MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
Assessment Summary:
Cognitive Psychomotor Affective Total
Test 1 10% - - 10%
Test 2 10% - - 10%
Project 30%
Peer assessment 3%
Proposal 2%
Demonstration/Presentation 12% 5%
Final Report 8%
Final 50% 50%
Total 80% 15% 5% 100%
MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
Evaluation Rubric for Project Proposal
Proposal
CLO 1 Cognitive-4 (Domain : Critical Thinking and Problem Solving)
Investigate an optical communication link in the optical network design.
1 2 3 4 MARK
Title The title was omitted or The title generally describe The title clearly describes the The title gains peoples interest and
inappropriate. what the project will be project describes the project
about
Introduction and Student not identify problem Student not quite sure what Student can generates question Student properly generates
problem statement statement the project is designed to do. and determine the problem questions and determine the
problem of project background
Objective/scope The proposal is inappropriate for The proposal may be The proposal is appropriate for The proposal matches the project
the project and the objectives appropriate for the project the project with with clearly objectives and scopes
and scopes not stated. with too general objectives objective/scopes stated. stated.
and scopes.
Literature review The literature reviews are not Just write back the source The information given with only Use critical thinking to synthesizes
significant with the project into their report partial details provided. Link to in depth information from relevant
background supporting viewpoints are source representing various points
limited. of view
Methodology not reasonable Presented but not Somewhat clear list of Clear list of methods; well
completed methods;There is a plan of described plan containing all
action; the plan contains most essential information to showcase
the steps planned for carrying out
of the information to showcase
the project (e.g. flowchart/block
the steps planned for carrying diagram)
out the project.
Expected result No expected result The expected result are not The relation between objective Clearly relate between objective
related with the objective and expected result are and expected result of the project
generally describe
Reference No references stated Not completed references Some of the references not The references are complete with
follow the format format
Total marks ( /28) *2 =
MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
Evaluation Rubric for Project Report
Project Report
CLO4 Cognitive -4 (Design)
Analyse a fibre optic communication system based on the optical components characteristics.
1 2 3 4 Mark
Methodology not reasonable Presented but not Somewhat clear list of Clear list of methods; well described
completed methods;There is a plan of plan containing all essential information
action; the plan contains most to showcase the steps planned for
carrying out the project (e.g.
of the information to showcase
flowchart/block diagram)
the steps planned for carrying
out the project.
Result and Analysis No explanation of result and Not complete flowchart and Result are analyses without Result are analyses with explanation of
(power supply , input analyses. diagram to support the explanation of power supply the power supply diagram, flowchart
output port) analyses. diagram, flowchart and and programming for input and output
programming for input and port
output port.
Result and Analysis No explanation of result and Result are analyze with Result are analyze with Result are analyze with good
(Transmitter) analyses. loose explanation. moderate explanation. explanation.
Result and Analysis No explanation of result and Result are analyze with Result are analyze with Result are analyze with good
(Receiver) analyses. loose explanation. moderate explanation. explanation.
Conclusion States an illogical conclusion States a general conclusion States a conclusion focused States a conclusion that is a logical
solely on the inquiry findings. extrapolating from the inquiry finding
Recommendation No logical recommendation Recommendation are Recommendation are flow from Recommendations are logic and flow
incompletely connected to the conclusion but can’t from the conclusions and can be extend.
the conclusion and can’t extend.
extend
References Reference No references stated Not completed references Some of the references not follow the
format
Total marks ( /28) *8=
MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
Evaluation Rubric for Project Presentation
Project Report
CLO3 Affrective -4 (Environment and Sustainability)
Explain the role of optical communication technology for sustainable development of the country.
1 2 3 4 Mark
Describe the Neither descriptions nor Incomplete description Developed description with Well-developed description with
environmental examples provided and/or no examples insufficient examples and/or appropriate examples provided
integrity, social provided provided examples with
equity, and economic
insufficient description
vitality aspects of
sustainability and
provide examples of
how they are
interrelated
Apply the concepts of No application of concepts of Incomplete application of Developed application of Well-developed application of concepts
(environmental, sustainability locally, regionally concepts of sustainability concepts of sustainability of sustainability locally, regionally
social and economic) and/or globally locally, regionally and/or locally, regionally and/or and/or globally
sustainability locally, globally
globally
regionally and/or
globally.
Total marks ( /8) *5=
MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
TABLE AND RUBRIC FOR PEER ASSESSMENT
GROUP MEMBERS Contribution Cooperation Problem Time Showing TOTAL TOTAL
Solving management up for
(name) meetings (20%) (3%)
MEP10603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 2 2018/2019)
Good Fair Poor Very Poor
No. Criteria Marks
4 3 2 1
PEER ASSESSMENT: INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT
1. CONTRIBUTION Consistently and actively Contributes knowledge, Contributes information Contributed information to
contributes knowledge, opinion, and skills without with occasional prompting the group only when
opinion and skills without prompting and reminding and reminding considering prompted considering
prompting or reminding considering environmental and
environmental and
considering environmental environmental and sustainability
and sustainability sustainability sustainability
2. COOPERATION Student interact well within Student interacts Student interact Students does not cooperate
the group and respect other adequately within the adequately within group with other group members
group members. group and respects other but does not respect others
group members
3. PROBLEM SOLVING Actively looks for and Refines solutions Does not suggest or refine Does not try to solve
suggest solutions to suggested by others solution toward problem or help other solve
problems toward toward environmental environmental and the problems.
environmental and
and sustainability sustainability but is willing
sustainability
to try out solutions
suggested by others
4. TIME MANAGEMENT Group member completed Group member usually Group member often did Group member did not
assigned tasks on time. completed assigned tasks not complete assigned complete most of the
on time and did not hold tasks on time, and held up assigned tasks on time and
up progress on the completion of project often forced the group to
projects because of work. make last-minute
incomplete work. adjustments and changes to
accommodate missing work.
5. SHOWING UP FOR MEETINGS Showed up for meetings Showed up for meetings Showed up late, but it No show or extremely late;
punctually, sometimes on time. wasn’t a big problem for feeble or no excuse offered.
ahead of time. completing work.
Total Marks (/ 20) x 3% =
BEB41603 OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS (SEMESTER 1 2015/2016)
Evaluation Rubric for Demonstration
Project Report
CLO3 Psychomotor -4 (Teamwork)
Organise project pertaining to the principles and operation of fibre optic communication systems.(Final Demonstration)
1 2 3 4 Mark
Content (1) Poor problem definition. (1) Inadequate problem (1) Adequate problem (1) Clear problem definition.
(2) No system architecture. definition. definition. (2) System design.
3) No discussion of the design of (2) Inaccurate/non- (2) System design. 3) Design of custom components.
custom components. functional system design. (3) Inadequate discussion of (4) Discussion of design decisions.
4) No discussion of design (3) No discussion of the the design of custom (5) Inter-component interfaces.
decisions. design of custom components.
(5) No discussion of components. (4) Discussion of design
intercomponent interfaces. (4) Discussion of design decisions.
decisions. (5) No discussion of
(5) No discussion of inter- intercomponent interfaces.
component interfaces.
Delivery (1) Unclear speech. (1) Hard to understand: (1) Speak legibly. (1) Speak clearly and fluently.
(2) Cannot explain ideas. weak language, low voice, (2) Communicate and explain (2) Communicate and explain ideas
(3) Unstructured presentation. mumbled speech, etc. ideas adequately. clearly.
(4) Doubtful of the work. (2) Unobvious explanation (3) Somewhat organized and (3) Organized and structured
of ideas. Requires discussion structured presentation. presentation.
to clarify. (4) Not very confident and (4) Confident and proud of the work
(3) Unclear structure of proud of the work.
presentation.
(4) Doubtful of the work.
Questions (1) Does not answer questions (1) rarely answers questions (1) Answers most questions (1) Answers questions effectively and
adequately adequately adequately. smoothly
Demo (1) No prototype. (1) Prototype present but (1) Prototype present and (1) Prototype present and working
not functional. partly working. perfectly
Total marks ( /16) *12=
