Each thesis/project gets two assessors. Each report must be dated and have at the beginning the name of the assessor, the thesis/project title and author.
The grading scheme below and reports will be shared with the students for transparency reasons. We keep all reports to document the reasoning behind the grades.

The assessors are to comment on each of the following aspects:

   • Context
The dissertation/project report should demonstrate, as far as is relevant, a good understanding of the context in which the work was undertaken. It should be evident that the student understood both the problem and the problem domain, and that the choice of approach was informed and intelligent. The examiners would like to be convinced that the student has a good general knowledge of the field.

   • Competence
The student should demonstrate, in the text of the dissertation/project report, that they are able to apply the ideas and the techniques that they have studied. The examiners will look for evidence of understanding, and appropriate application of techniques. They would like to be convinced that the student has shown competence in investigating the chosen topic.

   • Contribution
The dissertation/project report should have some value in itself. This may arise in different ways: the dissertation/project report may present a fresh application, an extension to a theory, a new solution, or a new approach to a problem. The value will depend upon the extent of achievement: the nature of the application, the utility of the extension, the elegance of the solution, or the coherence of the approach.
All of these are intangible, but the examiners’ expectations will be framed in the knowledge that this is work undertaken by new graduates (for MSc: it should be better than a BSc project, but not necessarily comparable with that of a research student). Ideally, the examiners would like to be convinced that the student has made a worthwhile contribution to knowledge or understanding in the field.

   • Criticism
The student should be able to provide, in the text of the dissertation/project report, a critical assessment and evaluation of the work he/she has undertaken, as well as of the actual process of doing the work.

   • Clarity
If the dissertation/project report is to succeed as a demonstration of knowledge and understanding, and if the examiners are to be convinced of the competence of the student, then a certain degree of clarity and organisation is required. However, part of the value of the dissertation lies in its accessibility: if it is to make a worthwhile contribution, then it must be readable.
For these reasons, and because clarity of exposition may in itself reflect a greater degree of effort and understanding, the examiners would like to be convinced that the dissertation is presented in a lucid and scholarly manner.

The Overall Mark is given from 0 to 100 based on the above. For the mapping of the range 0-100 to the final scale 0-6 used in Switzerland:
   • 50 is mapped to 4: this is the threshold for a pass
   • 70 is mapped to 5: this is the threshold for very good

The mark bands below serve as guideline:

90-100: The candidate shows remarkable ability and true insights. Dissertations in this band will be worthy of publication.
The work has significant novel content and is publishable with little effort.

80-89: The candidate shows outstanding problem-solving skills and outstanding knowledge of the material over a wide range of topics, and is able to use that knowledge innovatively and/or in unfamiliar contexts.
The work has novel content and is publishable with some effort.

70-79: The candidate shows excellent problem-solving skills and excellent knowledge of the material over a wide range of topics, and is able to use that knowledge innovatively and/or in unfamiliar contexts.
The work has novel content and could be publishable with non-trivial extra effort.

60-69: The candidate shows good or very good problem-solving skills, and good or very good knowledge of much of the material over a wide range of topics.

50-59: The candidate shows basic problem solving skills and adequate knowledge of most of the material.

40-49: The candidate shows reasonable understanding of at least part of the basic material and some problem solving skills. Although there may be a few good answers, the majority of answers will contain errors in calculations and/or show incomplete understanding of the topics.

30-39: The candidate shows some limited grasp of basic material over a restricted range of topics, but with large gaps in understanding. There need not be any good quality answers, but there will be indications of some competence.

0-29: The candidate shows inadequate grasp of the basic material. The work is likely to show major misunderstanding and confusion, and/or inaccurate calculations; the answers to most of the questions attempted are likely to be fragmentary only.