| University of Southern Queensland | |
| Faculty of Health, Engineering and Sciences | |
| Course Code: AGR3303 |
Course Name: Agricultural Materials and Post-Harvest Technologies |
| Assessment No: 1 | This assessment carries 200 of the 1000 total marks for this unit. |
| Examiner: A/Prof G. Chen | Moderator: Dr Malcolm Gillies |
| Date Due: 17 March 2023 | Penalty for Late Submission: – 5% per calendar day late unless prior approval has been obtained from the University |
| Special Instructions: Please make sure that the presentation of your work is as neat as possible. All writing questions must be typed. All assignments are to be submitted and uploaded on StudyDesk, in the file name of YourLastName-FirstName.XXX. This assignment must be the work of the individual student. |
|
| Students should retain a copy of the assignment in case the original is lost. No assessment will be accepted without this facing page duly completed and attached.
Any non USQ copyright material used herein is reproduced under the provision of Section 200(1)(b) of the Copyright Amendment Act 1980. |
Assessment objectives and course learning outcomes:
This assessment contains one question. It assesses the following objectives (from the
course specification):
1. list and define the relevant physical properties of agricultural materials;
3. discuss the causes and consequences of mechanical damage;
4. determine the requirements for good packaging;
5. understand the principles of separation, sorting and grading.
QUESTION 1 (200 Marks)
Professional agricultural engineers and scientists are often called upon to review and
summarize available information for a cost-effective and safe solution. A properly
researched technical summary will incorporate a literature review component. The aim
of this assignment question is to develop your writing skills and the ability to critically
review and summarize the key information in plain English with a clear structure and
good format from the available published literatures.
To do this, you will need to:
• Provide a coherent account of the issues raised in each of the research papers.
• Describe the links and correlations between the various theories investigated.
• Describe contradictions, ambiguities, weaknesses in the current knowledge
outlined in the articles.
A concise and clear to the point presentation style is strongly encouraged in this
assignment. The report should be well structured with appropriate uses of headings and
sub-headings. The key points should be clearly emphasised.
There are a range of theories available to explain the mechanism of bruising in apples.
These theories have been used in an attempt to predict the extent of bruising caused by
different loading conditions. The papers by Holt and Schoorl (1977) (AGR3303 Selected
Readings – Reading 5.1), and Siyami et al. (1988) (AGR3303 Selected Readings –
Reading 5.2), investigate and test a number of these theories.
Review these two papers and then:
• Briefly explain and summarise the different theories proposed and the results
obtained.
• Are the results described in the two papers compatible?
• Discuss which theory or mechanism appears to be most accurate.
• Compare the approaches in the two papers and consider which theory is more
useful in practical terms (e.g. how would you use this knowledge in designing an
apple handling or packing systems?).
• Perform a short literature search and briefly discuss (in 200-250 words) whether
more recently published papers (after the year 2000) might change your
conclusions above.
This assessment will comprise 20% of the total assessment for this course. Marks will be
allocated according to the following three criteria:
• General presentation and layout, grammar, spelling, logic of the presentation (30
marks).
• Accuracy/appropriateness of result summary and factual material/content (100
marks)
• Discussion/interpretation of presented materials (70 marks).
Length: A standard essay format of up to maximum four A4 pages in 11pt font
(excluding the cover and reference pages) and single line spacing would be appropriate.
A sample format and suggested headings is attached.
The reference format for this assignment is standard Harvard format.
The written report must also be submitted as a word document file type (.doc, .docx or
.rtf file type) only.
| Marking criteria | (8 Excellent 5-100%) | (6Good 5-85%) | (50Fair -65%) | (0Po -50%) or | mark Your |
| Overall presentation and language • (30 marks available) |
|||||
| Result summary • Summary of Paper 1 (50 marks available) • Summary of Paper 2 (50 marks available) |
|||||
| Discussion and interpretation • Comparison of the results (50 marks available) • Overall conclusions (20 marks available) |