Migration from IP4v to IPv6

Order Description

Recognising that deadlines are an integral part of professional workplace practice, the University expects students to meet all agreed deadlines for submission of assessments. Work submitted after the deadline will be given a Nil response (NR), i.e. a 0 grade. However, the University acknowledges that there may be circumstances which prevent students from meeting deadlines. There are now 3 distinct processes in place to deal with di?ering student circumstances:

Assessed Extended Deadline (AED) Students with disabilities or long term health issues are entitled to a Support Plan.

Exceptional Extenuating Circumstances (EEC) The EEC policy applies to situations where serious, unforeseen circumstances prevent the student from completing the assignment on time or to the normal standard.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_i_exceptional_extenuating_circumstances.pdf

Late Submission Requests for late submission will be made to the relevant Subject Manager in the School (or Head of Joint Honours for joint honours students) who can authorise an extension of up to a maximum of one week.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_f_assessment_regulations_ug_programmes.pdf

Level of Collaboration:
None

Learning Outcome
1.Critically evaluate the use of advanced routing in the context of detailed case studies.
2.Demonstrate a critical awareness of the technology and issues involved in the application of advanced routing over a range of network designs.

Part 1
You will need to identify a research area in the field of advanced routing and produce a review paper. It is expected that you read and review at least five relevant journal or conference papers on the subject. Your review paper is expected to be around four pages, and should not just be a summary of the papers you have read but be critical in nature and hence detail shortcomings or problems of the presented approaches as well as identify potential areas for future investigation.

Your tasks are as follows:

•    Email the module leader the title of your paper and major reference sources (initial indicative list) before 4/2/2014 and await confirmation.
•    Submit a paper around four pages on 4/3/2014 to your tutor.
•    Give a 12 minute presentation (10 minutes presentation + 2 minutes question time) on 4/3/2014.
•    Review the paper of another student and give feedback. In your feedback you will need to make comments on the paper in terms of significance of topic, quality of presentation and content. You will also need to point out strengths and weaknesses of the paper.
•    Put all documents in a portfolio and submit through course resources by 21:00pm on 10/3/2014.

Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented paper around four pages using the IEEE format provided together with your presentation slides and review of paper. The paper should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references. The Internet is rich of sites helping with report/paper writing (e.g. http://writing.colostate.edu).

Format: download the template from the IEEE Web site at http://www.ieee.org/documents/TRANS-JOUR.doc so you can use it to prepare your paper. See appendix A for guidelines on how to write a journal paper (taken form an IEEE web site, will also be provided in UDo course resources)

Marking Scheme
The cou` rsework mark will be split according to the following scheme:

•    Presentation    15%
o    presentation itself 5%
o    information presented 10%

•    Paper     30%
o    style 5%
o    explanation of paper 15%
o    putting paper into context 10%

•    Review of paper    5%

Part 2
Company A in London purchased Company B in Edinburgh. Currently two companies’ networks remain separate entities. Company A’s network has 7 Cisco router and running the EIGRP routing Protocol. Company B’s network has 10 non cisco routers and running the OSPF routing protocol. Both companies’ networks are still using IPv4. Two networks need to be merged together to provide connectivity. It is expected the new network should be based on IPv6. As the network consultant to the company,

Your tasks are as follows:
1.    Propose a new network routing strategy that it is scalable and will provide optimal performance and security.
2.    Critically evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of transition from IPv4 to IPv6
3.    Propose a transition plan from IPv4 to IPV6
Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented report about 6 pages by 21:00pm on 10/4/2014.The report should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references.

Marking Scheme
Grade    Element    Descriptor    Class

100

90    Knowledge and understanding    It is creative and illustrates a thoroughly in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of excellent extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Incisive original thinking.    Distinction
Criticality    The work shows an exceptional, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an outstanding appreciation of all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an exceptional level of evaluation and illustrates incisive conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is exceptional in that it is logically presented and error-free. The work is communicated with an exceptional degree of authority that comes close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
89

80    Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems. There is evidence of extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Excellent original thinking
Criticality    The work shows an excellent, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an excellent appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an advanced level of evaluation and illustrates some solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is excellent in that it is logically presented and almost error-free. The work is communicated with an excellent degree of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
79

70
Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an advanced understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading and synthesis of primary research literature. Commendable original thinking.
Criticality    The work shows an extremely good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an extremely good appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an extremely good level of evaluation and illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is extremely good in that it is logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an extremely good degree of authority that sometimes comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
69

60    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading of primary research literature. Significant original thinking.    Merit
Criticality    The work shows a very good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a very good appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a very good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is very good in that it is mainly logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an occasional glimpse of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
59

50    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is a little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Some evidence of original thinking    Pass
Criticality    The work has a fairly good level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a fair appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fairly good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is of a good standard in that there is an attempt to present it logically and it is reasonably error-free. The work is communicated without very much authority. It requires development to come close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

49

40    Knowledge  and understanding    The work demonstrates reasonable understanding of subject issues and problems in the subject area.Demonstrates a satisfactory level of knowledge, but with little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking.
Criticality    The work has a fair level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts, but here is a little appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fair level of evaluation but rarely illustrates any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    Although soundly presented, the work lacks authority. Due to some weaknesses in style, it does not come at all close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

39

35    Knowledge  and understanding    The work illustrates little understanding of issues and problems in the subject area.There is little evidence of any reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking    Marginal Fail
Criticality    The work lacks much critical engagement with any ideas and concepts. There may be virtually no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows inadequate evaluation and does not refer to any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is very poor. The work is limited in that it is not logically presented and has errors. The work is communicated in an unacceptable way. It is far from that expected of a professional in the discipline.
34

21    Knowledge and understanding    The work is poor and has a number of errors. It illustrates virtually no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is almost no evidence of any reading of primary research literature. No evidence of original thinking.                                    Fail
Criticality    The work lacks critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is almost no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows virtually no evaluation and hardly refers to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is unacceptable. The work is communicated very poorly. It is not to any graduate standard.
20

5    Knowledge  and understanding    The work is extremely poor and has many errors. It illustrates no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is no evidence of any reading of primary research literature.
Criticality    The work lacks any critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows no evaluation and does not refer to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is totally unacceptable. The work is incoherent and may be scant or severely under-length.
4
1
Z
(0)        Nothing of value is contained in  the submitted work.
Where no work has been submitted the NS notation will apply.
Z designates work where an academic offence has occurred or been suspected.

Migration from IP4v to IPv6

Order Description

Recognising that deadlines are an integral part of professional workplace practice, the University expects students to meet all agreed deadlines for submission of assessments. Work submitted after the deadline will be given a Nil response (NR), i.e. a 0 grade. However, the University acknowledges that there may be circumstances which prevent students from meeting deadlines. There are now 3 distinct processes in place to deal with di?ering student circumstances:

Assessed Extended Deadline (AED) Students with disabilities or long term health issues are entitled to a Support Plan.

Exceptional Extenuating Circumstances (EEC) The EEC policy applies to situations where serious, unforeseen circumstances prevent the student from completing the assignment on time or to the normal standard.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_i_exceptional_extenuating_circumstances.pdf

Late Submission Requests for late submission will be made to the relevant Subject Manager in the School (or Head of Joint Honours for joint honours students) who can authorise an extension of up to a maximum of one week.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_f_assessment_regulations_ug_programmes.pdf

Level of Collaboration:
None

Learning Outcome
1.Critically evaluate the use of advanced routing in the context of detailed case studies.
2.Demonstrate a critical awareness of the technology and issues involved in the application of advanced routing over a range of network designs.

Part 1
You will need to identify a research area in the field of advanced routing and produce a review paper. It is expected that you read and review at least five relevant journal or conference papers on the subject. Your review paper is expected to be around four pages, and should not just be a summary of the papers you have read but be critical in nature and hence detail shortcomings or problems of the presented approaches as well as identify potential areas for future investigation.

Your tasks are as follows:

•    Email the module leader the title of your paper and major reference sources (initial indicative list) before 4/2/2014 and await confirmation.
•    Submit a paper around four pages on 4/3/2014 to your tutor.
•    Give a 12 minute presentation (10 minutes presentation + 2 minutes question time) on 4/3/2014.
•    Review the paper of another student and give feedback. In your feedback you will need to make comments on the paper in terms of significance of topic, quality of presentation and content. You will also need to point out strengths and weaknesses of the paper.
•    Put all documents in a portfolio and submit through course resources by 21:00pm on 10/3/2014.

Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented paper around four pages using the IEEE format provided together with your presentation slides and review of paper. The paper should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references. The Internet is rich of sites helping with report/paper writing (e.g. http://writing.colostate.edu).

Format: download the template from the IEEE Web site at http://www.ieee.org/documents/TRANS-JOUR.doc so you can use it to prepare your paper. See appendix A for guidelines on how to write a journal paper (taken form an IEEE web site, will also be provided in UDo course resources)

Marking Scheme
The cou` rsework mark will be split according to the following scheme:

•    Presentation    15%
o    presentation itself 5%
o    information presented 10%

•    Paper     30%
o    style 5%
o    explanation of paper 15%
o    putting paper into context 10%

•    Review of paper    5%

Part 2
Company A in London purchased Company B in Edinburgh. Currently two companies’ networks remain separate entities. Company A’s network has 7 Cisco router and running the EIGRP routing Protocol. Company B’s network has 10 non cisco routers and running the OSPF routing protocol. Both companies’ networks are still using IPv4. Two networks need to be merged together to provide connectivity. It is expected the new network should be based on IPv6. As the network consultant to the company,

Your tasks are as follows:
1.    Propose a new network routing strategy that it is scalable and will provide optimal performance and security.
2.    Critically evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of transition from IPv4 to IPv6
3.    Propose a transition plan from IPv4 to IPV6
Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented report about 6 pages by 21:00pm on 10/4/2014.The report should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references.

Marking Scheme
Grade    Element    Descriptor    Class

100

90    Knowledge and understanding    It is creative and illustrates a thoroughly in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of excellent extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Incisive original thinking.    Distinction
Criticality    The work shows an exceptional, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an outstanding appreciation of all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an exceptional level of evaluation and illustrates incisive conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is exceptional in that it is logically presented and error-free. The work is communicated with an exceptional degree of authority that comes close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
89

80    Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems. There is evidence of extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Excellent original thinking
Criticality    The work shows an excellent, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an excellent appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an advanced level of evaluation and illustrates some solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is excellent in that it is logically presented and almost error-free. The work is communicated with an excellent degree of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
79

70
Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an advanced understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading and synthesis of primary research literature. Commendable original thinking.
Criticality    The work shows an extremely good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an extremely good appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an extremely good level of evaluation and illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is extremely good in that it is logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an extremely good degree of authority that sometimes comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
69

60    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading of primary research literature. Significant original thinking.    Merit
Criticality    The work shows a very good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a very good appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a very good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is very good in that it is mainly logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an occasional glimpse of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
59

50    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is a little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Some evidence of original thinking    Pass
Criticality    The work has a fairly good level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a fair appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fairly good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is of a good standard in that there is an attempt to present it logically and it is reasonably error-free. The work is communicated without very much authority. It requires development to come close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

49

40    Knowledge  and understanding    The work demonstrates reasonable understanding of subject issues and problems in the subject area.Demonstrates a satisfactory level of knowledge, but with little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking.
Criticality    The work has a fair level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts, but here is a little appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fair level of evaluation but rarely illustrates any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    Although soundly presented, the work lacks authority. Due to some weaknesses in style, it does not come at all close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

39

35    Knowledge  and understanding    The work illustrates little understanding of issues and problems in the subject area.There is little evidence of any reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking    Marginal Fail
Criticality    The work lacks much critical engagement with any ideas and concepts. There may be virtually no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows inadequate evaluation and does not refer to any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is very poor. The work is limited in that it is not logically presented and has errors. The work is communicated in an unacceptable way. It is far from that expected of a professional in the discipline.
34

21    Knowledge and understanding    The work is poor and has a number of errors. It illustrates virtually no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is almost no evidence of any reading of primary research literature. No evidence of original thinking.                                    Fail
Criticality    The work lacks critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is almost no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows virtually no evaluation and hardly refers to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is unacceptable. The work is communicated very poorly. It is not to any graduate standard.
20

5    Knowledge  and understanding    The work is extremely poor and has many errors. It illustrates no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is no evidence of any reading of primary research literature.
Criticality    The work lacks any critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows no evaluation and does not refer to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is totally unacceptable. The work is incoherent and may be scant or severely under-length.
4
1
Z
(0)        Nothing of value is contained in  the submitted work.
Where no work has been submitted the NS notation will apply.
Z designates work where an academic offence has occurred or been suspected.

Migration from IP4v to IPv6

Order Description

Recognising that deadlines are an integral part of professional workplace practice, the University expects students to meet all agreed deadlines for submission of assessments. Work submitted after the deadline will be given a Nil response (NR), i.e. a 0 grade. However, the University acknowledges that there may be circumstances which prevent students from meeting deadlines. There are now 3 distinct processes in place to deal with di?ering student circumstances:

Assessed Extended Deadline (AED) Students with disabilities or long term health issues are entitled to a Support Plan.

Exceptional Extenuating Circumstances (EEC) The EEC policy applies to situations where serious, unforeseen circumstances prevent the student from completing the assignment on time or to the normal standard.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_i_exceptional_extenuating_circumstances.pdf

Late Submission Requests for late submission will be made to the relevant Subject Manager in the School (or Head of Joint Honours for joint honours students) who can authorise an extension of up to a maximum of one week.
http://www.derby.ac.uk/files/part_f_assessment_regulations_ug_programmes.pdf

Level of Collaboration:
None

Learning Outcome
1.Critically evaluate the use of advanced routing in the context of detailed case studies.
2.Demonstrate a critical awareness of the technology and issues involved in the application of advanced routing over a range of network designs.

Part 1
You will need to identify a research area in the field of advanced routing and produce a review paper. It is expected that you read and review at least five relevant journal or conference papers on the subject. Your review paper is expected to be around four pages, and should not just be a summary of the papers you have read but be critical in nature and hence detail shortcomings or problems of the presented approaches as well as identify potential areas for future investigation.

Your tasks are as follows:

•    Email the module leader the title of your paper and major reference sources (initial indicative list) before 4/2/2014 and await confirmation.
•    Submit a paper around four pages on 4/3/2014 to your tutor.
•    Give a 12 minute presentation (10 minutes presentation + 2 minutes question time) on 4/3/2014.
•    Review the paper of another student and give feedback. In your feedback you will need to make comments on the paper in terms of significance of topic, quality of presentation and content. You will also need to point out strengths and weaknesses of the paper.
•    Put all documents in a portfolio and submit through course resources by 21:00pm on 10/3/2014.

Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented paper around four pages using the IEEE format provided together with your presentation slides and review of paper. The paper should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references. The Internet is rich of sites helping with report/paper writing (e.g. http://writing.colostate.edu).

Format: download the template from the IEEE Web site at http://www.ieee.org/documents/TRANS-JOUR.doc so you can use it to prepare your paper. See appendix A for guidelines on how to write a journal paper (taken form an IEEE web site, will also be provided in UDo course resources)

Marking Scheme
The cou` rsework mark will be split according to the following scheme:

•    Presentation    15%
o    presentation itself 5%
o    information presented 10%

•    Paper     30%
o    style 5%
o    explanation of paper 15%
o    putting paper into context 10%

•    Review of paper    5%

Part 2
Company A in London purchased Company B in Edinburgh. Currently two companies’ networks remain separate entities. Company A’s network has 7 Cisco router and running the EIGRP routing Protocol. Company B’s network has 10 non cisco routers and running the OSPF routing protocol. Both companies’ networks are still using IPv4. Two networks need to be merged together to provide connectivity. It is expected the new network should be based on IPv6. As the network consultant to the company,

Your tasks are as follows:
1.    Propose a new network routing strategy that it is scalable and will provide optimal performance and security.
2.    Critically evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of transition from IPv4 to IPv6
3.    Propose a transition plan from IPv4 to IPV6
Main deliverable:

You will submit a well presented report about 6 pages by 21:00pm on 10/4/2014.The report should be well written, structured and formatted, and you should use a proper format for your list of references.

Marking Scheme
Grade    Element    Descriptor    Class

100

90    Knowledge and understanding    It is creative and illustrates a thoroughly in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of excellent extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Incisive original thinking.    Distinction
Criticality    The work shows an exceptional, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an outstanding appreciation of all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an exceptional level of evaluation and illustrates incisive conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is exceptional in that it is logically presented and error-free. The work is communicated with an exceptional degree of authority that comes close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
89

80    Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an in-depth understanding of content as well as issues and problems. There is evidence of extensive reading and synthesis of mostly primary research literature. Excellent original thinking
Criticality    The work shows an excellent, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an excellent appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an advanced level of evaluation and illustrates some solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is excellent in that it is logically presented and almost error-free. The work is communicated with an excellent degree of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
79

70
Knowledge and understanding    It illustrates an advanced understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading and synthesis of primary research literature. Commendable original thinking.
Criticality    The work shows an extremely good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is an extremely good appreciation of almost all of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows an extremely good level of evaluation and illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is extremely good in that it is logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an extremely good degree of authority that sometimes comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
69

60    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is evidence of some reading of primary research literature. Significant original thinking.    Merit
Criticality    The work shows a very good, critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a very good appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a very good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is very good in that it is mainly logically presented and reasonably error-free. The work is communicated with an occasional glimpse of authority that comes reasonably close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.
59

50    Knowledge and understanding    The work illustrates a good understanding of content as well as issues and problems in the subject area. There is a little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Some evidence of original thinking    Pass
Criticality    The work has a fairly good level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts. There is a fair appreciation of some of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fairly good level of evaluation and, perhaps, illustrates a few solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The work is of a good standard in that there is an attempt to present it logically and it is reasonably error-free. The work is communicated without very much authority. It requires development to come close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

49

40    Knowledge  and understanding    The work demonstrates reasonable understanding of subject issues and problems in the subject area.Demonstrates a satisfactory level of knowledge, but with little evidence of reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking.
Criticality    The work has a fair level of critical engagement with complex ideas and concepts, but here is a little appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows a fair level of evaluation but rarely illustrates any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    Although soundly presented, the work lacks authority. Due to some weaknesses in style, it does not come at all close to that expected of a professional in the discipline.

39

35    Knowledge  and understanding    The work illustrates little understanding of issues and problems in the subject area.There is little evidence of any reading of primary research literature. Little evidence of original thinking    Marginal Fail
Criticality    The work lacks much critical engagement with any ideas and concepts. There may be virtually no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows inadequate evaluation and does not refer to any solution-focused conclusions based on that evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is very poor. The work is limited in that it is not logically presented and has errors. The work is communicated in an unacceptable way. It is far from that expected of a professional in the discipline.
34

21    Knowledge and understanding    The work is poor and has a number of errors. It illustrates virtually no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is almost no evidence of any reading of primary research literature. No evidence of original thinking.                                    Fail
Criticality    The work lacks critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is almost no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows virtually no evaluation and hardly refers to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is unacceptable. The work is communicated very poorly. It is not to any graduate standard.
20

5    Knowledge  and understanding    The work is extremely poor and has many errors. It illustrates no understanding of issues and problems in the subject area. There is no evidence of any reading of primary research literature.
Criticality    The work lacks any critical engagement with ideas and concepts. There is no appreciation of the relevant competing perspectives.
Evaluation    The work shows no evaluation and does not refer to any conclusions based around an evaluation.
Presentation and communication    The standard of presentation is totally unacceptable. The work is incoherent and may be scant or severely under-length.
4
1
Z
(0)        Nothing of value is contained in  the submitted work.
Where no work has been submitted the NS notation will apply.
Z designates work where an academic offence has occurred or been suspected.