Project Formulation (CSP600)
The foundational phase where students define their problem statement, review literature, and propose a robust methodology.
Report TemplateProject Registration & F1 Form
Administrators import student data. Lecturers assign the main supervisor (and external co-supervisors if applicable). Students must formally accept the project assignment via the digital F1 Form.
Chapter Submissions (A1, A2, A3)
Students progressively submit their initial drafts for lecturer review:
Weekly Logbook (F5)
Constant communication is key. Students document weekly meetings, discussions, and progress. Supervisors must digitally sign and approve entries regularly to validate consistent effort.
Proposal Presentation & Interim Report
The semester concludes with a formal viva defense and the submission of the compiled Interim Report (F6a).
Project Implementation (CSP650)
The execution phase where students build their solution, conduct testing, and present their final thesis.
Implementation & Progress Assessment
Students continue system development and maintain their F5 Logbook. A mandatory mid-semester progress evaluation is conducted by the Lecturer via the F9 form (10%) to ensure projects are on track.
Final Deliverables Submission
Preparation for the final defense requires critical documentation:
Final Exhibition & Defense
Students exhibit their completed system to a panel. Evaluated independently by both Supervisor and Examiner, each contributing their own weighted share of the mark.
Final Corrections & Hardbound (F12)
Students amend their thesis based on panel feedback. The corrected report must be digitally signed and approved by all evaluators before the project is officially marked as Completed.
Grading Weightages
Visual breakdown of how marks are distributed across both semesters.
CSP600
100 MarksCSP650
100 MarksMarks from Supervisor and Examiner roles are combined by their configured weightage (not a simple average) — e.g. F11 is SV 30% + Examiner 25%.
Digital Forms Matrix
Quick reference sheet for the F1–F13 processes handled inside this digital system. Three further forms, F14–F16, exist for the Special Evaluation route — see the next section.
| Form | Purpose | Evaluator |
|---|---|---|
| F1 | Title & Supervisor Mutual Acceptance | Supervisor |
| F2 | Motivation Assessment (A1 Document) | Lecturer |
| F3 | Literature Review Assessment (A2 Document) | Lecturer |
| F4 | Methodology Assessment (A3 Document) | Lecturer |
| F5 | Continuous Weekly Logbook | Supervisor (Weekly) |
| F6a/b | Report Repository (Proposal & Final Thesis) | Storage only |
| F7 | Proposal Presentation Viva Assessment | Lecturer + SV + Ex |
| F8 | Proposal Report (F6a) Evaluation | SV + Examiner |
| F9 | CSP650 Mid-Semester Progress Assessment | Lecturer |
| F10 | Final Presentation / Exhibition | SV 15% + Ex 15% |
| F11 | Final Thesis (F6b) Evaluation | SV 30% + Ex 25% |
| F12 | Final Thesis Corrections Sign-off | All Panel Members |
| F13 | Lean Model Canvas (LMC) | Lecturer |
Special Evaluation (F14–F16)
A separate re-assessment route in the 4th Edition handbook for CSP650 students who did not meet the standard passing bar (e.g. an Incomplete result) and are given one further semester to qualify. These three forms are not yet part of this digital system — they are administered manually by the Lecturer/FYP Coordinator.
Special Evaluation Qualification Form
A Yes/No checklist the Lecturer completes to confirm a student qualifies for special evaluation. All of the following must be met:
- Continuous Assessment marks ≥ 50% (Progress 10% + LMC 5% ≥ 7.5%)
- Complete report submitted earlier, at an unsatisfactory level
- Attended the Presentation Day/Exhibition, though unsatisfactory
- In final semester and has passed all other required courses
Special Evaluation Presentation Form
Re-assesses the student's presentation for a qualified special evaluation case, scored against the same criteria style as F10.
Special Evaluation Report Evaluation Form
Re-assesses the student's final report for a qualified special evaluation case, scored against the same criteria style as F11.
Integrity & Ethics Policies
Plagiarism Policy
Academic integrity is strictly enforced. All uploaded reports (F6a and F6b) must be accompanied by a valid Turnitin similarity report.
Research Ethics
Projects involving human subjects require strict adherence to ethical guidelines to protect participants and the university.