Environmental Modelling in QGIS

GIS Marking Criteria: Full Report (Assignment 2) – Environmental modelling in QGIS

Technical -

maps

Technical –

methods/data

Technical –

analysis

Technical -

interpretation

Theoretical Application Communication

High

Distinction

>80%

Mapped outputs

are produced to a

professional

standard reflecting

exemplary

understanding of

quality

cartographic

practice.

Methods and

data are

extremely

clearly

described with

complete

rationale

provided.

Use of

appropriate

spatial analysis

operations is

excellent with

fully correct

usage to

develop robust

spatial outputs.

Highly critical

interpretations of the

results with a strong level

of critical engagement

with the literature.

Interpretations explicitly

link to the underlying

characteristics of the

data.

Demonstrates a

strong critical

understanding of

GIS theory and

concepts. Use of

GIS terminology is

used proficiently

throughout report.

A strong contextual

description linking to

environmental

management is

provided.

Recommendations for

conservation explicitly

build upon spatial

outputs.

An extremely

professionally

presented report.

Writing is highly

logical, well-

structured and

follows a strong

academic style.

Distinction

70-79%

Mapped outputs

are produced to a

good standard

reflecting a strong

understanding of

quality

cartographic

practice.

Methods and

data are clearly

described with

complete

rationale

provided.

Use of

appropriate

spatial analysis

operations is

good with fully

correct usage to

develop robust

spatial outputs.

Critical interpretations of

the results with a good

level of critical

engagement with the

literature. Interpretations

link well to the underlying

characteristics of the

data.

Demonstrates a

good critical

understanding of

GIS theory and

concepts. Use of

GIS terminology is

used well

throughout report.

A good contextual

description linking to

environmental

management is

provided.

Recommendations for

conservation build

upon spatial outputs.

A professionally

presented report.

Writing is logical,

well-structured

and follows a good

academic style.

Credit

60-69%

Mapped outputs

are produced to

an acceptable

standard

demonstrating

some

understanding of

quality

cartographic

practice.

Methods and

data are mostly

clearly

described with

near-complete

rationale

provided.

Use of

appropriate

spatial analysis

operations is

good with near-

correct usage to

develop good

spatial outputs.

Good interpretations of

the results with an

adequate level of critical

engagement with the

literature. Attempts are

made to link

interpretations to the

underlying characteristics

of the data.

Demonstrates an

acceptable

understanding of

GIS theory and

concepts. Use of

GIS terminology is

used throughout

report but not

always correctly.

A contextual

description linking to

environmental

management is

provided.

Recommendations for

conservation

somewhat build upon

spatial outputs.

A semi-

professionally

presented report.

Writing is relatively

logical, well-

structured and

follows a good

academic style.

Pass

50-59%

Mapped outputs

lack strong

technical

proficiency and do

not fully reflect

quality

Methods and

data are a little

unclearly

described with

Spatial analysis

operations may

be somewhat

inappropriate

but analysis is

undertaken

Interpretations of the

results are adequate but

lack engagement with the

literature. Some weak

attempts are made to link

interpretations to the

Demonstrates a

weak understanding

of GIS theory and

concepts. Use of

GIS terminology is

used throughout

The contextual

description linking to

environmental

management is

lacking.

Recommendations for

Report somewhat

lacks

professionalism

with average

presentation of

report materials.

cartographic

practice.

rationale weak

or missing.

correctly. Spatial

outputs may be

questionable as

to robust quality.

underlying characteristics

of the data.

report but often not

to great effect.

conservation do not

build upon spatial

outputs very well.

Academic writing

style needs some

improvement to

ensure better

communication.

Fail

<50%

Mapped outputs

demonstrate very

little technical

proficiency and/or

understanding of

quality

cartographic

practice.

Methods and

data are not well

described and

rationale is

missing.

Spatial analysis

operations are

entirely

inappropriate

with incorrect

analysis. Spatial

outputs are not

appropriate.

Interpretations of the

results are inadequate

and lack any

engagement with the

literature. No attempts

are made to link

interpretations to the

underlying characteristics

of the data.

Demonstrates an

unacceptable

understanding of

GIS theory and

concepts. Use of

GIS terminology not

used at all within

the report or is used

completely

incorrectly.

Little or no contextual

description linking to

environmental

management.

Recommendations for

conservation fail to

build upon spatial

outputs.

Report is

inadequately

presented with

poor structuring

and insufficient

academic writing

style. Substantial

improvements are

required to

increase

professionalism.