Assessment
The EUHT CETT-UB Master’s Committee is responsible for assigning reviewers regarding the topic and the type of MCP.
This Committee is made up of:
· MCP Director
· MCP Coordination
· Director Master's Degree
· The Coordination of Master's specialization
· The person responsible for the subject of MCP
The examining board assigned to each MCP will carry out their evaluation based on the materials delivered (memory, article and presentation) and their defence.
Evaluation Criteria
The evaluation criteria that will be applied to the projects respond to the following headings.
1) Research’s Project rubric
|
ITEMS |
SCORE (%) |
CRITERIA |
|
REPORT |
60 |
|
|
Structure and formal aspects |
5 |
Following the structure / sections required in the student's guide and present a careful spelling and syntax |
|
Objectives (and hypotheses) |
10 |
Set the objectives perfectly and achieve them all at once (and excellent formulation of hypotheses, if applicable) |
|
Theoretical framework |
5 |
It gathers with scientific rigor the key concepts, authors and main theories. Scientific references are included |
|
Status of the issue |
5 |
It compiles in detail the current state of the study object and its context from official sources |
|
Research methodology |
10 |
It gathers and presents in detail all the methodological aspects required: - Types of methodology (quantitative, qualitative or mixed) - Techniques and instruments for collecting information (survey, interview, observation, data collection ...) |
|
Results |
15 |
Significant results are presented in coherence with the initial approach of the investigation and are interpreted in depth |
|
Conclusions |
10 |
It gathers and presents in detail all the aspects required: |
|
DEFENSE |
30 |
|
|
Clarity and synthesis in the oral presentation |
10 |
The discourse is shown with absolute clarity, organized and synthesized adjusting to the indicated time |
|
Quality of support resources |
5 |
The quality and use of the support resources is professional, accurate and rigorous, both in terms of content and design |
|
Suitability of answer to the questions of the court |
10 |
The student correctly identifies the questions and gives specific and detailed answers |
|
Face-to-face defense |
5 |
The student has excellent communicative, verbal and non-verbal skills |
|
EVALUATION OF THE PROCESS (only tutors) |
10 |
|
|
Attendance to tutorials |
2 |
Attendance to all the tutorials arranged |
|
Chronogram tracking |
2 |
Regular monitoring of the timeline , fulfilling the scheduled tasks in a high degree |
|
Proactive attitude |
6 |
High degree of autonomy and initiative |
2) Rubric professional projects
|
ITEMS |
SCORE (%) |
CRITERIA |
|
REPORT |
60 |
|
|
Structure and formal aspects |
5 |
Following the structure / sections required in the student's guide and present a careful spelling and syntax |
|
Introduction and Objectives |
10 |
It accurately introduces the whole work, perfectly sets out the objectives and all are more than achieved |
|
Current analysis situation |
5 |
It collects in detail the current state of the project's topic and the context where it is developed (territory, market, company / institution) from official sources |
|
Work plan |
10 |
It describes in detail all the phases for the development of the project, including the instruments and techniques for collecting information. |
|
Results |
15 |
Significant results are presented in coherence with the initial approach of the Project and are interpreted in depth |
|
Conclusions |
10 |
It gathers and presents in detail all the aspects required: |
|
DEFENSE |
30 |
|
|
Clarity and synthesis in the oral presentation |
10 |
The discourse is shown with absolute clarity, organized and synthesized adjusting to the indicated time |
|
Quality of support resources |
5 |
The quality and use of the support resources is professional, accurate and rigorous, both in terms of content and design |
|
Suitability of answer to the questions of the court |
10 |
The student correctly identifies the questions and gives specific and detailed answers |
|
Face-to-face defense |
5 |
The student has excellent communicative, verbal and non-verbal skills |
|
EVALUATION OF THE PROCESS (only tutors) |
10 |
|
|
Attendance to tutorials |
2 |
Attendance to all the tutorials arranged |
|
Chronogram tracking |
2 |
Regular monitoring of the timeline , fulfilling the scheduled tasks in a high degree |
|
Proactive attitude |
6 |
High degree of autonomy and initiative |
3) Business plan or entrepreneurship
|
ITEMS |
SCORE (%) |
CRITERIA |
|
REPORT |
60 |
|
|
Structure and formal aspects |
10 |
Following the structure / sections required in the student's guide and present a careful spelling and syntax |
|
Objectives |
10 |
Set the objectives perfectly and achieve them all at once |
|
Business idea’s description |
5 |
Clearly define the business idea, mission, vision, values, as well as the product / service it will offer . |
|
Current analysis situation (macro-micro environmment) |
5 |
It collects in detail the current state of the project's topic and the context where it is developed (territory, market, company / institution) from official sources It gathers in detail the state of the macro and micro environment that affects the company (territory, market, company / institution) and uses official and / or reliable sources. |
|
Sales & marketing Plan |
10 |
It describes in detail the positioning in the market, competitive advantages, customer profile, market and sales objectives), the competitors analysis, in addition to detailing the operational marketing (description of the product or service from a commercial point of view, prices, distribution , communication plan, management and customer loyalty) |
|
Operations & HR plan |
5 |
It describes in detail the manufacturing and provision processes, agreements and alliances, supplier management as well as the legal structure and legal form, the human resources plan and the organizational structure of the company |
|
Economic and financial plan |
5 |
It details the investment plan, the financing mechanisms, the forecast of sales and income, expected profitability of the project, the forecast the as well as the forecast of costs and income statement. |
|
Conclusions |
10 |
It gathers and presents in detail all the aspects required: -Project strengths and future perspectives |
|
DEFENSE |
30 |
|
|
Clarity and synthesis in the oral presentation |
10 |
The discourse is shown with absolute clarity, organized and synthesized adjusting to the indicated time |
|
Quality of support resources |
5 |
The quality and use of the support resources is professional, accurate and rigorous, both in terms of content and design |
|
Suitability of answer to the questions of the court |
10 |
The student correctly identifies the questions and gives specific and detailed answers |
|
Face-to-face defense |
5 |
The student has excellent communicative, verbal and non-verbal skills |
|
EVALUATION OF THE PROCESS (only tutors) |
10 |
|
|
Attendance to tutorials |
2 |
Attendance to all the tutorials arranged |
|
Chronogram tracking |
2 |
Regular monitoring of the timeline , fulfilling the scheduled tasks in a high degree |
|
Proactive attitude |
6 |
High degree of autonomy and initiative |
IMPORTANT: Within the framework of their competencies, the tutor of a MCP has the power to exclude a student from the process of global evaluation of the subject. This exclusion automatically involves the suspension of the subject without the right to revaluation.
5. Reassessment
The reassessment is aimed at all those students who have not passed the project (with a minimum grade of 4) on the closing date of the final evaluation of the MCP. Projects that wish to raise the grade or those that have yet to be submitted will not be re-assessed. Neither will students suspended within the framework of an approved group project be reassessed.
The reassessment consists of resubmitting the MCP document that the editors consider appropriate based on their comments. The student will have a period of 2 weeks from the publication of the grades to present the corrected documents through the Virtual Campus.
Projects submitted for reevaluation may only be qualified with a grade of 5.