how to write up a project1 msc project co-ordinator (old): dr jim briggs phone: (023) 9284 6438...

How to write up a project 1

How to write up a project

http://www.pums.cam.port.ac.uk/projects/index.htm

MSc projectco-ordinator (old):

Dr Jim Briggs

Phone: (023) 9284 6438

Office: BT1.08

MSc projectco-ordinator (new):

Dr Matthew Poole

Phone: (023) 9284 6469

Office: BK 1.??

BSc projectco-ordinator:

Mrs Penny Hart

Phone: (023) 9284 6665

Office: BT1.19


Project deliverables

• Artefact to solve a problem

• Requirements document

• Design document

• Test results

• Survey results

• Report (the only one that is directly assessed)


The assessment schedule

• Deadline is:– Wednesday 4th May 2005 (MSc May)– Friday 6th May 2005 (BSc)– Friday 16th September 2005 (MSc Sept)– Friday 2nd December 2005 (BSc February entry)

• Before then - write it, print it, bind it


The assessment process

• Assessed by two markers

• Third marker/external examiner may arbitrate

• Good ones (60%+) go in Frewen library (see past ones there!)– List at

http://www.pums.cam.port.ac.uk/projects/cohorts/past.htm


Assessment categories

• Statement of project's context, aims and objectives

• Critical review of relevant literature

• Methodological approach• Specification and discussion of the

requirements (E)• Primary research and results (if

any) (S)• Analysis and discussion of the IT

design (E)• Content (S)• Discussion of implementation (E)

• Originality (S)• Discussion of verification and

validation (E)• Evaluation against requirements (E)• Evidence of project planning and

management• Attributes of the solution (E)• Summary, conclusions and

recommendations• Structure and presentation• Overall understanding and

reflection

(E) = Engineering only (S) = Study only


Assessment criteria 1

Good things:– work of publishable

standard;

– clearly defined aims and objectives;

– clear statement of requirements of artefact;

– well-reasoned explanations for design;

– perceptive analysis;

– interesting conclusions;– answers the question

definitively– development of high

quality artefacts;– work that was

challenging;– good quality presentation

PJE*, PJ45/60P:Note also requirements set by BCS accreditation


Assessment criteria 2

Bad things:– errors of fact;

– vague aims and objectives;

– vague requirements for artefacts;

– unexplained or ill-judged design decisions;

– little or no analysis, solely descriptive;

– trite conclusions;

– misinterpretations of literature;

– has no question or doesn't answer it

– development of poor quality artefacts;

– work that was facile;– little evidence of work

done by the student;– spelling mistakes, poor

grammar, lousy structure, crazy layout


Common problems

• Inadequate critical literature review (quantity and quality)– Descriptive/superficial vs.

deep understanding/critique

• No discussion of design decisions and alternatives– Failed to justify why the

approach taken was the best one

• Did not take an “engineering approach”– Failed to use methods

• “Closed mindset”– Only looked at solutions close to

home

• Students who think this summary is all they need to read on how to write their report

NOT AN INSURMOUNTABLE PROBLEM…

• non-“complete” artefact


Planning your report

• Plan it well in advance of submission• Outline

– Chapter headings– Section headings

• Identify what you have done and what you still have to do

• Write one bit at a time (like developing a program procedure by procedure)


An example of an outline

1. Introduction

1.1 background to the project

1.1.1 history and context

1.1.2 organisational structure

1.2 aims and objectives

1.3 constraints

1.4 structure of the rest of the report

2. Review

…


Practical issues

• Word-processing: use– paragraph styles

– automatic numbering

– tables of contents, etc.

– spell checkers, etc.

• Beware lab congestion

• Covers will be available 2-3 term weeks before deadline

• Binding (comb or perfect) is your responsibility

• Normal coursework rules apply


Regulations for reports

• Guideline word count (excluding appendices):– 20/30pt: 10,000-12,000

– 40/45/60pt: 12,000-15,000

• A4 paper, one side only

• Recommend for text:– 12pt typescript

– Times-roman or Arial font

– Single-spaced [change]

– At least 9pt for diagrams, etc.

• Margins >= 20mm

• Number chapters and sections to <= 3 levels Page numbers at bottom

• First page is special

• No need to submit floppy disk


Write with style

• Think of your audience (fellow students)

• Cheque speling and gramer; read your work

• Be concise and clear– break down complicated

bits

• Use diagrams, pictures, graphs (but don’t over-use)

• Use numbers/bullet pts• Think up clear chapter

and section headings

• Emphasise but DON’T over-emphasise

• Link sections together• Be accurate, concise,

interesting, relevant, incisive, discriminating


Structure of a report

• Usually 6 areas to address: introduction, review, design, implementation, evaluation, conclusions

• Order is indicative rather than mandatory

• May re-arrange according to aspects of project

• Make sure you talk about requirements

• Make sure you talk about your question


1. Introduction

• Context of project (where did it come from?)– broad statement then refine it down– why is it an interesting/relevant problem?– what is the academic question you are trying to answer?

• Aim & objectives (what did you set out to do?)– broad single aim and several specific objectives

• Constraints (what limited what you could do?)– time, money, equipment available, your skills, etc.

• Lead-in to rest of report


2. Review

• What else has been written:– about your problem?

– about possible solutions to it?

• Reader needs:– background to be able to tell whether your approach was valid or best.

– to know you considered all possible solutions

• Read/review widely; academic focus – quality, currency

• Be relevant and explain how and why it is– use examples to illustrate important points

– be “critical” in the positive sense of the word


3. Design

• Address issues such as:– Why did you do X that way?

– Why did you do Y but not Z?

– What was important and what not?

• Relate back to objectives and requirements– show completeness and correctness

• Show process• What, HOW, WHY


1/2/3 requirements

• Building an artefact => have “requirements”

• Given by customer / elicited as part of project

• Detail in an appendix - must write them down

• Discuss somewhere relevant:– “introduction” if given them– “design” if yours but small– separate chapter if yours but big


4. Implementation

• Address:– tools/methods used

– difficulties encountered; how you overcame them

– how you tested your artefact as you built it

• NOT internal documentation (that’s an appendix)

• More important to be interesting than complete• Arrange by project stages or by major components• If design only, consider future implementation issues


5. Evaluation

• Compare– what you did with objectives

• i.e. has customer got what they wanted?

– what you did with something else that does same• is what you’ve done better than the other thing?

• Involve customer and/or users• Structured evaluation best; not simply word of mouth• Again, interesting stuff only - leave mundane detail in

appendix


6. Conclusions

• How did what you did contribute to objectives?• Sum up key bits of evidence• What is the answer to the academic question?• Evidence needs to hang together to make a case• Loose ends are OK (suggestions for future work)

• Reflection• Apply to context (opposite of introduction)

– start specific and become more general


Non-standard report structures

• Projects of many small (independent?) parts– one chapter per part?

• Entirely review (PJS* only)– review of X; review of Y; …; summing up

• Scientific experiment/survey:– hypothesis (and justification); experiment (explain

how you carried it out); control; results (what did you observe?)


Choosing a title for your report

• Limited space• Avoid noise phrases (e.g. “A report into”)• What differentiates your project from all others?• Most important words first• Problems not usually solutions• The question you attempted to answer or the

problem you attempted to solve


Appendices

• Things not important or interesting enough to be in main body of report

• Examples:– program listings– requirements / design specifications– documentation– test case results– data


References

• Citations in text, either• numeric 1, or• labelled [Briggs99]

• List of references contains full bibliographic details of what you have referred to

• Example:[Barnes98] Barnes, J.P.G., Programming in Ada 95, Addison-Wesley, 2nd

edition 1998.

• See “How to cite references and avoid plagiarism” (http://www.pums.cam.port.ac.uk/projects/docs/projcite.htm) for full details


When to cite a reference

• All direct quotes must be cited (and placed either inside quotation marks or indented paras)

• Preferable to paraphrase (translate author's words into your own) but must still give credit

• If something is “common knowledge” (referred to in many sources), no need to cite

• Everything else is assumed to be your idea


Plagiarism

• Examples:– Using directly quoted material without marking it (e.g. by

placing it within quotation marks or indented paragraph) and citing it

– Paraphrasing the work of an author and attempting to pass it off as your own by not including a citation

– Submitting the work of another student as if it is your own

• Plagiarism is a serious matter


Abstract

• Abstract is a summary (précis) of the entire report (introduction, review, design, …, conclusions)

• Must be able to stand entirely on its own

• Our regulations require it to be 150-300 words and on first page


Lifecycles and your report

• What lifecycle model did your project adopt/follow? (Was this what you expected?)

• One chapter per stage?

• One chapter per cycle?

• Chronological vs. other logical structures


Bibliography

• Christian W. Dawson. The essence of computing projects: a student's guide. Prentice Hall, 2000. ISBN 0-13-021972-X. Publisher's price £16.99.

• Gavin Fairbairn and Christopher Winch, Reading, writing and reasoning - a guide for students, Open University Press, 2nd edition 1996.

• Phyllis Creme and Mary Lea, Writing at university - a guide for students, Open University Press, 1997.

• H.W. Fowler and Robert Burchfield, The New Fowler’s Modern English Usage, Oxford University Press, 1996


Penultimate words

• The only final-year project you’ll ever do!

• Do it right

• Think about the problem and how you solved it (practically)

• Present your work in the best possible light compatible with reality


Last words

• Think about your audience

• There are no right answers, only wrong ones

• Be honest and fair in your judgements

• Don’t take credit for what you didn’t do

• Make sure you take the credit for what you did

• Be proud of your accomplishment

how to write up a project1 msc project co-ordinator (old): dr jim briggs phone: (023) 9284 6438...

Documents

reflection e

discussion of design

objectives vague requirements

bsc project coordinator

crazy layout slide

bcs accreditation slide

s analysis

solution e summary