 17Outcome at focal level. Generally good level of knowledge or ability, with only one or two significant deficiencies.
13 - 14No major flaws, but a number of significant deficiencies. Showing acceptable levels of basic knowledge or ability.
10 - 12Outcome at threshold level. Only one or two major flaws. Lacking effectiveness in some aspects.
5 - 9A number of major flaws. Evidence of a lack of basic knowledge or ability.
0 - 4Nothing approaching an acceptable performance.

Stage 3 Final Report

The overall mark for this assessment (out of maximum 100) is the sum of five elements each of which is marked out of 25 using the criteria tabulated below:

  1. Business and Scientific Context
    The problem(s) that were the subject of the investigation are described and put in context. Both the business aspects (i.e. the aims and constraints of the unit hosting the placement) and scientific aspects (established knowledge) should be discussed. The ethical and legal constraints, and IPR issues relevant to the project are identified and discussed. The rationale for the project management and business planning methods used for the project. How was work prioritised and scheduled, what contingencies were planned for? An evaluation the effectiveness of the methods used and their contribution to the success of the project.
  2. Performance and Problem Solving
    Selection of appropriate physics-related techniques of and application to the solution of the problem. Student has gathered, evaluated and analysed information in order to devise and apply a creative and practical method to solve the problem making effective use of the time and resources available. The investigation has been conducted in a systematic way consistent with the project plan.
  3. Reporting and Communication
    A list describing all reports and presentations made during the course of the project should be included as an appendix. The employer's evaluation of these will form the basis of the mark for this element. The employer's evaluation should also take into account performance as a team member in project meetings, demonstrations, etc..
  4. viva
    Understanding and responding appropriately to questions about any aspect of the professional experience module.

 

Mark RangeProfessionalism (a-c)
(Marks are given to reflect performance for each aspect listed above)
21 - 25At the standard expected for a polished professional, perhaps with one or two minor deficiencies.
18 - 20Outcome at excellent level. Could reach the standard above if several minor deficiencies were attended to.
15 - 17Outcome at focal level. Generally good level of knowledge or ability, with only one or two significant deficiencies.
13 - 14No major flaws, but a number of significant deficiencies. Showing acceptable levels of basic knowledge or ability.
10 - 12Outcome at threshold level. Only one or two major flaws. Lacking effectiveness in some aspects.
5 - 9A number of major flaws. Evidence of a lack of basic knowledge or ability.
0 - 4Nothing approaching an acceptable performance.

 

Mark RangeOral performance
(Marks are given to reflect the student's understanding.)
21 - 25A thorough understanding of all aspects which allows questions to be answered accurately and fluently and the discussion to be extended with confidence into difficult or unfamiliar areas.
18 - 20Outcome at excellent level. A thorough understanding of most aspects, with some ability to extend the discussion into difficult or unfamiliar areas
15 - 17Outcome at focal level. An understanding of most aspects in some depth, with the ability to extend the discussion so as to make relevant links (e.g., between project and market).
13 - 14An adequate understanding of most aspects, with some ability extend the discussion so as to make relevant links.
10 - 12Outcome at threshold level. A relatively superficial understanding of most aspects, with the ability to make relatively simple links.
5 - 9Little understanding shown. Unable to make relevant links.
0 - 4No understanding demonstrated.

University of Exeter Handbook (Physics) Questions/Comments Department (Physics)