Assessment

Continous Assessment Activities

Title	Weighting	Hours	ECTS	Learning Outcomes
Preparing process and writing	70%	0	0	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Public presentation and discussion	30%	1	0.04	1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

The TFG assessment will follow the procedure established in the protocol (https://www.uab.cat/doc/Protocol-TFG). Thereby, the committee will determine a weighted average based on:

1.     The written dissertation (70%), assessed by the person in charge of supervising the process (using different pieces of evidence) and by a second person of the committee, who will also judge the oral presentation;

2.     The public defense of the project (30% of the final mark).

EVIDENCE	DATE	VALUE
I.               Proposal	1st committee meeting (8-22 January)	10 % (1 point)
II.              Development	2nd committee meeting (5-28 de March)	20% (2 points)
III.            Final submission (written dissertation)	7-11 June	40% (4 points)
IV.            Defense	3rd committee meeting, subdivided by tribunals (1-2 July)	30% (3 points)

 

This subject does not foresee a single evaluation system.

The Bachelor's Thesis does not have a recovery option, as stated in the Protocol of the "Bachelor's Thesis" subject of the Faculty of Philosophy and Letters.

If one of the evidences is not submitted, the grade for that evidence will be zero.

A specific committee will grant, if appropriate, the relevant Honors.

The Bachelor's Thesis must be original and unpublished. In the event that the student engages in any irregularity that could lead to a significant variation in the grading of an evaluation act, said evaluation act will be graded as 0, regardless of any disciplinary process that may be initiated. If multiple irregularities occur in the evaluation acts of the same subject, the final grade for that subject will be 0.

Statement on the use of generative tools (AI): The use of style review tools, translation, and bibliographic references in the edition of the TFG or TFM does not require an explicit declaration in the text. However, if AI-assisted technologies were used to generate new textual or graphic content during the writing process, it must be declared in a section before the bibliographic references titled "Declaration of use of AI." The author must provide adequate justification for including the AI-generated content. Regardless, the author assumes full responsibility for the publication's content.

Characteristics of the assessed evidence:

Evidence 1. Proposal

The 1st piece of evidence assessed is the document where students will present the project to be developed in their TFG. This document will be presented to the committee and must contain a description of the approach of theirTFG, the chosen format and the objectives of the project, understanding that it is a proposal that will be evolving throughout the course. After the Meeting with the committee, it will be completed with the supervisor, mentioning the working plan proposed, as well as the theoretical framework, the methodology and the references intended to use. This document will serve as the first piece of evidence to be assessed.

Evidence 2. Development

For this 2nd piece of assessed evidence, the development of the project must be presented to the committee based on what will have been structured in the first section assessed and taking into account the indications given in the previous stage, as well as the supervisor’s . In this second stage, a more accurate document will be produce, including the theoretical framework and the methodology, as well as all other fundamental aspects of the project (bibliographic research, field work, etc.)

Evidence 3 (Written dissertation)

The 3rd piece of evidenceis the written dissertation of the TFG. It may be written in Catalan or Spanish. The written dissertation of the TFG will be assessed by the supervisor, in conformity with another member of the committee (who will be present in the oral defense). The TFG must be original. In the case that the student proceeds with irregularities that may lead to a significant variation of the qualification of a piece of assessment (like plagiarism), that piece will be qualified with a 0, regardless of the disciplinary process that might take place.

Regardless of the TFG modality chosen, the 3rd piece of evidence assessed, corresponding with the written dissertation, may be presented in three different formats:

1. REPORT FORMAT: The student presenting the Bachelor's Thesis in this format must adhere to the following formal presentation aspects:

•   Extension of around 70.000 characters (spaces included) (20/25 pages approximately) – Bibliographic references and annexes aside, where complementary information will be exposed (it does not belong to the body of the project)
•  The cover must include:
• Name of the author
• Title of TFG
• Degree of the student
• Name and department of the supervisor
• Committee
• Academic course

 After the cover, a table of contents must be included with page numbers, as the project must be correctly paged. It will also be compulsory to include an abstract in Catalan, Spanish and English.

2. SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE FORMAT: Students using this TFG format will have to follow a presentation policy similar to that of a scientific journal. The objective is to simulate that the student is presenting a text to be published. For that, the following general guidelines are presented: 

• Articles must have an extension of around 30,000 characters, spaces included (10-12 pages approximately).
• 7-8 line abstract in Catalanor Spanish, as well as in English.
• List of 5-8keywords.
• Bibliographic references section using APA rules.
• The following information must be included: name and surname, email address. Supervisor’s name and department must also appear.
• Structure: introduction, context analysis, theoretical approach, methodology or Planning suggested, results, conclusions and final comments.

 At the end of the text, students may attach table, graphics, pictures and video/audio recordings to make the content of the article more intelligible.

3. CULTURAL PRODUCT FORMAT: In the completion of the TFG, this degree invites the students to explore, experiment and innovate through new narrative formats, in accordance to the subject, the context and the theoretical approach of the project. In this light, the use of artistic, literary, communicative and/or activist products are justified, such as audiovisual projects, exhibitions, comic books, poetry, novel, art installation, website, drama piece, scale model, campaign, dissemination or educational material, amongst other possibilities.

• The indication for the cultural product will be agreed upon with the supervisor and will be suited in each case to the artistic, literary, communicative and/or activist genre chosen.
• The product will be complemented with a short essay of a maximum of 30,000 characters including spaces (around 10-12 pages), following the guidelines for the essay format.

Evidence 4 (Oral defense)

The oral presentation of the TFG will be done in front of a tribunal formed by 2 members of the committee (one who knows the dissertation and another one that doesn’t necessarily do so), that under any circumstances will be the supervisor. The student will have 15 minutes, followed by 10 minutes for the tribunal to pose the necessary questions. This tribunal will only assessthe oral defense and not the written document. Given that the defenses are public, other than the tribunal and the called students, other people may attend, like family members, friends, other students or other professors who wish to be there, as long as timings and defense procedures are respected. Students must attend the complete defense act programmed for the day they are called.

 RUBRIC FOR EVALUATION E2 and E3: 

INDICATORS	DESCRIPTORS	1 - Fail	2 - Pass	3 - Good	4 - Excellent	Not Applicable
PROBLEM, QUESTIONS, OBJECTIVES, AND RESEARCH TOPIC	Specific contextualization of the problem in the context	The contextualization of the problem is brief and not clearly justified or lacks contextualization and/or justification	The contextualization and justification of the problem are adequate	The contextualization and justification of the problem are clear and adequate	The contextualization and justification of the problem are very clear, adequate, and concise	--
	The objectives, questions, and/or hypotheses are adequate.	The questions, objectives, hypotheses of the research are not defined or sufficiently defined	The questions, objectives, hypotheses of the research are adequate and well defined	The questions, objectives, hypotheses of the research are clear and sufficiently defined	The questions, objectives, hypotheses of the research are clear and well defined
	The objectives, questions, and/or hypotheses are correctly formulated.	Does not explain or explains in a diffuse and not very specific way and without order the objectives to be achieved with the research and/or research hypotheses	Expresses the objectives and/or research hypotheses in a general way and/or lacks adequate sequencing	Includes a list of objectives and/or hypotheses with appropriate wording, although lacking clarity in some of them and with appropriate sequencing	Provides a clear and concrete explanation of all objectives and/or hypotheses, expressed in a way that allows only one interpretation and prioritizing the sequence of execution. Its wording allows verifying if they have been achieved
	The problem or motivation is well defined.	Does not present or presents in a deficient way the problem to be solved and/or the motivation of the work	Presents the problem to be solved and/or the motivation of the work unclearly	Presents clearly the problem to be solved and/or the motivation of the work	Justifies the problem to be solved with theory, in a clear way and/or the motivation of the work
	The research topic is based on the literature review	Does not explain the research topic or does so unclearly	The TFG allows understanding the research topic	Clearly exposes the research topic	Exposes very clearly and well-founded the research topic with the review of bibliographic sources
THEORETICAL FOUNDATION	The theoretical foundation reviews several relevant and well-cited sources.	There are none or there is a minimal review (less than 15) of the relevant sources, little citation of the most pertinent works on the study subject	There is a minimal review (less than 15) but adequate of the relevant sources and an adequate citation of most of the specialized works on the study subject	There is a correct review (between 15-19) of the relevant sources and an adequate citation of the specialized works on the study subject	There is an extensive review (between 20-30) of the relevant sources, and an adequate citation of the specialized works on the study subject	--
	The theoretical foundation is based on quality and current references.	Most references (<50%) are inadequate and/or of poor quality and/or not current enough	Some references (<30%) are inadequate or of poor quality or not current enough	Most references (<90%) are adequate, of quality and/or current	All references (100%) are adequate, of quality and/or current
	The theoretical foundation is well synthesized	There is no or little synthesis, analysis and organization of the literature linked to the research topic	Shows adequate synthesis and organization of the literature linked to the research topic	Shows good synthesis and organization of the literature linked to the research topic	Shows excellent synthesis and organization of the literature linked to the research topic
	Knowledge construction is detected in the theoretical foundation	The analysis and synthesis to present the literature are not visualized	There is an attempt to analyze to present the literature, although there are more textual citations than critical self-writing	There is a process of analysis to present the literature, although it lacks critical writing in some sections	There is a rigorous process of analysis to present the literature from which it constructs its own ideas
	The theoretical foundation is well structured and classified.	Identifies some of the most relevant ideas but does not relate them	Identifies many relevant ideas but relates them in a poorly organized way	Identifies many relevant ideas and relates them in an organized way using good criteria	Identifies, classifies and relates with good criteria all the ideas it brings
CONTEXTUALIZATION	Description of the context in which the TFG is developed	There is no description of the context or it is superficial and not concrete	There is a good description of the context but lacks relevant aspects that help understand the methodological approach and the obtained results	The description of the context is accurate but lacks some relevant aspects that help understand the methodological approach and the obtained results	The description of the context is accurate, complete and suitable for the problem or need raised and helps understand the methodological approach and the obtained results	--
METHODOLOGICAL DESIGN	The methodology and/or strategies applied throughout the TFG are justified	There is no or there is a description and poorly precise foundation of the research design, the sample, data collection tools and the analysis process	Although there is a description and foundation of the research design, the sample, the data collection tools and the analysis process, lacks clarity	There is an appropriate and clear description and foundation of the research design, the sample, the data collection tools and the analysis process	There is an excellent and very clear description and foundation of the research design, the sample, the data collection tools and the analysis process	--
	Coherence between objectives, design and theoretical foundation	There is little coherence between the objectives, the research design and the theoretical framework	There is little coherence between the objectives, the research design and the theoretical framework	There is coherence between the objectives, the research design and the theoretical framework	An excellent coherence is visualized between the objectives, the research design and the theoretical framework
RESULTS	Organization and relevance of the results	Does not present relevant results	Presents the most relevant results but lacks organization	Presents relevant results fairly organized	Presents very well organized relevant results	Not applicable in this delivery
	Coherence of the results with objectives and theoretical foundation	The results are not related to the objectives and/or the theoretical framework	They are not organized according to the objectives and theoretical approach, although efforts are seen	They are organized according to the objectives and the theoretical framework although there are minor deficiencies	They are appropriately organized according to the objectives and the theoretical framework
	Presentation and precision of results	Presents incorrect results and with some errors of interpretation from the collected data	The results are correct and complete, but with some errors and/or little precision or lack of evidence from the collected data	The results are correct and complete and are expressed with enough precision	Presents excellently the results that are correct and naturally derived from the procedure followed
	Presentation resources of results	Does not use or uses few or too many resources to present the results (tables, graphics, diagrams, figures, interview excerpts, field notes...) or graphics, figures and/or excerpts do not provide understanding of the results	Uses basic resources to present the results (tables, diagrams, graphics, figures, interview excerpts, field notes...) and sometimes the information is redundant or contains minor errors	Uses appropriate resources in the presentation of results and adjusted to each situation (tables, graphics, figures, interview excerpts, field notes...) and are placed with the purpose of clarifying and/or expanding the written information	Uses appropriate resources in the presentation of results and adjusted to each situation (tables, graphics, figures, interview excerpts, field notes...), adding visual elements that improve understanding
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS	Discussion of results considering other bibliographic sources finding connections disagreements with the own results	There is no discussion of the results or explains some of the obtained results	Explains all the obtained results	Explains all the obtained results and relates them to the knowledge	Explains all the obtained results, relates them to the knowledge and discusses with authors in a very correct way	Not applicable in this delivery
	Conclusions related to the objectives	There are no conclusions or there are own conclusions but none of the issues addressed in the TFG is highlighted or they are not fully related to the objectives.	The conclusions are clear, remembering what has been researched and the results but without emphasizing any aspect, although they are related to the objectives they are scarce or poorly associated with the work, or repeat what has been described in the results	The conclusions are clear and well structured and organized, they are related to the objectives, but show small omissions of content or problems in writing or are too extensive	The conclusions highlight all the contributions of the research, are synthetic and are arranged logically, are totally related to the objectives
	Proposal of improvements and limitations from an innovative and realistic perspective	Few or no limitations and possible improvements and/or future lines of work are proposed and they are not adequate, showing lack of mastery in the studied topic	The limitations and possible improvements and/or future lines of work are proposed but do not demonstrate having acquired mastery on the studied topic	The limitations and possible improvements and/or future lines of work proposed are quite adequate, showing the mastery acquired on the studied topic	The limitations and possible improvements and/or future lines of work proposed are very adequate, showing the great mastery acquired on the studied topic
	Reflection on achieved competencies and possibilities for professional and training development	There is no reflection or the reflection related to the competences of the degree and the possibilities of professional and training development contains some gaps or noticeable errors	The reflection related to the competences of the degree and the possibilities of professional and training development is developed with some minor gaps or errors	The reflection related to the competencies of the degree and the possibilities for professional and educational development is very well developed	There is an excellent reflection on the competencies of the degree achieved with the development of the research and the possibilities for professional and educational development based on the work carried out.
WRITING, USE OF LANGUAGE, AND FORMAL ASPECTS	The final report is clear and correct, using appropriate terminology and vocabulary for the area of knowledg	The writing of the Bachelor's Thesis is chaotic or contains serious terminological and vocabulary errors related to the topic of the thesis	The writing of the Bachelor's Thesis contains evident errors from a terminological and vocabulary point of view related to the topic of the thesis	The writing of the Bachelor's Thesis contains minor errors from a terminological and vocabulary perspective related to the thesis topic	The writing of the Bachelor's Thesis is very clear from a terminological and vocabulary perspective related to the thesis topic
	Use of non-discriminatory language	The language used in the Bachelor's Thesis is discriminatory			The language used in the Bachelor's Thesis is not discriminatory.
	The style of the final report is appropriate for a Bachelor's Thesis (format and style)	The final report submitted is not appropriate for a Bachelor's Thesis.	The final report respects the style typical of a Bachelor's Thesis with some evident errors.	The final report adheres to the style typical of a Bachelor's Thesis with some minor errors.	The final report fully respects the style typical of a Bachelor's Thesis.
	Regarding the intellectual property of visual resources	The visual resources included do not have authorship reference or open license, and are copyrighted without reproduction permission.			The visual resources included have authorship reference or an open license, or if they are copyrighted, reproduction permission has been obtained
TRANSVERSAL SKILLS	The student has reacted appropriately to unforeseen events in the development and manages tasks and schedule autonomously.	Clearly, the student has not managed either the task or the schedule	The student has had some difficulties managing the task and schedule due to not knowing how to handle unforeseen events."	The student has managed the task and schedule correctly, except for occasional situations where she has been overwhelmed by unforeseen events	The student has managed the task and schedule very clearly, reacting responsibly to unforeseen events
	She has critically analyzed the suggestions of the tutor and incorporated them into her Bachelor's Thesis.	The student has not taken into account the suggestions of the tutor	The student has taken into account the suggestions of the tutor but has incorporated them into the Bachelor's Thesis without reformulating them in her own words	The student has taken into account the suggestions of the tutor and has incorporated them into the Bachelor's Thesis using her own words	The student has taken into account the suggestions of the tutor, engaged in dialogue with them, and authentically and personally incorporated them into the Bachelor's Thesis
	The student has developed strategies for autonomous and continuous learning.	The student has not been autonomous in carrying out the Bachelor's Thesis or in solving problems	The student has shown sufficient autonomy in carrying out the Bachelor's Thesis but expected the tutor to propose solutions to the problems that arose	The student has been autonomous in carrying out the Bachelor's Thesis in most cases, although at times she has not known which obvious decisions to make	The student has been completely autonomous in carrying out the Bachelor's Thesis and has solved the problems that arose, anticipating solutions
	The student has requested seminars to resolve doubts or to reflect on her work.	She has not attended the mandatory seminars for the development of the Bachelor's Thesis and/or has not made progress or raised questions	The student has attended just enough seminars to develop her Bachelor's Thesis, but it is evident that she needed more work because she did not contribute much progress or questions	The student has attended the necessary seminars to develop her Bachelor's Thesis and has contributed progress and questions	The student has attended the necessary seminars to develop her Bachelor's Thesis and has contributed progress, questions, and reflections or improvement proposals.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES	The bibliography is adequate for the research topic	Inappropriate bibliography (30%) or very low (25%) in number, the sources do not contribute to the clarity of the work	The bibliography is adequate for the research topic, although not updated	The bibliography is adequate for the research topic and recent	The bibliography is extensive, adequate for the research topic, updated and specific
	Bibliography format	The sources are not organized according to the normative of scientific texts	Some of the sources are organized according to the normative of scientific texts	The sources are almost all organized according to the normative of scientific texts	All sources are organized according to the normative of scientific texts
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTION

 

 RÚBRIC FOR EVALUATION E4: Each question can be answered with a yes or no, and nuances can also be included. The intention of the rubric is to provide a general and qualitative overview that can help determine a numerical grade.

 

Oral expression: ability to effectively convey information. It involves evaluating different aspects of the oral presentation.	Does the presenter explain concepts and ideas clearly?
	Has the presenter captured attention and interest?
	Does the presenter use effective vocabulary to address different cultural and artistic phenomena?
	Is the discourse well-structured?
	Do gestures and rhythm help convey the desired information?
Effective use of resources	Is there a positive relationship between the cultural artifacts or discourses presented and the resources or supports used for the presentation?
	Do technical supports facilitate the presentation?
	Is the information provided through technical resources and the presenter's oral discourse coherent?
Structure of the presentation	Are the contents of the presentation coherent?
	Has the presentation time been managed well for it to develop with tranquility and clarity?
	Does the presentation convey interest and control over the topic being discussed?
	Is the audience taken into account?
	Is the information developed in a balanced manner without repeating ideas?
	Has the presenter responded to tribunal questions clearly and demonstrated control over the topic?