civil engineering modification

this is two graduation projects for civil engineering which need to modify for some comment ## Deliverables here there are comments for the first & second project and the attached file is the projects Project Title: Cracks | **COMMENTS** | ** Weighting (%)** | **Actual Mark (%)** | | 1. **Statement of Problem and recognition of objectives** This paper states clear, if weak objectives with a short overview | (10) | 5 | | **2. Development of project (Literature review, State of the Art, )** There does not appear to be a formulated literature review, certainly no critical review of contemporay technology. This comment is further supportted by limited references | (15) | 4.5 | | 3**. Research Approach (Methodology, Design work, Model making, Experimental work)** Appear under this heading to be a review of current work but more like an extended essay no methodology that would be expected. The student does not appear to understand what a dissertation is and this is not one | (25) | 9.5 | | **4. Analysis (Interpretation Results)** Very generic in nature and does not actually state anything new or robust. This should be allow the student to begin to address the objectives | (25) | 7.5 | | **5. Summary and Conclusion (Reference to research objective(s) set out)** This basically lacks riggor and depth but needs work, suggest a case study or testing. It has limited reference to the objectives. | (10) | 4 | | **6. Presentation (References, Bibliography, Tables, Figures, Appendices, Layout)** Reasonable but needs data tables and moreappendices etc… to allow the reader to be more informed | (15) | 6 | | **7 General remark** This is not really a dissertation and the student has not addressed the issues with academic riggor. The title really tells the story how can “CRACKS?? have a focus it means to much!!!!!!!!!!!!! | | | comment for second project health and safety control Below is categorized feedback for **1. Statement of Problem and recognition of objectives** *Stated, but in effect merely reflects information that is available in any textbook on the topic (4/10)* **2. Development of project (Literature review, State of the Art)** *Unclear whether a global, UK, or Kuwaiti perspective (p.7). (3/15)* **3. Research Approach (Methodology, Design work, Model making, Experimental work)** *Far too generic (eg. Risk Assessment p.22). An actual risk assessment could have been conducted on a case study site for example. (10/25)* **4. Analysis (Interpretation of Results)** *Little analysis exists…the report mainly consists of generally available Health and Safety information. No uniqueness or particular focus is evident. (6/25)* **5. Summary and Conclusion (Reference to research objectives set out)** *No references to legislation; standards and best practice mentioned but no robust evidence to link to. (6/10)* **6. Presentation (References, Bibliography, Tables, Figures, Appendices, Layout)** *Contents are poorly presented and lack emphasis, for example, Chapters 1,2,3. Bibliography has no consistent base material. Images on page 39 and 40 are unexplained. (6/15)* **7. General remarks** *The student was advised to give this a Kuwaiti (case study) perspective in order to be focussed at a more personal level. Advice not taken.* *(Overall score for Final Submission 35/100).*