polymers and polymer based composites for additive manufacturing

Grade Score Overall Outcome Understanding/Background Literature Methodology Critical Result Analysis & Discussion Report Writing

N: Unsatisfactory 0 -49

Unstatisfactory: Has demonstrated no or a poor

understanding of the context and importance and

existing issues relevant to the report topic in

additive manufacturing for a specific metallic

alloy/polymer/composite/ emerging material, and

has used low-quality, inappropriate or no

literature to support this.

Has demonstrated no or a poor understanding of

the key topics, considerations and issues specific

to the report research area, has used low-quality,

inappropriate or no literature to support this, and

has no or inappropriate statement of research

problem.

Methodology/approach does not detail majority

of research tasks that were conducted in the

studied research articles and has demonstrated

little or no understanding of the research

methodologies used.

Has not demonstrated an understanding of the

published research results in relevant articles, or

failed to include a critical evaluation that includes

an analysis of the implications of the results,

thoughtful comparison of the results among the

available literature.

Extremely poor quality report and/or substantial

missing sections of the report.

P: Satisfactory 50 - 59

Satisfactory: Has demonstrated some basic

understanding of the context, importance and

existing issues relevant to the report topic in

additive manufacturing for a specific metallic

alloy/polymer/composite/emerging material, and

has used some literature to support this.

Has demonstrated some basic understanding of

the key topics, considerations and issues specific

to the report research area, has used some

literature to support this, and has limited

information of research problem.

Methodology/approach details the research

tasks that were conducted in the studied

research articles, has demonstrated some

basic understanding of the research

methodologies used and has referenced

appropriate literature (such as standards or

research papers) when necessary.

Has demonstrated some basic understanding of

the published research results through an

attempted critical evaluation that includes an

analysis of the implications of the results,

thoughtful comparison of the results among the

available literature.

Report has issues that may include: spelling

and grammar errors, structure or referencing

that needs improvement, or poor quality or

missing figures.

C: Good 60 - 69

Good: Has demonstrated a good and necessary

understanding of the context, importance and

existing issues relevant to the report topic in

additive manufacturing for a specific metallic

alloy/polymer/composite/emerging material, and

has used appropriate literature to support this.

Has demonstrated a good and necessary

understanding of the key topics, considerations

and issues specific to the report research area,

has used appropriate literature to support this,

and has addressed the research problem.

Has clearly articulated methodology/approach

that accurately details research tasks that were

conducted in the studied research articles, has

demonstrated a good understanding of the

research methodologies used and has

referenced appropriate literature (such as

standards or research papers) when

necessary.

Has demonstrated a good understanding of the

the published research results through a critical

evaluation that includes an analysis of the

implications of the results, thoughtful comparison

of the results among the available literature.

Mostly well-written and structured report that

uses appropriate referencing techniques and

contains appropriate figures when necessary.

D: Very good 70 - 79

Very good: Has demonstrated an in-depth

understanding of the context, importance and

existing issues relevant to the report topic in

additive manufacturing for a specific metallic

alloy/polymer/composite/emerging material, and

has used high-quality and appropriate literature

to support this.

Has demonstrated an in-depth understanding of

the key topics, considerations and issues specific

to the report research area, has used high-quality

and appropriate literature to support this, and has

clearly addressed the research problem.

Has clearly articulated methodology/approach

that accurately details research tasks that were

conducted in the studied research articles, has

demonstrated an in-depth understanding of the

research methodologies used and has

referenced appropriate literature (such as

standards or research papers) when

necessary.

Has clearly demonstrated an in-depth

understanding of the published research results

through a critical evaluation that includes an

analysis of the implications of the results,

thoughtful comparison of the results among the

available literature.

Well-written and structured report that uses

appropriate referencing techniques and

contains clear and accurate figures when

necessary.

HD: Excellent 80 - 100

Excellent: Has demonstrated a thorough and in-

depth understanding of the context, importance

and existing issues relevant to the report topic in

additive manufacturing for a specific metallic

alloy/polymer/composite/emerging material, and

has used high-quality, comprehensive and

appropriate literature to support this.

Has demonstrated a thorough understanding of

the key topics, considerations and issues specific

to the report research area, has used high-quality,

comprehensive and appropriate literature to

support this, and has clearly addressed the

research problem in a professional engineering

fashion.

Has clearly articulated methodology/approach

that accurately details research tasks that were

conducted in the studied research articles, has

demonstrated a thorough understanding of the

research methodologies used and has

referenced appropriate literature (such as

standards or research papers) when

necessary.

Has clearly demonstrated an thorough and in-

depth understanding of the published research

results through a detailed critical evaluation that

includes an analysis of the implications of the

results, thoughtful comparison of the results

among the available literature.

Extremely well-written and structured report

that uses appropriate referencing techniques

and contains clear and accurate figures when

necessary.

Overall Score Metric and Outcome Expectations

To create your rating, select Assessment Rating worksheet below.

Assessment Rating worksheet



Student Name/ID:

Report Title:

Marker:

Title is clear and concise 0 

Aims and objectives are explicitly stated 0 

Literature review is comprehensive and relevant 0 

Critical evaluation & presentation in a logical & coherent manner 0 

Clear methodology/approach that details research tasks 0 

Technical understanding of the methodology/approach used 0 

Results and discussion demonstrate critical thinking, insight,

technical accuracy 0 

Critical evaluation of the process-structure-property relationship 0 

Document has clear and logical structure 0 

Document is of professional quality (Grammar, Punctuations,

Diagrams etc.) 0 

Format and Reference Appropriate section headings, document layout, appropriate

referencing and valid SEBE Assignment Coversheet 0 

Total Mark 0.00

Grade N

Feedback to Students

Standards

N

P

C

D

HD 8-10

0-4

Rating

SEM725 Project Report 1 & 2 Marking

Title and Abstract

Introduction and

Problem Statement

Methodology and

Approach

Achievement Rating Expectation

(In the grey cells on the RHS, provide a rating to represent the

standard of student's achievement)

Assessment Attribute

5-6

6-7

7-8

Results and

Discussion

Organization and

Presentation