|
Criteria
|
HD
100% - 85%
|
DI
84% - 75%
|
CR
74% - 65%
|
PS
64% - 50%
|
FL
50% - 0
|
|
Introduction:
Background, scope of engagement, tools and findings
(3 marks)
|
All elements are present, well expressed, comprehensive and accurate.
|
All elements are present and largely accurate and well expressed.
|
All elements are present with few inaccuracies.
|
Most elements are present possibly with some inaccuracies.
|
Fails to satisfy minimum requirements of introduction.
|
|
Possible marks
|
3.0 – 2.55
|
2.54 – 2.25
|
2.24 – 1.95
|
1.94 – 1.5
|
1.4 – 0
|
|
Analysis: relevant programs, techniques, graphics
(5 marks)
|
Description of analysis is clear and appropriate programs and techniques are selected. Very good graphic image analysis.
|
Description of analysis is clear and mostly appropriate programs and techniques are selected. Good graphic image analysis.
|
Description of analysis is clear and mostly appropriate programs and techniques are selected.
Reasonable graphic image analysis.
|
Description of analysis is not completely relevant. Little or no graphics image analysis provided.
|
Fails to satisfy minimum requirements of analysis.
|
|
Possible marks
|
5.0 – 4.25
|
4.24 – 3.75
|
3.74 – 3.25
|
3.24 – 2.5
|
2.4 – 0
|
|
Findings:
specific files/images, type of searches, type of evidence, indicators of ownership
(5 marks)
|
A greater detail of findings is provided. Keywords and string searches are listed very clearly. Evidence found is very convincing. Indication of ownership is very clear.
|
Findings are provided, keywords and string searchers are listed. Evidence is sound. Ownership is clear.
|
Findings are provided, some keywords are listed. Evidence is reasonable which relates to the ownership.
|
Findings are provided but are somewhat vague. Keywords
and strings are not very clear. Evidence found may be questionable.
|
Fails to satisfy minimum requirements providing findings.
|
|
Possible marks
|
5.0 – 4.25
|
4.24 – 3.75
|
3.74 – 3.25
|
3.24 – 2.5
|
2.4 – 0
|
|
Conclusion:
Summary, Results
(3 marks)
|
High level summary of results is provided which is consistent with the report.
|
Well summarised results and mostly consistent with the findings.
|
Good summary of results.
Able to relate the results with findings. No new material is included.
|
Satisfies the minimum requirements. Results are not really consistent with the findings.
|
Fails to satisfy minimum requirements of summarising the results.
|
|
Possible marks
|
3.0 – 2.55
|
2.54 – 2.25
|
2.24 – 1.95
|
1.94 – 1.5
|
1.4 – 0
|
|
References:
Must cite references to all material used as sources for the content
(2 marks)
|
APA 6th edition referencing applied to a range of relevant resources. No referencing errors. Direct quotes used sparingly. Sources all documented.
|
APA 6th edition referencing applied to a range of relevant resources. No more than 2 referencing errors.
Direct quotes used sparingly. Sources all documented.
|
APA 6th edition referencing applied to a range of relevant resources. No more than 3 errors. Direct quotes used in-context. Sources all documented.
|
APA 6th edition referencing applied
to a range of relevant resources.
No more than 4 errors. Direct quotes used in-context. Some sources documented.
|
Referencing not done to the APA 6th edition standard. Over-use of direct quotes. Range of sources used is not appropriate and/or not documented.
|
|
Possible marks
|
2.0 – 1.7
|
1.6 – 1.5
|
1.4 – 1.3
|
1.2 – 1.0
|
0.9 – 0
|
|
Glossary / Appendices:
(2 marks)
|
Glossary of technical terms used in the report is provided which has generally acceptable source of definition of the terms and appropriate references are included. Relevant supporting material is provided in appendices to demonstrate the evidence.
|
Glossary of technical terms used in the report is provided which has mostly acceptable source of definition of the terms and appropriate references are included. Some supporting material is provided in appendices to demonstrate the evidence.
|
Glossary of some technical terms used in the report is provided which has mostly acceptable source of definition of the terms and appropriate references are included. Some supporting material is provided in appendices to demonstrate the evidence.
|
Glossary of some technical terms
used in the report is provided however terms are not generally common and some references are missing. Some supporting material is provided in appendices.
|
Most terminologies are missing.
Appendices are either not provided or are irrelevant.
|
|
Possible marks
|
2.0 – 1.7
|
1.6 – 1.5
|
1.4 – 1.3
|
1.2 – 1.0
|
