CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, GUINDY
ANNA UNIVERSITY, CHENNAI - 600 025
Regulations 2015(CBCS)  July 2016 – November 2016
M.E. Environmental Engineering
GUIDELINES
FOR PREPARATION, PRESENTATION AND EVALUATION OF PROJECTS – PHASE I
[A candidate should have earned a minimum of 24 credits (Regulations 2015) to enroll for Project work (Phase I)]
Qa1 z`

1.0 The Projects will be evaluated based on three reviews, the final Report and a final Viva –Voce.
2.0 The project proposal including the Title, Introduction, Need for the study, Project Objectives
and Literature Review will be evaluated in the First Review. The proposal should include a
brief introduction to the history of the problem with the support of appropriate evidence
(References) and justify the “why the chosen problem is interesting and important to
be investigated?” The overall research goal including hypothesis has to be stated clearly
to bring out “what will be achieved by the research at the end of the project. The
Proposal shall include
 A survey of the basic facts and theories in the proposed field of research.
 An account of the recent work done by other researchers, and what important
questions still remain unanswered.
 Your ideas for new research to find the answers to some of these questions.

The scope should be appropriate, not too big (so that you can't achieve it within the
available time) and not too small (so that nobody realize you have a project). The project
objectives which will aid in the achievement of the overall goal and help to prove the
hypothesis are to be listed. Be specific in the objectives so that they can be evaluated
whether it's achieved at the end of the project.

The literature review should discuss the results of previous work pertinent to the proposed
study and should be organized so that the literature covering the various aspects of the
topic is addressed in an appropriate and well-organized sequence. Literature should be
summarized in your own words and properly referenced. A list of Journals, Conference /
Seminars proceedings, previous project works / thesis and other technical reports / books
reviewed has to be provided.

3.0 Research Methodology and Work Plan will be evaluated in the Second Review. The
purpose is to understand “how you are going to carry out the project?”. Describe the
methodology with sufficient details and references so that someone else could duplicate
the work. Give details of the new information you will seek, the materials to be used, the
laboratory facilities/equipments/field studies needed, the observations and measurements
to be made, how the data will be analyzed and a plan for the papers to be published based
on the work. Make a budget with estimates of all the expenditure needed. Provide the
literature reference to the specific procedure. The different tasks in the project and the time
frame in which you will finish each task will have to be summarized with a work plan (i.e.
key tasks on a weekly calendar).
4.0 Final Methodology, Additional review of Literature and preliminary results will be evaluated
in the Third Review. Experimental Setup has to be Complete and the Experiments / Field
Studies Started. Present the Preliminary Results and Formats for tabulation of all the
expected Results.

5.0 REVIEW REPORTS: It is mandatory that the student submits a report covering the scope of the
review and duly signed by the Guide at least two days prior to review date to the Course coordinator.
The Report specifications shall be as per the Anna University MANUAL FOR PREPARATION
OF THESIS
(http://www.annauniv.edu/academic courses/download/PGthesisformat/guidelines.pdf)
6.0 PRESENTATION: Mode of presentation – may be either PPT Slide / or using OHP. Duration of
presentation is about 10 minutes, followed by discussion for about 5 minutes (or more, if necessary).
The information presented on the screen should not be in the form of (long) paragraphs. Present the
information point by point. Graphs, Figures or Tables are helpful. The student should use his own
words as far as possible, rather than reproducing verbatim what he/she puts on the slide. The font
size used should be large enough for people in the back to read. Typically, 24 points or higher are
recommended. Colors are more effective than black and white. The color scheme and graphics
may be chosen to make the slides tidy and pleasing for the eye. Except those with the title,
objectives and work-plan, slides SHOULD NOT be repeated from the previous presentation,
unless there is a compelling reason for doing so.
For the 2nd and 3rd reviews, the presentations should include the comments / suggestions made in
the previous review and the students actions in this regard.

7.0 PROJECT WORK RECORD: All students must use a 200-page long size notebook exclusively to
record (a) daily work carried out (b) observation in the laboratory experiments. This record should
be submitted to the Supervisor every week and got signed by the Supervisor. This record should be
submitted to the review committee during the review.

8.0 ATTENDANCE: The student should report to the Supervisor daily, sign the attendance register and
act as per his/her instructions.

9.0 REPETITION OF REVIEW: A student not fulfilling the requirements stated above will not be allowed
for the presentation and he/she will be awarded zero marks for the review. If a student’s
performance in the review is unsatisfactory, he will be given one more chance to repeat the
presentation. If still the performance is not satisfactory, the student will get zero marks.

10.0 PLACE FOR REVIEW: In the case of project work involving the laboratory work, the review
committee will visit the laboratory work table of the student and the student has to present the
project there itself with all details. For computer-based projects, the review will be done with actual
demonstration of the work using the computers and for all others, in the designated class room.

11.0 EVALUATION: Phase I: Project work evaluation - Total marks: 100

(a) Internal Assessment : 60 marks

(b) Final Report and Viva Voce Examination : 40 (10+30) marks

Following split up of marks should help the students to understand how they may be evaluated by the
committee, for each review:-

S.No. Item Weightage (%)

1. Review Reports (content and promptness of submission) 20

2. Work done for the current review 40

3 Completeness and contents of Project Work Record 10

Quality of presentation
3. (Clarity and confidence of the speaker, appropriateness and adequacy of 15
slides/OHP sheets, organization of the material in them)
Participation in the discussion
4. (Receptiveness and response to criticism/suggestions, capability to defend 15
genuinely, confidently and independently)

Director, CES