Energy Project Research Planning

129 views 8:49 am 0 Comments April 14, 2023

Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022
Assessment Brief
*This document is for CU Group students for their own use in completing their assessed work for this
module and should not be passed to third parties or posted on any website. Any infringements of
this rule should be reported to [email protected]

Module Title: Energy Project Research Planning
Module Code: 506OGE

 

Assessment Type:
Presentation		 Assessment Number:
CW 2		 Study Mode:
FT		 Weighting:
25 Credits
Submission Date:
14/04/2023		 Submission Time:
18:00		 Campus:
North Greenwich CUL		 Block 4

 

Completion of this assessment will address the following learning outcomes:
1 Apply their knowledge and understanding of the concept and design of a research
project, exploring a defined problem or research question
2 Plan and take responsibility for a self-managed project within an appropriate ethical
framework.
3 Design a project specifying the aim, objectives and realistic targets.

 

Task: Individual Research Project Proposal 2,000 words
• You are required to write a 2,000 words individual research project proposal on
an energy sector topic.
• Your project proposal should include the following:
• Rationale for your choice of topic
• Introduction to your research: aims and objectives
• Overview of proposed time scale
• Scoping literature review
• Proposed research methods
• APA 7th edition style of referencing must be used in your Project Proposal
• Relevant graphics can be included in your proposal.

Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022

4 Critically research and compile information relevant to an energy sector project theme,
using an appropriate and justifiable range of research methods to identify, select and
review a wide range of fully cited information sources to support the subject matter
both historically and current.
5 Develop a research project proposal and methodology framework by considering data
and analytical methods to the problem under investigation.

Submission Guidelines
There should be a title page which clearly identifies the following:
* Name and code of the module
* Title of the Assessment
* Assessment number
* Word count
The word count identified includes quotations and citations. However, it does exclude the list of
references and/or the bibliography and, unless specifically stated, encompasses a discrepancy of + or
– 10%.
There will be a penalty of a deduction of 10% of the mark (after internal moderation) for work
exceeding the word limit by 10% or more.
Late Submission
If you are not able to complete your coursework on time due to extenuating circumstances*, the
ONLY way to receive an extension (up to 5 working days) or a deferral (anything longer than 5
working days) is to apply using the online portal where you will also be able to find more information
about extensions and deferrals any evidence required.
Extenuating circumstances are defined by CU as ‘genuine circumstances beyond your control or
ability to foresee, and which seriously impair your assessed work’. Please note that you will need to
provide third party evidence to support your reasoning for requiring an extension or deferral. Your
course tutor is NOT able to approve an extension or a deferral. If you have not completed the official
forms, your work will count as not submitted and receive a zero mark.
Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022
Guidance Notes and Considerations
Referencing
Access, Foundation and Undergraduate:
You should use APA 7th edition style of referencing.
Referencing guidance can be accessed on the Library’s LibGuides pages.
Referencing guidance can be accessed on the Library’s LibGuides pages.
Use of Sources and Information:
You can access high quality, authoritative information via the library. Use LibGuides to access Locate,
BibliU and research guidance.
Academic Writing Resources
There are a variety of academic writing resources available which can be accessed via LibGuides.
These writing guides can help with different types of assessment as well as important writing skills
needed for university.
Glossary of Assessment Terms for Assessment Writing – this is an a-z that covers the majority of
terms used in assessment briefs, learning outcomes and feedback throughout the CU Group. If you
would like any further support with your assessment, you can contact your Academic Writing
Developer or visit the Academic Writing LibGuides page.
If you would like to book an Academic Writing appointment for support with your assessment, you
can contact your Writing Developers:
CUC: [email protected]
CUS: [email protected]
CUL Dagenham: [email protected]
CUL Greenwich: [email protected]
Academic Integrity Guidance
The best way to avoid academic misconduct is to follow appropriate academic and referencing
conventions. Further guidance on academic integrity and conduct can be found using LibGuides.
Collusion between students (where sections of your work are similar to the work submitted by other
students in this or previous module cohorts) is taken extremely seriously and will be reported to the
Academic Conduct Panel. This applies to all coursework and exam answers. If you would like more
guidance on understanding collusion, you can find it on LibGuides.
If an assessment suspected of involving a breach of academic integrity is found to display a marked
difference in writing style, knowledge and skill level from that demonstrated elsewhere on the
course, you may be required to undertake a Viva Voce in order to prove the coursework assessment
is entirely your own work.
Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022
Proofreading of assessments by CU approved proofreaders is permitted. There is a list of approved
proof readers along with guidelines for use. However, please remember that proofreading is a
lengthy and detailed process for which there is a cost. If you decide to use a proofreader, please take
this into account and contact them at least 10 days in advance of your assessment deadline.
You must not submit work for an assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full),
either for your current course or for another qualification of this university, unless this is specifically
provided for in your assessment brief or specific course or module information.
It is important to realise that as a student you should not submit all or part of an assessment for
which you have already received academic credit, to be used for an assessment in a different
module. Reusing your own work in this way is called self-plagiarism. Where you wish to refer to
some of your own work you must reference it in the same way that you reference work by other
people.
Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022
Coventry University Generic Assessment Criteria: Undergraduate

Mark
band		 Outcome Guidelines
90-100%
1st		 Meets learning
outcomes		 1st – Exceptional work with very high degree of understanding, creativity, and critical/analytic skills. Evidence of
exceptional research well beyond minimum recommended using a range of methodologies. . Exceptional
understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories. Demonstrates creative flair, a high degree of originality
and autonomy.
Exceptional ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates well-developed problem-solving skills. Work
completed with very high degree of accuracy and proficiency and autonomy. Exceptional communication and
expression, significant evidence of professional skill set. Student evidences deployment of a full range of exceptional
technical and/or artistic skills.
80-89%
1st		 1st – Outstanding work with high degree of understanding, creativity, and critical/analytical skills. Outstanding
understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories. Evidence of outstanding research well beyond minimum
recommended using a range of methodologies. Demonstrates creative flair, originality and autonomy.
Outstanding ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates clear problem-solving skills. Assessment completed
with high degree of accuracy and proficiency and high-level of autonomy. Outstanding communication and
expression, evidence of professional skill set. Student evidences deployment of a full range of technical and/or
artistic skills.
70-79%
1st		 1st – Excellent work with clear evidence of understanding, creativity and critical/analytical skills. Thorough research
well beyond the minimum recommended using methodologies beyond the usual range. Excellent understanding of
knowledge and subject-specific theories with evidence of considerable originality and autonomy.
Excellent ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates consistent, coherent substantiated argument and
interpretation. Demonstrates considerable creativity and clear problem-solving skills. Assessment completed with
accuracy, proficiency, and considerable autonomy. Excellent communication and expression, some evidence of
professional skill set. Student evidences deployment of a highly developed range of technical and/or artistic skills.
60-69% 2:1 – Very good work demonstrating strong understanding of theories, concepts and issues with clear critical analysis.
Thorough research, using established methodologies accurately, beyond the recommended minimum with little, if

Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022

2:1 any, irrelevant material present. Very good understanding, evidencing breadth and depth, of knowledge and subject
specific theories with some originality and autonomy.
Very good ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates coherent substantiated argument and interpretation.
Demonstrates some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills. Work completed with accuracy, proficiency, and
autonomy. Very good communication and expression with evidence of professional skill set. Student has a thorough
command of a good range of technical and/or artistic skills.
50-59%
2:2		 2:2 – Good understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues with some critical analysis. Research undertaken
accurately using established methodologies, enquiry beyond that recommended may be present. Some errors may
be present and some inclusion of irrelevant material. Good understanding, with evidence of breadth and depth, of
knowledge and subject-specific theories with indications of originality and autonomy.
Good ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates logical argument and interpretation with supporting
evidence. Demonstrates some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills but with inconsistencies. Expression
and presentation mostly accurate, proficient, and conducted with some autonomy. Good communication and
expression with appropriate professional skill set. Student consistently demonstrates a well-developed range of
technical and/or artistic skills.
40-49%
3rd Class		 3rd – Meet the learning outcomes with a basic understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues.. Demonstrates
an understanding of knowledge and subject-specific theories sufficient to deal with concepts. Assessment may be
incomplete and with some errors. Research scope sufficient to evidence use of some established methodologies.
Some irrelevant material likely to be present.
Basic ability to apply learning resources. Demonstrates ability to devise and sustain an argument. Demonstrates
some originality, creativity and problem-solving skills but with inconsistencies. Expression and presentation sufficient
for accuracy and proficiency. Sufficient communication and expression with basic professional skill set. Student
demonstrates technical and/or artistic skills.
30-39%
Fail		 Fails to achieve
learning outcomes		 Fail – Very limited understanding of relevant theories, concepts and. Little evidence of research and use of
established methodologies. Some relevant material will be present. Deficiencies evident in analysis. Fundamental
errors and some misunderstanding likely to be present.
Limited ability to apply learning resources. Student’s arguments are weak and poorly constructed. Very limited
originality, creativity, and struggles with problem-solving skills. Expression and presentation insufficient for accuracy

Uncontrolled when printed V1.0
April 2022

and proficiency. Insufficient communication and expression and with deficiencies in professional skill set. Student
demonstrates some deficiencies in technical and/or artistic skills.
20-29%
Fail		 Fail – Clear failure demonstrating little understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues. Minimal evidence of
research and use of established methodologies and incomplete knowledge of the area. Serious and fundamental
errors and aspects missing
Little evidence of ability to apply learning resources. Student’s arguments are very weak and with no evidence of
alternative views. Little evidence of originality, creativity, and problem-solving skills. Expression and presentation
deficient for accuracy and proficiency. Insufficient communication and expression and with deficiencies in
professional skill set. Student demonstrates a lack of technical and/or artistic skills.
0-19%
Fail		 Fail – Inadequate understanding of relevant theories, concepts and issues. Complete failure, virtually no
understanding of requirements of the assignment. Material may be entirely irrelevant. Assessment may be
fundamentally wrong, or with major elements missing. Not a serious attempt. No evidence of research.
Inadequate evidence of ability to apply learning resources. Very weak or no evidence of originality, creativity, and
problem-solving skills. Students presents no evidence of logical argument and no evidence of alternative views.
Expression and presentation extremely weak for accuracy and proficiency. Communication and expression very weak
and with significant deficiencies in professional skill set. Student evidences few or no technical and/or artistic skills