MLO1 Identify, apply and critically record the performance of complex engineering systems through the creative use of analytical methods and/or modelling techniques to establish innovative solutions Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:
The coursework will assess your ability to demonstrate MLOs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Write a technical report that
demonstrates proficiency in each of the module learning outcomes. This technical document can include
the sections indicated in the template provided i.e. introduction, literature survey, methodology, result,
discussion and conclusion.
Write a technical document (Project Report) addressing the following elements:
• Provide an evaluation and synthesis of the problem field and a definition of the problem statement. Base this on the literature from a range of sources with identifiable relevance.
• Develop a structured project approach indicating the aim & objectives, methodology and designed work packages. Clearly show the links with the literature review. Define a work/experimental plan leading to outputs that is aligned with milestones and contingencies.
• Present results in a wellstructured and coherent manner that is linked to and covering the designed project work programme.
• Provide conclusions and recommendations for future work that is justified by results discussion. Indicate the link between the project objectives and the findings/output.
• Make use of a range of technical language, correct grammar and spelling. Display good academic practise by referencing using a recognised format. Present tables and figures presented with clarity, originality and precision and full referencing of any non-original figures.
The word limit of this submission is 7000 words. This does not include the front matter and appendices.
You are to write your coursework using the Cite Them Right version of the IEEE referencing system. An online guide to Cite Them Right is freely available to Northumbria University students at
https://www.citethemrightonline.com/. A guide to the IEEE referencing system with practical examples is
available at https://ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/IEEE-Reference-Guide.pdf.
3.6 Assessment Criteria
Marking will be done anonymously. Add only your student number to submissions.
DO NOT include your name or the name of you supervisor on the Project Report.
The full grading rubric is provide on Blackboard:
An excellent report (70+) in most respects showing evidence of:
Critical and insightful evaluation and synthesis of the problem field and a precise definition of the problem statement, based on critically selected literature from a range of sources with identifiable relevance.
A fully range of excellent wellstructured and coherent results and data presentation, well linked to and covering the entire designed project work programme.
Utilize full range of technical language, correct grammar and spelling. Excellent referencing of a recognised format, tables and figures presented with clarity, originality and precision, full referencing of any non-original figures.
A very good report (60-70) in general showing evidence of:
Accurate and critical description of the primary issues of the problem field and a clear description of the problem statement. Literature is constructively used to identify key theory or considerations and constraints.
Clearly defined project: aims, objectives, methodology and sufficient project structure to ensure a satisfactory outcome to the project, largely based on literature research. A well-structured work/experimental plan is clearly expressed in relation and with reference to the project objectives.
More than one underlying theory is identified and critically evaluated during the project conducting and experiment process, in support of the project objectives.
Well-structured and coherent presentation of results and data, well linked to the designed project work programme.
Using a wide range of technical language, largely correct grammar and spelling. Thorough referencing of a recognised format, tables and original figures clearly support the argument being presented, full referencing of a small number of non-original figures.
An adequate report (50 – 60) in general showing evidence of:
Adequate and clear description of the problem field and a general description of the problem statement. Literature is used to identify most key theory or considerations and constraints.
Adequately designed project with just suitable and achievable aims, weakly defined objectives, with a briefly outlined methodology which just support the project aims. An adequately presented work/experimental plan, but with little evaluation of milestones and referencing to the project
A theoretical basis is provided and adequately evaluated during the project conducting and experiment process, but not critically appraised against objectives.
Results and data presented with an adequate structure, mostly linked to the designed project work programme.
Some use of correct technical language, largely correct grammar and spelling. Complete and consistent referencing, figures and tables adequate, reliance on non- original figures but all fully referenced.
A weak report (below 50) typically showing:
Inadequate description of the problem field and unclear description of the problem statement. Literature research presents, but not properly used to identify key theory or considerations and constraints.
Unclear and inadequately defined aims, less relevant objectives, and vague methodology with weak support from literature sources lack of justification. A weak work/experimental plan exists, but without evaluation of milestones or referencing to the project objectives. In general, unlikely to yield a satisfactory project outcome.
Identified theory is not clearly supported and justified during the experiment/work programme, in
relation to the project objectives.
Make little use of technical language, errors in spelling and grammar. Incomplete referencing or not of consistent standard format, figures and tables not used where needed and over reliance on non-original figures which are also poorly referenced.
The University has several policies for assessment. The following information, which is available to you from the link below, provides guidance on these policies, including relevant procedures and forms.
(1) Assessment Regulations and Policies
(a) Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards
(b) Group Work Assessments Policy
(c) Moderation Policy
(d) Retention of Assessed Work Policy
(e) Word Limits Policy
(2) Assessment Feedback
(a) Anonymous Marking Policy
(3) Late Submission of Work and Extension Requests
(4) Personal Extenuating Circumstances
(5) Technical Extenuating Circumstances
(6) Student Complaints and Appeals
(7) Academic Misconduct
(8) Student Disability and Unforeseen Medical Circumstances
- Assignment status: Already Solved By Our Experts
- (USA, AUS, UK & CA PhD. Writers)
- CLICK HERE TO GET A PROFESSIONAL WRITER TO WORK ON THIS PAPER AND OTHER SIMILAR PAPERS, GET A NON PLAGIARIZED PAPER FROM OUR EXPERTS