you must demonstrate what you have learnt by providing

ENEG20001 Australian Engineering Practice Portfolio Assessment Criteria The Portfolio is your opportunity to demonstrate what you have learnt in this course. It is not sufficient to simply say that you have learnt something, you must demonstrate what you have learnt by providing evidence. Creating a Portfolio emulates the process of applying for a job. When you apply for a job, you need to demonstrate how you have met the Selection Criteria. You need to provide examples of times in the past when you have done things that show that you have the capabilities the job requires. Then, during the interview, you will be asked to talk more about the events you described in your application. For the Portfolio, you must respond to the learning outcomes, giving examples of how you have met each of them. After you have submitted the Portfolio, you will participate in an individual viva voce. The Viva Voce is an opportunity to discuss any anomalies in your evidence to ensure that your portfolio is fairly graded. Requirements Your Portfolio should be collated into a single pdf with the following sections: Cover page with your name and student number, course code and name, assignment title and date Executive summary Table of contents Grade nomination Individual reflective writing tasks Workbook Team project charter and project plan Self and peer assessment results Team project report and slides from presentation Other requirements for the portfolio are: There is no strict word limit (minimum or maximum) but you should aim to succinctly demonstrate the requirements in the marking criteria. Only submissions uploaded to Moodle will be accepted. Only extension requests submitted through Moodle BEFORE the due date will be considered. Workbook Engineers must keep records of their work for many reasons. Mainly, these records are handy points of reference for future projects so you do not need to continuously relearn complex processes, software, calculations, standards, etc. However, good quality records (accurate, comprehensive, relevant and intuitive) are important for justifying your decisions to project stakeholders. Good records are essential when asked to explain your decisions many years after the project was completed. It is for these reasons that in this course you will be made to complete a Workbook as part of your Portfolio. Your Workbook can be typed, handwritten (then scanned) or a combination of both but must be neat, chronological and legible. The workbook contains all your work for the team project. It should contain separate entries with headings and the date, such as: ‘April 20 – Project Risk Assessment’. These entries will show when you worked on each element of the project and how your ideas and capabilities have developed through the course. You should not go back and edit old entries as this may prohibit demonstrating skills development. The Workbook cannot be completed retrospectively and must include at least two entries each week while working on the team project. Entries should demonstrate a variety of technical skills like researching, brainstorming, creating mind maps, flowcharts, methodologies, schedules, obtaining experimental data, undertaking data analysis, producing results, figures, charts, conclusions, calculations, drawings or any other work done for your team project. It is good practice to add entries to your Workbook first and then send a copy to your teammates to ensure you retain the original work. Example of a Workbook Entry: Your Workbook should reflect pride in your work and showcase your abilities to apply the skills taught through this course. Your Workbook should also become a tool that you can refer to throughout your studies and potentially even when practicing as an engineer. Contribution to team project You are expected to actively contribute to the team project. In the final team project report, your team will provide a description of what each team member contributed to the project which must be agreed to by all team members.   Grade nomination You will self-assess your performance against the each of the learning outcomes. You must demonstrate how you have met each of the performance criteria and to what level. The Portfolio template that has been provided will show you the required format for demonstrating your achievement of each criteria. Your self-assessment grading rubric You will calculate the percentage marks you think you should get from each learning outcome using Equation 1 below. For example, for Learning Outcome 1 if you get a Sound (1 mark) in Criteria 1.1 and a Good (1.5 marks) in criteria 1.2, you would get: Percentage=(1+1.5)/4×100=62.5%………………………………………………Equation 1 The 4 at the bottom in equation 1 is the highest possible marks you can get in Learning Outcome 1 which indicates excellent (2 marks) in criteria 1.1 and excellent (2 marks) in criteria 1.2. The criteria for each learning outcome are listed below. Explain the historical impact of engineering on society. Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 1.1 Positive impact of engineering No relevant reflective writing task completed Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 1 example of a positive impact. Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 2 examples of positive impact. Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 2 examples of positive impact including analysing strengths and weaknesses of the engineer 1.2 An engineering disaster No relevant reflective writing task completed Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 1 example of an engineering disaster. Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 2 examples of an engineering disaster. Individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria discusses 2 examples of an engineering disaster including analysing risks and identifying potential alternative strategies Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 1.1+marks for criteria 1.2)/4×100=?? Explain engineering professionalism and ethics in the Australian context. Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 2.1 Engineering professionalism No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing tasks relevant to this criteria At least 3 individual reflective writing tasks relevant to this criteria 2.2 EA Stage 1 Competencies EA Stage 1 Competencies not considered Relevance of EA Stage 1 Competencies to engineering practice discussed As for Sound plus: Basic self-assessment against EA Stage 1 Competencies undertaken As for Good plus: Reflection on assessment against EA Stage 1 Competencies undertaken 2.3 EA Code of Ethics EA Code of Ethics not considered EA Code of Ethics considered in project scope. As for Sound plus: EA Code of Ethics considered in project outcomes. As for Good plus: EA Code of Ethics considered in project recommendations. 2.4 Engineering ethics No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria including identifying at least 3 values. Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 2.1+2.2+2.3+2.4)/8×100=??   Discuss engineers’ roles, responsibilities and the need to employ principles of sustainable development. Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 3.1 Engineers’ roles and responsibility No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 3 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria 3.2 Use of Australian Standards No evidence of using Australian Standards Corre
ct Australian standards have been identified but application is limited in both depth and breadth as relevant to the project. Australian standards applied generally but not entirely compliant under any major sections of the report or the standard. Australian standards have been applied correctly to validate decisions for at least one major section of the report or the standard. 3.3 Sustainability as an integral part of engineering design Sustainability not considered in project work Sustainability considered in project scope As for Sound plus: Sustainability considered in material selection As for Good plus: Sustainability considered when evaluating life cycle of project solution 3.4 Risk to project completion assessed and managed Hazards and risk to project completion not adequately identified. Realistic hazards and level of risk in terms of health and safety to workers and project completion are identified. Some attempt at assessing impact on stakeholders and determining management strategies. Risks include potential impacts to the interests of all major stakeholders Management strategies demonstrate good understanding of project. Evidence of risks being revisited in at least 2 sets of meeting minutes. As for Good plus: Management strategies demonstrate more than one way of ensuring project success. Evidence of risks being revisited in at least 4 sets of meeting minutes. Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 3.1+3.2+3.3+3.4)/8×100=??   Manage documentation and information (emphasizing on referencing) and Explain effective communication across a range of contexts Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 4.1 Ensure version control of shared documents No evidence provided or evidence unacceptable Emails, forum posts or meeting minutes show evidence of managing version control of shared documents. As for Sound plus: Meeting minutes and team charter show protocols in place for shared documents. As for Good plus: Evidence that protocols have been followed in a sustained manner throughout the project. 4.2Ensure team project documents are coherent (Team Meetings and Minutes) No evidence provided or evidence unacceptable Evidence of team members reviewing team submission to ensure consistency of formatting and language. As for Sound plus: Team project submission flows from one section to the next. There is no repetition of content. As for Good plus: Team project submission is persuasive and professional. 4.3 Harvard referencing In-text citations and reference lists are NOT included in your individual writing Attempted both in-text citations and reference lists in individual writing but improvements could be made in either variety of information sources cited, the quality or relevance of sources cited and formatting of references Attempted both in-text citations and reference lists in individual writing but minor errors are made Consistently correct use of both in-text citations and reference lists in individual writing 4.4 Oral presentation No participation in team project presentation ‘Sound’ for team project presentation as per the Presentation Marking Criteria ‘Good’ for team project presentation as per the Presentation Marking Criteria ‘Excellent’ for team project presentation as per the Presentation Marking Criteria 4.5 Professional correspondence No evidence of professional correspondence At least one piece of evidence which demonstrates professional correspondence At least 5 instances demonstrating professional correspondence Sustained evidence throughout the term of professional correspondence 4.6Technical writing No contribution to team report Appropriate use of engineering terminology and language. Use of word processor including mathematical symbols and equations, tables and figures. Advanced word processing skills including automatic generation of Tables of Contents, page numbering etc. Excellent use of terminology and language. Evidence of assisting others to develop word processing skills. 4.7Technical sketching and drawing No sketches or drawings At least 1 hand sketch used to communicate a project idea to team mates. At least 1 CAD drawing for project work. CAD drawing is in accordance with aspects of AS1100. At least 3 hand sketches used to communicate a project idea to team mates. CAD drawing shows advanced skills. Evidence of using sketches extensively as a mode of communication. CAD drawings communicate information clearly. Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 4.1+4.2+4.3+4.4+4.6+4.7)/14×100=??   Lead or participate collaboratively in team. Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 6.1 Team submissions on time Project report is not submitted on time and there is no approved extension. Project report is submitted on time. Evidence in meeting minutes that team monitors project progress regularly and notes if the project is behind schedule. Evidence in meeting minutes that team monitors project progress at each meeting and adjusts resource allocation accordingly. 6.2 Self and Peer assessment Project contribution statement in project report indicates unacceptable level of contribution to team project. Project contribution statement in project report indicates acceptable level of contribution to team project. Project contribution statement in project report indicates fair contribution to team project. Project contribution statement in project report indicates proactive contribution that ensured project success. 6.3 Regular attendance and contribution to team meetings Minutes show non-attendance with no prior advice of reason Minutes show regular attendance at meetings. Minutes show some participation in team discussions and decisions. Minutes show regular active participation in team discussions and decisions. 6.4 Team charter and project plan Not submitted. Submission graded as ‘Sound’ Submission graded as ‘Good’ Submission graded as ‘Excellent’ 6.5 Assisting your peers to learn No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria As for Good AND Minutes or other evidence of assisting your peers Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 6.1+6.2+6.3+6.4+6.5)/10×100=?? Demonstrate critical self-review, self-management and lifelong learning. Criteria Unacceptable (0 marks) Sound (1 mark) Good (1.5 marks) Excellent (2 marks) 6.1 Self-review and reflection No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 3 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria 6.2 Time management No relevant reflective writing tasks completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 3 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria 6.3 Identifying gaps in knowledge No relevant reflective writing task completed At least 1 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 2 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria At least 3 individual reflective writing task relevant to this criteria 6.4 Ability to synthesise information No evidence provided Evidence that you have combined information from at least 3 independent sources to complete a section of the project report. Evidence you have combined information from at least 3 independent types of sources to complete a section of the project report. Evidence you have combined information from many independent sources and types of sources to complete a section of the project report. 6.5 Justifying decisions No evidence provided Evidence that you justify some decisions made based on citations of reputable sources like Australian Standards or journal publications. Justification of decisions made for team project demonstrate an evidence-based approach to decisio
n making. Workbook demonstrates a continued commitment to justifying decisions to ensure you are following industry best practices. Your claimed marks are = (marks for criteria 6.1+6.2+6.3+6.4+6.5)/10×100=?? Grading rubric As shown above, you will receive a percentage for each Learning Outcome. For example, for Learning Outcome 1 if you get a Sound and a Good, you would get: Percentage=(1+1.5)/4×100=62.5% You must achieve minimum of 50% for each Learning Outcome to be eligible for a passing grade. Overall grade will be calculated based on the following weighting: Total = 0.1 x (LO1 + LO2 + LO3 + LO5) + 0.3 x (LO4 + LO6) ENEG20001 Australian Engineering Practice Learning Outcome 6 and 7 Feedback Sheet Criteria Acceptable 1. Reflection Reflection shows student has considered ‘What, So what, What else, What now’ 2. Concepts Shows good understanding of concepts as presented in the textbook. 3. Presentation and language Neatly presented with appropriate headings. Language, grammar and spelling are suitable. The intent of the writing is clear. Sentences flow logically. 4. Referencing Includes in-text citations and reference list where appropriate, including referencing textbook. Any sources used are reliable. Harvard referencing style is used. Note that writing tasks must be deemed acceptable if they are to be used as evidence in the Portfolio. If a writing task is deemed not acceptable, you should discuss how you might improve your submission with your facilitator. Writing task Acceptable Comments 6a Yes Good. Proofread before final submission. 6b Yes Good. Proofread before final submission. 7a Yes Good. Proofread before final submission. 7b Yes Good. Proofread before final submission. 7c Yes Need further improvement to make the concept clear.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *