5.3 Application of ground rules and management of conflict 6.1 Logical organisation of content and language flow in the project report Effective 6. 6.2 Using correct language and grammar in the project Communication report (15%) 6.3 Producing engineering drawings 6.4 Using effective oral communication 7.1 Using a range of critical and creative thinking skills Personal and 7.2 Monitoring and reviewing quality of own thinking 7. Professional Skills & 7.3 Managing learning Attributes (15%) 7.4 Acting in a manner consistent with professional codes and ethics Score 5 to 1 in the boxes above. CDIO skills 80% (For the above raw marks, items 1-4 = 60%, items 5-7 = 40%) Key: 5= Consistently met to a very high standard Exhibition 10% (Duty/Exhibited = 5, Bronze = 6, Silver = 8, Gold = 10) 4= Mainly met to a high standard Deadline 10% (Project Deadline as per page 6 of logbook) – 3= Mainly met to an acceptable standard 2= Partially met to an acceptable standard Marks ratio between supervisor and co-examiner = 2:1 1= Very poor performance Assessment evidence Assessment Evidence refers to the range of performances and products that can be validly and efficiently considered in making an assessment decision. In making assessment decisions, it is firstly necessary to consider the range of evidence that can be generated by the various activities in relation to the performance areas and criteria. For example, in assessing teamwork, a wide range of evidence sources can be generated and used to make a valid assessment decision. These could include the following: Feedback from students (e.g., peer assessment) Lecturer observation of student interactions Questioning Meeting deadlines and objectives Students logs/journals For SP projects, the following generic types of assessment evidence are typically produced: Reports Progress reviews Logbook Scheduling documentation Engineering drawings Artifacts (e.g., models, prototypes, programmes, operating manuals, etc) Presentations Responses to questions (oral, written, etc.) Invariably, the greater the range of evidence sources that can be accessed (providing they are sufficiently valid and reliable), the more likely it is that we can make accurate assessments of performance.
5.3 Application of ground rules and management of conflict 6. Effective Communication (15%) 6.1 Logical organisation of content and language flow in the project report 6.2 Using correct language and grammar in the project report 6.3 Producing engineering drawings 6.4 Using effective oral communication 7. Personal and Professional Skills & Attributes (15%) 7.1 Using a range of critical and creative thinking skills 7.2 Monitoring and reviewing quality of own thinking 7.3 Managing learning 7.4 Acting in a manner consistent with professional codes and ethics CDIO skills 80% (For the above raw marks, items 1-4 = 60%, items 5-7 = 40%) Exhibition 10% (Duty/Exhibited = 5, Bronze = 6, Silver = 8, Gold = 10) Deadline 10% (Project Deadline – as per page 6 of logbook) Marks ratio between supervisor and co-examiner = 2:1 Score 5 to 1 in the boxes above. Key: 5= Consistently met to a very high standard 4= Mainly met to a high standard 3= Mainly met to an acceptable standard 2= Partially met to an acceptable standard 1= Very poor performance Assessment evidence Assessment Evidence refers to the range of performances and products that can be validly and efficiently considered in making an assessment decision. In making assessment decisions, it is firstly necessary to consider the range of evidence that can be generated by the various activities in relation to the performance areas and criteria. For example, in assessing teamwork, a wide range of evidence sources can be generated and used to make a valid assessment decision. These could include the following: Feedback from students (e.g., peer assessment) Lecturer observation of student interactions Questioning Meeting deadlines and objectives Students logs/journals For SP projects, the following generic types of assessment evidence are typically produced: Reports Progress reviews Logbook Scheduling documentation Engineering drawings Artifacts (e.g., models, prototypes, programmes, operating manuals, etc) Presentations Responses to questions (oral, written, etc.) Invariably, the greater the range of evidence sources that can be accessed (providing they are sufficiently valid and reliable), the more likely it is that we can make accurate assessments of performance.
CHAPTER-FOUR.docx