Objective
The primary objectives of this policy are to:
- Ensure continuous assessment and academic engagement of students throughout the semester.
- Promote the development of critical thinking, technical writing, and problem-solving skills through structured assignments and evaluations.
- Maintain transparency, fairness, and consistency in internal assessment practices.
- Align internal evaluation with the academic regulations and guidelines issued by the University.
- Help students identify their strengths and areas for improvement before external examinations.
- Scope
This policy is applicable to:
- All undergraduate (B.Tech) programs across departments.
- All theory courses that include the internal evaluation component (Assignment).
- All faculty members involved in course delivery and internal assessments.
- Guidelines
- Assignment Policy
- The faculty shall provide a minimum of two assignments per course per semester as mandated by the University.
- The faculty must prepare the assignment questions along with the course plan for the concerned course at the beginning of the semester.
- Assignments should be:
- Course-relevant and designed addressing the higher cognitive levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. (Analyzing, Evaluating, and Creating)
- Course assignments will be distributed and submitted in a phased manner throughout the semester to ensure meaningful learning and to reduce end-semester workload.
- Assignments should be given at the beginning of the semester
- Submitted on or before the due date communicated by the faculty.
- Evaluated based on clearly defined rubrics (e.g., understanding, originality, presentation, completeness).
- Assignments may include written reports, problem sets, design tasks, or digital submissions depending on the course.
- Assignment Evaluation Components
- The main criteria for assignment evaluation are understanding, completeness, accuracy, presentation, originality and time of submission
Weightage: As specified by KTU for internal marks calculation.
Criteria | Excellent (5 marks) | Good (4 marks) | Satisfactory (2 – 3 marks) | Needs Improvement (0 – 1 marks) |
Understanding of Concepts | Demonstrates complete and accurate understanding of all concepts; explanations are clear and insightful. | Shows good understanding with minor errors; explanations are mostly clear. | Partial understanding; some concepts incorrectly applied or unclear. | Shows little understanding; major errors or missing conceptual clarity. |
Completeness and Accuracy of Solutions | All tasks/questions are fully completed and accurate. | Most tasks are completed with adequate detail/have minor inaccuracies | Some tasks incomplete/errors present | Many tasks incomplete or missing/ answers are incorrect |
Presentation & Organization | Work is neat, well-organized, logically structured, and easy to follow. | Generally neat and organized with minor inconsistencies. | Organization is present but inconsistent; presentation needs improvement. | Poorly organized, difficult to read, messy or unclear. |
Originality & Effort | Demonstrates original thinking, creativity, and high effort; no plagiarism. | Shows good effort; mostly original. | Limited originality; some parts lack effort. | Minimal effort; lacks originality or contains copied content. |
Timeliness | Submitted on or before the deadline. | Submitted within allowed grace period. | Submitted late with justification. | Submitted very late or without valid reason. |
- Record Maintenance
- Faculty must maintain detailed records of Assignment submissions and marks
- Student Feedback & Transparency
- Students shall receive timely feedback on assignments
- Internal marks should be displayed before final submission to the university to allow students to raise genuine concerns.
- Review Mechanism
- The Department Quality Assurance Cell (DQAC) addresses any grievances related to internal marks.
- Penalties / Non-Compliance
- For Students
- Late submission of assignments without valid reason: Marks may be reduced or assignment may not be accepted.
- Plagiarism or copying: Assignment will be rejected, and disciplinary action may be initiated as per college policy.
- For Faculty/Departments
- Failure to conduct fair evaluation may result in:
- Academic audit observations.
- Departmental-level corrective actions as per institutional policy.
- Unfair practices or bias in evaluation may lead to a faculty review by the DQAC
Prepared by
Internal Quality Assurance Cell
LBS Institute of Technology for Women (LBSITW)
Poojappura, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala