this is two graduation projects for civil engineering which need to modify for some comment
## Deliverables
here there are comments for the first & second project and the attached file is the projects
Project Title: Cracks
| **COMMENTS** | ** Weighting (%)** | **Actual Mark (%)** |
| 1. **Statement of Problem and recognition of objectives**
This paper states clear, if weak objectives with a short overview | (10) | 5 |
| **2. Development of project (Literature review, State of the Art, )**
There does not appear to be a formulated literature review, certainly no critical review of contemporay technology. This comment is further supportted by limited references | (15) | 4.5 |
| 3**. Research Approach (Methodology, Design work, Model making, Experimental work)**
Appear under this heading to be a review of current work but more like an extended essay no methodology that would be expected. The student does not appear to understand what a dissertation is and this is not one | (25) | 9.5 |
| **4. Analysis (Interpretation Results)**
Very generic in nature and does not actually state anything new or robust. This should be allow the student to begin to address the objectives | (25) | 7.5 |
| **5. Summary and Conclusion (Reference to research objective(s) set out)**
This basically lacks riggor and depth but needs work, suggest a case study or testing. It has limited reference to the objectives. | (10) | 4 |
| **6. Presentation (References, Bibliography, Tables, Figures, Appendices, Layout)**
Reasonable but needs data tables and moreappendices etc… to allow the reader to be more informed | (15) | 6 |
| **7 General remark**
This is not really a dissertation and the student has not addressed the issues with academic riggor. The title really tells the story how can “CRACKS?? have a focus it means to much!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | |
comment for second project
health and safety control
Below is categorized feedback for
**1. Statement of Problem and recognition of objectives**
*Stated, but in effect merely reflects information that is available in any textbook on the topic (4/10)*
**2. Development of project (Literature review, State of the Art)**
*Unclear whether a global, UK, or Kuwaiti perspective (p.7). (3/15)*
**3. Research Approach (Methodology, Design work, Model making, Experimental work)**
*Far too generic (eg. Risk Assessment p.22). An actual risk assessment could have been conducted on a case study site for example. (10/25)*
**4. Analysis (Interpretation of Results)**
*Little analysis exists…the report mainly consists of generally available Health and Safety information. No uniqueness or particular focus is evident. (6/25)*
**5. Summary and Conclusion (Reference to research objectives set out)**
*No references to legislation; standards and best practice mentioned but no robust evidence to link to. (6/10)*
**6. Presentation (References, Bibliography, Tables, Figures, Appendices, Layout)**
*Contents are poorly presented and lack emphasis, for example, Chapters 1,2,3. Bibliography has no consistent base material. Images on page 39 and 40 are unexplained. (6/15)*
**7. General remarks**
*The student was advised to give this a Kuwaiti (case study) perspective in order to be focussed at a more personal level. Advice not taken.*
*(Overall score for Final Submission 35/100).*