Loading...
 

Research and Design

Work centered

The Research and Design category is work centered. We evaluate the research and design skills of the students through what they have done in their projects. The emphasis for our evaluation is on their work, results and achievements.

Research and design

The Research and Design category is work-centered. We evaluate the research and design skills of the students through what they have done in their projects. The emphasis for our evaluation is on the merits of their work, results, and achievements. The main scale is:

implicit → explicit → proficient → novel → visionary

Rubrics of evaluation

The aspects of the performance criteria for the category Research and Design, as specified in the evaluation forms, are:

A. Formulation of research questions

Definition: Quantification and clarity of problem formulation, clarity of research for project aims, formulation of sub-goals.

Main gradient: Coherent plan, goals, approachs → Explicit problem definition, research question, research approach → Motivated approach and solid answer to the research question → Methodological creativity or innovations → Societal and scientific benefits.

Go to the examples →

B. Quality and quantity of established results

Definition: Quality of results in terms of scientific and/or functional value. Quantity of results in view of project time.

Main gradient: Reconfirm established knowledge → Explicit, concrete deliverables → Results at the state-of-the-art level → Results advance theory and application → Demonstration, prototype.

Go to the examples →

C. Creativity, originality, innovative value

Definition: Originality of contributions, creativity of solutions, innovative value.

Main gradient: Self-made items → Improvements → Useful and motivated advancements → Proven novelties → Breakthroughs

Go to the examples →

D. Critical attitude towards results, methods, scope and perspective of research

Definition: Ability to critically assess, analyze and defend the relevance of contributions, scientific way of working.

Main gradient: Basic checks → Critical considerations → Verification and validation → Criticism on own work and the state-of-the-art → Boundaries before, now and after.

Go to the guidelines →

E. Extra

Go to the examples →

5 and lower

  • The presented work does not meet the expectations of the given research or design assignment;
  • The work does not follow the methods and approaches suggested by the supervisor;
  • The work lacks the relevant literature, even after significant help from the supervisor(s);
  • The work provide no critical considerations towards the achieved results and blindly refers to teachers, books and papers;
  • The work have not verified nor expanded any knowledge, know-how, data or methods/techniques available in the research group;
  • The work does not offer any own contributions;
  • The work is faulty and inconsistent, does not comply with the scientific code of conduct of TU/e and should not be communicated to the scientific and engineering communities;
  • The work lacks any signs of creativity and does not use the available theory to make solutions;
  • Serious mistakes in e.g. formulas, analysis, approach, conclusions.