Software Security
CompSci 725
SC 07
Clark Thomborson
Handout 15: Samples of Summary Feedback on Term Papers
Note: When marking term papers, I convert the submission into PDF, make a few comments in the body of the paper, write a sentence or two of summary feedback, then return the marked-up PDF to the student. Below you will find anonymised versions of summary feedback given to students in prior offerings of COMPSCI 725.
Total marks: 35. The analysis in this term paper is unacceptably weak. I see no indication, other than two sentences in the conclusion, that this student has learned anything in COMPSCI 725.
Total marks: 40. This term paper contains a good summary, but no comparative analysis, of an interesting and exciting research frontier in XXX system design. I have no evidence against the presumption that it was written by its purported author (student YYY) – my plagiarism checks all came up negative. However, because this term paper does not make good use of any required reading in COMPSCI 725 (as required for a COMPSCI 725 term paper), I am giving it a barely-failing grade.
Total marks: 60. This term paper shows a limited critical and appreciative understanding of a technical article in the context of what was taught in COMPSCI 725.
Total marks: 70. The introduction is excellent, showing a very strong understanding of technically-challenging material in a required reading [1]. The body and conclusion of the paper were disappointing after such a strong start. Overall this paper contains an accurate summary of information drawn from four technical articles, but very little analysis on the part of the student. Only one of the required readings in COMPSCI 725 was referenced and discussed.
Total marks: 80. This term paper has a good discussion of XXX, in the context of COMPSCI 725. I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of analysis of the XXX mechanism proposed in [5]. However the student has made a very nice start on analysing the XXX requirements for YYY.
Total marks: 85. This is a very nice survey of the complex and rapidly-changing field of XXX. None of the analysis is very deep or sustained, but it is all reasonably accurate and well-directed.
Total marks: 87. This is a nice exploration of the XXX required reading, in the context of COMPSCI 725, and in the light of YYY. If you're interested in continuing to a MSc degree, then I'd strongly encourage you to send a copy of this paper (after cleaning up some of its typographical and spelling errors) to ZZZ, who may very well be interested in supervising you on this topic – I think it shows excellent promise for MSc research. I think you'll be able to write a good MSc thesis, if you continue to build up your skills in technical writing in English. I have not marked this paper down for errors in writing, because it is written at an acceptable level for a postgraduate paper in our department. However this term paper is not written at an acceptable level of clarity and accuracy for a Master's thesis.
Total marks: 93. Excellent and thought-provoking. A few careless arguments. Missed some chances to cite relevant security concepts such as false-positives and prevent-detect-respond systems.
Total marks: 90. This paper describes a case-study analysis of XXX’s method for security modelling. The student demonstrates very strong critical and appreciative understanding by identifying two areas of difficulty: the cost metric and the YYY.
Total marks: 96. Well done!! There are a few rough edges in the analysis, and there are not quite as many uses of other COMPSCI 725 readings as I would have hoped. But you showed excellent critical and appreciative understanding of a broad range of authoritative references.