Scribd
Upload
119 views4 pages

Thesis Evaluation Form

The thesis evaluation form assesses an inventory system thesis with a QR code scanner. It uses rubrics to evaluate the written thesis and oral presentation. For the written thesis, criteria include research questions, supporting evidence, methodology, data gathering and analysis, and conclusions. For the oral presentation, criteria include organization, delivery, content, use of media/resources, and response to questions. The evaluation aims to determine if the thesis sufficiently addressed the research question and objectives, used appropriate methodology and evidence, and presented clear conclusions.

Uploaded by

EKS SANTIAGO
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
119 views4 pages

Thesis Evaluation Form

The thesis evaluation form assesses an inventory system thesis with a QR code scanner. It uses rubrics to evaluate the written thesis and oral presentation. For the written thesis, criteria include research questions, supporting evidence, methodology, data gathering and analysis, and conclusions. For the oral presentation, criteria include organization, delivery, content, use of media/resources, and response to questions. The evaluation aims to determine if the thesis sufficiently addressed the research question and objectives, used appropriate methodology and evidence, and presented clear conclusions.

Uploaded by

EKS SANTIAGO
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

University of La Salette

College of Engineering and Architecture


Department of Computer Engineering
Santiago City

Thesis Evaluation Form


Title: Inventory System with QR Code Scanner
I. RUBRIC FOR WRITTEN THESIS
Criteria Undeveloped Developing Satisfactory Outstanding Score
50 points to 79 points 80 points to 100 points
The researchers failed to answer adequately the The researchers sufficiently answered the research
research question as well as any or all of the question as well as the hypothesis/propositions.
hypothesis/ propositions.
Research Questions The researchers sufficiently met proposal objectives,
The researchers did not adequately meet the explaining any deviations.
proposed objectives and/or failed to explain
variances. Historical context, assumptions/ biases, and/or ethical
considerations are present/developed.
10 points to 39 points 40 points to 60 points
Evidence/body of knowledge inadequately Body of knowledge thoroughly discussed
Supporting Evidence
discussed
and Body of
Evidence is sufficient and well Utilized
Knowledge
Evidential support for an argument, or use of
evidence is selective or inadequate
50 points to 79 points 80 points to 100 points
Researchers deviated from the Researchers adhered to the approved
approved methodology/approach methodology/approach. When there were variances,
without sufficient justification. these were properly justified.
Methodology
The researchers did not provide an adequate The researchers sufficiently provided a detailed
description of the actual description of the actual methods and data analysis
methods and/or data analysis tools used. tools used.
100 points to 179 points 180 points to 240 points
Gathered only superficial information. Data gathered was comprehensive and
Fact versus opinion not well exhaustive
distinguished Accuracy and relevance of an evidence
Data Gathering,
Perspectives are limited appropriately questioned
Discussion of
Quantitative and/or symbolic tools Multiple perspectives considered
Findings, Analysis
were used inappropriately Appropriate quantitative and/or
Evaluation, analysis, synthesis is symbolic tools are utilized
limited Evaluation, analysis, synthesis was
Extensive
100 points to 159 points 160 points to 200 points
Conclusions, implications, and/or consequences Conclusions, qualifications and consequences
lacking or conclusions are loosely related to including the value of the thesis are presented and
consequences or implications well developed.
Significance of what was discovered or learned is Significance of what was discovered
Conclusions unclear. or learned is clear.
Implications
Assertions are unqualified or unwarranted Assertions are qualified and well supported.
Appropriate connections to local, national, global
or civic issues are lacking or weak Ramifications Develops insightful connections to local, national,
of work not discussed global or civic issues are discussed. Ramifications of
work presented and Discussed
40 points to 79 points 80 points to 100 points
Language obscures meaning/unclear in places Language clearly and effectively communicates ideas

Grammatical, spelling or punctuation errors are Shows near flawless editing for grammar, syntax,
distracting or repeated punctuation, spelling
Writing
The writing style is incoherent Pages lack white The writing style is eloquent/engaging Pages have
space, paragraphs too long and not flowing Work white spaces, paragraphs of adequate length and is
is unfocused flowing Work is focused
The organization is clumsy or mechanical The organization is clear and effective
Sources not cited or not used correctly Sources and citations used correctly
TOTAL
RUBRIC FOR ORAL PRESENTATION
Criteria Undeveloped Developing Satisfactory Outstanding Score
0-10 points 11-20 points 21-30 points 31-40 points
Speaker/s Speaker/s adequately Presentation follows Speaker/s highly
Organization
disorganized; jumped organized logical sequence organized, easy to follow,
topics smooth transitions
0-10 points 11-20 points 21-30 points 31-40 points
Paper was read or Some parts of the In most instances, the Speech was smooth, clear
seemed memorized. presentation was presentation went and articulate. There was
Speech was too delivered well, other smoothly. There were voice projection and
Delivery
fast/too slow/too soft. parts were not. minor snags in delivery. pacing was effective.
No eye contact. Attempts were made There was eye contact.
Delivery stiff and to adjust pace of Delivery was poised.
unsure delivery
0-10 points 11-20 points 21-30 points 31-40 points
Presentation was not Content was adequate. Presentation was A general audience could
apt to topic nor There were attempts to sufficient. In most understand the
Content audience. Background provide background instances, the content presentation. Key terms
information and/or information was appropriate. were defined and
assumptions were background information
lacking. provided.
0-10 points 11-20 points 21-30 points 31-40 points
Media and format were There were many Satisfactory media Excellent media format
poor choice for media glitches. Some presentation. There were for content. All materials
Media and Resources content. Materials slides were very however some lapses. were clear and
were confusing or distracting. Not all information was
distracting. Speaker/s speaker/s were in pertinent.
not in business attire. business attire.
Response to 0-10 point 11-20 points 21-30 points 31-40 points
Questions Misunderstands Some questions Group was able to Group was able to
questions; cannot misunderstood and answer most of the answer questions well
answer convincingly. inadequately questions well. There and with reference to
There was a lot of addressed. Group was were occasions though own work. Showed
fumbling about. easily rattled but when group was not too knowledge of subject
managed to sail confident about the matter.
through. subject matter.
TOTAL

Summary:
Component Minimum Grade Maximum Grade Score
Written Thesis 350 800

Oral Presentation 0 200

GRAND TOTAL 350 1000

_____________________________________________
EVALUATOR

You might also like