Some Rubric Some Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDesign and delivery 5 Pts Excellent Delivery of presentation is excellent and engaging. Content is relevant,...

Some Ru
ic
    Some Ru
ic
    Criteria
    Ratings
    Pts
    This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDesign and delivery
        5 Pts
Excellent
Delivery of presentation is excellent and engaging. Content is relevant, interesting and the presenters
ing excellent insight and interpretation. Visual aids are excellent and engaging and timing is adhered to. All group members presented.
    3.75 Pts
Good
Delivery of presentation is clear and relatively engaging. Content is relevant, and presenters
ing good insight and interpretation. Visual aids are clear, engaging and timing is adhered to. All group members presented.
    2.5 Pts
Satisfactory
Delivery of presentation is mostly clear. Content is relevant. Visual aids are mostly clear, engaging and timing is adhered to. All group members presented.
    1.5 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Delivery of presentation may not be clear. Content may not be relevant. Visual aids are uninteresting or poorly developed. Timing not adhered to. Not all group members presented
    5 pts
    This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDefining sustainability
        8 Pts
Excellent
Detailed and comprehensive discussion of set and additional literature on defining sustainability as it relates to the built environment. Discussion demonstrates logic and a clear understanding about what sustainability is, how it relates to the built environment and engages with the key debates around how to define. Discussion includes excellent critique of the literature. Brings out your definition of sustainability in relation to the built environment and supports why you chose this. If based upon existing definition, justifies why this is the best definition.
    6 Pts
Good
Detailed discussion of set and additional literature on defining sustainability as it relates to the built environment. Discussion is logical and includes good integration of the cu
ent debates around defining sustainability. Good level of critical understanding demonstrated. Discusses your definition and supports why you believe this to be the best definition.
    4 Pts
Satisfactory
Satisfactory discussion of set and some additional literature on defining sustainability as it relates to the built environment. May be some e
ors or issues with discussion of literature. Limited critique of the different definitions or their strengths/ limitations. Presents your definition of sustainability but may not link to built environment or be supported with evidence/literature.
    2 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Fragmented discussion of set literature on defining sustainability as it relates to the built environment. No critique of literature. Does not present own definition or presented definition is not clear or supported by evidence.
    8 pts
    This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCase study
        8 Pts
Excellent
A case study of a best practice sustainable building or program to support improving performance in buildings is presented. Excellent and detailed description of the case study provided including key information about innovative sustainability elements or mechanisms.
    6 Pts
Good
A case study of a best practice sustainable building or program to support improving performance in buildings is presented. Good level of detail provided in the description of the case study provided.
    4 Pts
Satisfactory
A case study of a best practice sustainable building or program to support improving performance in buildings is presented. Satisfactory level of detail provided in the description of the case study provided although some key information missing.
    0 Pts
Unsatisfactory
No case study presented or case study presented is fragmented and not discussed in enough detail.
    8 pts
    This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeLinking case study to definition of sustainability
        5 Pts
Excellent
Comprehensive and critical discussion about how the case study achieves (or not) outcomes in comparison to your definition of sustainability. Excellent support of discussion by evidence.
    3.75 Pts
Good
Detailed discussion about how the case study achieves (or not) outcomes in comparison to your definition of sustainability. Good use of supporting evidence
eferences.
    2.5 Pts
Satisfactory
Discussion about how the case study achieves (or not) outcomes in comparison to your definition of sustainability. May be some information missing. Limited use of supporting evidence
eferences.
    1.5 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Fragmented or lack of discussion about how case study achieves (or not) outcomes in comparison to your definition of sustainability. No use of supporting evidence
eferences.
    5 pts
    This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeUse of additional references and evidence
        4 Pts
Excellent
Presentation engages with high quality literature and evidence. At least 5 additional references used with at least 2 of these to be high quality journal articles. These references are in addition to the 2 set journal articles. References formatted as per RMIT Harvard reference style requirements.
    3 Pts
Good
Presentation engages with good quality literature and evidence. At least 3 additional references used with at least 1 of these to be high quality journal article. These references are in addition to the 2 set journal articles. References formatted as per RMIT Harvard reference style requirements.
    2 Pts
Satisfactory
Presentation engages with literature and evidence. At least 2 additional references used with at least 1 of these to be a journal article. These references are in addition to the 2 set journal articles. References formatted as per RMIT Harvard reference style requirements but may be some formatting or style issues.
    1 Pts
Unsatisfactory
Presentation has limited engagement with additional literature or evidence. Presentation does not include at least 2 additional references and/or does not include at least 1 of these to be a journal article. These references are in addition to the 2 set journal articles. References are not formatted as per RMIT Harvard reference style requirements.
    4 pts
    Total points: 30

Microsoft Word - Assessment task 1
BUIL1225    Sustainability    in    the    Built    
Environment    –    Assessment    Task    1:    Case    studies    
(group    assessment)    
 
Due date:     In class presentation: Wednesday 17th March (week 3) 
Presentation slides: Wednesday 17th March 6.30pm (i.e. before 
presentations) 
 
Assessment:     30% of the final mark for BUIL1225 
Course Learning Outcomes: CLO1, CLO2, CLO3, CLO4, CLO5 (detailed descriptions below) 
Marking criteria:  Assessment ru
ic (attached). 
Submission:  Electronic submission of presentation slides (in PowerPoint of pdf format) 
through Canvas, presentation delivered during week 3 class. 
Output format:  Oral presentation and submission of presentation slides 
Oral presentation will be conducted in front of the class (online) and two (2) 
assessors. Presentations are to go for no more than 7 minutes. This timing 
will be strictly enforced. 
Presentation slides (e.g. PowerPoint) must be used. You need to submit 
these slides (in pdf format) to Canvas prior to the class. 
For help with putting together and delivering a high quality presentation, 
visit the Study and Learning Centre or explore their online resources here: 
https:
emedia.rmit.edu.au/learningla
content/oral‐presentations  
 
Submission details:  Submit your final presentation as one pdf file through the link on the 
BUIL1225 Canvas website. Only 1 member of your group needs to submit the 
presentation file. Ensure that you include the authorisation statement “I 
declare that in submitting all work for this assessment I have read, 
understood and agree to the content and expectations of the Assessment 
Declaration.”. More details on this declaration can be found here: 
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student‐essentials/assessment‐and‐
exams/assessment/assessment‐declaration  
File format:    *.pdf (To generate an Adobe PDF file, either save your file as PDF or print to 
a PDF printer, such as “Cute PDF”.) or ppt. 
Submission format:   Name your file as: Group number_Ass1_case studies.pdf 
(e.g. group 1_Ass1_case studies.pdf) 
Paper size: A4 
 
Referencing style:   RMIT’s Harvard Style http:
www.rmit.edu.au/li
ary
eferencing 
This task is to be submitted in accordance with the University submissions policy. The policies 
associated with requests for extension and special consideration can be found at the link below. 
Please ask the course coordinato
program manager if you are in doubt regarding the policy. 
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student‐essentials/assessment‐and‐exams  
Submissions must be made by the due date and time. Late submissions without a granted 
extension of time or special consideration are marked as zero.  
 The policies associated with requests for extension of time can be found at this link: 
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student‐essentials/assessment‐and‐
exams/assessment/extensions‐of‐time‐for‐submission‐of‐assessable‐work. You can lodge 
the Application for extension of time (up to seven days) with the Course Coordinator.  
 The policies associated with requests for special consideration can be found at this link: 
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student‐essentials/assessment‐and‐
exams/assessment/special‐consideration. These applications will be assessed by specialist 
staff. 
Context    
As we explore throughout this course, the built environment has a significant negative impact on our 
natural environment. Over recent decades there has been an increasing focus on how the built 
environment can reduce the impact it has on our natural environment, and the role that more 
sustainable buildings can play in a transition to a low ca
on future. While there has been some 
progress towards addressing key sustainability challenges in the built environment, we still face key 
challenges in delivering more sustainable buildings. Part of the challenge remains that the concept of 
sustainability is seen as hard to define and implement in practice. It is important that when you are 
working in the sustainability field, that you can understand different people’s (e.g. clients, policy 
makers etc.) views about sustainability. Not everyone you deal with will share the same definition or 
values of sustainability as you. However, it is critical that you can articulate your definitions of 
sustainability and identify examples which represent this. 
This assessment task builds upon your week 1 and 2 content and discussions and requires you in 
groups of three (3) to critique common definitions of sustainability as it relates to the built 
environment. You will then put forward your definition of sustainable development (it may be one 
you found in the literature or one you created/altered) and your reasons why you support that 
definition over other definitions of sustainable development. You will then use a case study of an 
actual building or program (government or non‐government) to demonstrate real world application 
and explore how it links to your definition. The building or program can be from anywhere in the 
world. You will present to the class in our week 3 face‐to‐face session (online). Depending on your 
selected case study this assessment task addresses the Course Learning Outcomes 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5: 
1. Identify the characteristics of best‐practice in sustainable building initiatives 
2. Apply sustainability criteria to assess the performance of a building 
3. Identify and analyse effective strategies for achieving sustainable buildings and sustainable 
design outcomes 
4. Critically analyse Australian sustainability policy and project initiatives 
5. Evaluate and communicate the effectiveness of cu
ent sustainability initiatives and assess 
whether these initiatives are operating in an effective sustainability framework 
This assessment addresses the following Program Learning Outcomes 2 and 3: 
2. Critically analyse, synthesise and reflect on sustainable building theory and recent 
developments, both local and international, to extend and challenge knowledge and practice 
3. Professionally communicate and justify sustainable building design principles, strategies, 
solutions and/or outcomes, engaging effectively with diverse stakeholders, including across 
the government and industry sectors 
Task    description    
1. You will be organised into groups of three (3) by the course coordinator. This will be 
organised by the end of the week 1 class. 
2. Explore definitions of sustainable development and select (or create/edit) the definition of 
sustainable development which you believe best matches your views given the cu
ent 
global situation. As a starting point, read the two (2) articles provided on sustainable 
development (see Reading List for Assessment Task 1) and conduct an annotated 
ibliography for each article. See attached document for how to conduct an annotated 
ibliography. Note: Conducting an annotated bibliography is to help you start to think more 
critically about the articles and frame your discussion for your presentation. You do not have 
to submit the actual annotated bibliography. 
3. You are expected to draw upon wider literature and resources which have not been 
provided in class to further support your discussion on defining sustainable development 
and your case study (see below). You need to demonstrate you have used at least two (2) 
other journal articles in your presentation and use the right reference format. 
4. Select a case study of a real building which you believe demonstrates best practice 
sustainable development outcomes or a program which helps to deliver improved 
sustainability in the built environment (e.g. the Victorian Government’s solar panel rebate 
scheme). The building or program you select will be your case study. You need to describe 
the case (e.g. what is it, what is interesting about it, what it aims to do, who can access it) 
and discuss how well it aligns with the criteria of sustainable development that you 
introduced earlier in your presentation. If you need some ideas of possible case studies you 
could present you can look for examples here: 
World Green Building Council: https:
www.worldgbc.org/case‐study‐li
ary  
Green Building Council of Australia: https:
new.gbca.org.au/showcase/  
Renew: https:
enew.org.au/  
5. You are to present your discussion of your definition of sustainable development and the 
case study to the class during our week 3 class. Each group will be allotted 7 minutes 
(maximum) to present. There will also be 2 minutes of question time by the lecturer and 
other class members. Each group member must talk during the presentation. A suggested 
format for the presentation will be provided in the week 1 class. 
6. You must submit a copy of your presentation via the link on Canvas prior to the week 3 class. 
This is so that there is a record of your presentation. If you do not submit your presentation 
you will not be able to receive a mark. As this is a group task, make sure that someone in the 
group is responsible for submitting a copy of the presentation. You must also make sure all 
group member names and student numbers are on the first slide of your presentation. 
Reference all your sources using the Harvard referencing style as described on the RMIT website: 
http:
www.rmit.edu.au/li
ary
eferencing 
If you are unsure as to how to prepare and deliver your presentation, the following link provides 
some useful guidance: https:
emedia.rmit.edu.au/learningla
content/oral‐presentations 
Assessment    
This assessment task will be assessed in accordance with Table 1. The task is worth a total of 30 
marks. If resources allow, there will be two lecturers who will assess your presentation, with an 
average of the two marks given as your total mark. 
 
   Excellent  Good  Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory 
Delivery and 
design 
Mark available: 5 
Points: 5 
Delivery of presentation is 
excellent and engaging. 
Content is relevant, 
interesting and the 
presenters 
ing excellent 
insight and interpretation. 
Visual aids are excellent 
and engaging, and timing 
is adhered to. All group 
members presented. 
Points: 3.75 
Delivery of presentation is 
clear and relatively 
engaging. Content is 
elevant, and presenters 
ing good insight and 
interpretation. Visual aids 
are clear, engaging and 
timing is adhered to. All 
group members 
presented. 
Points: 2.5 
Delivery of presentation is 
mostly clear. Content is 
elevant. Visual aids are 
mostly clear, engaging and 
timing is adhered to. All 
group members 
presented.    
Points: <2.5 
Delivery of presentation 
may not be clear. Content 
may not be relevant. 
Visual aids are 
uninteresting or poorly 
developed. Timing is not 
adhered to. Not all group 
members presented.   
Defining 
sustainability 
Mark available: 8 
 
Points: 8 
Detailed and 
comprehensive discussion 
of set and additional 
literature on defining 
sustainability as it relates 
to the built environment. 
Discussion demonstrates 
logic and a clear 
understanding about what 
sustainability is, how it 
elates to the built 
environment and engages 
with the key debates 
around how to define. 
Discussion includes 
excellent critique of the 
literature. Brings out your 
definition of sustainability 
in relation to the built 
environment and supports 
why you chose this. If 
ased upon existing 
definition, justifies why 
this is the best definition. 
Points: 6 
Detailed discussion of set 
and additional literature 
on defining sustainability 
as it relates to the built 
environment. Discussion is 
logical and includes good 
integration of the cu
ent 
debates around defining 
sustainability. Good level 
of critical understanding 
demonstrated. Discusses 
your definition and 
supports why you believe 
this to be the best 
definition. 
Points: 4 
Satisfactory discussion of 
set and some additional 
literature on defining 
sustainability as it relates 
to the built environment. 
May be some e
ors or 
issues with discussion of 
literature. Limited critique 
of the different definitions 
or their strengths/ 
limitations. Presents your 
definition of sustainability 
ut may not link to the 
uilt environment or be 
supported with 
evidence/literature. 
Points: <4 
Fragmented discussion of 
set literature on defining 
sustainability as it relates 
to the built environment. 
No critique of literature. 
Does not present own 
definition or presented 
definition is not clear or 
supported by evidence.  
Case study 
Mark available: 8 
 
Points: 8 
A case study of a best 
practice sustainable 
uilding or program to 
support improving 
performance in buildings is 
presented. Excellent and 
Points: 6 
A case study of a best 
practice sustainable 
uilding or program to 
support improving 
performance in buildings is 
presented. Good level of 
Points: 4 
A case study of a best 
practice sustainable 
uilding or program to 
support improving 
performance in buildings is 
presented. Satisfactory 
Points: <4 
No case study presented, 
or case study presented is 
fragmented and not 
discussed in enough detail. 
detailed description of the 
case study provided 
including key information 
about innovative 
sustainability elements or 
mechanisms.  
detail provided in the 
description of the case 
study provided. 
level of detail provided in 
the description of the case 
study provided although 
some key information 
missing. 
Linking case study 
to definition of 
sustainability 
Mark available: 5 
 
  
Points: 5 
Comprehensive and critical 
discussion about how the 
case study achieves (or 
not) outcomes in 
comparison to your 
definition of sustainability. 
Excellent support of 
discussion by evidence. 
Points: 3.75 
Detailed discussion about 
how the case study 
achieves (or not) 
outcomes in comparison 
to your definition of 
sustainability. Good use of 
supporting 
evidence
eferences.  
 
Points: 2.5 
Discussion about how the 
case study achieves (or 
not) outcomes in 
comparison to your 
definition of sustainability. 
May be some information 
missing. Limited use of 
supporting 
evidence
eferences.   
Points: <2.5 
Fragmented or lack of 
discussion about how case 
study achieves (or not) 
outcomes in comparison 
to your definition of 
sustainability. No use of 
supporting 
evidence
eferences. 
Use of additional 
eferences and 
evidence 
Mark available: 4 
 
Points: 4 
Presentation engages with 
high quality literature and 
evidence. At least 5 
additional references used 
with at least 2 of these to 
e high quality journal 
articles. These references 
are in addition to the 2 set 
journal articles. References 
formatted as per RMIT 
Harvard reference style 
equirements. 
Points: 3 
Presentation engages with 
good quality literature and 
evidence. At least 3 
additional references used 
with at least 1 of these to 
e high quality journal 
article. These references 
are in addition to the 2 set 
journal articles. References 
formatted as per RMIT 
Harvard reference style 
equirements. 
Points: 2 
Presentation engages with 
literature and evidence. At 
least 2 additional 
eferences used with at 
least 1 of these to be a 
journal article. These 
eferences are in addition 
to the 2 set journal 
articles. References 
formatted as per RMIT 
Harvard reference style 
equirements but may be 
some formatting or style 
issues. 
Points: <2 
Presentation has limited 
engagement with 
additional literature or 
evidence. Presentation 
does not include at least 2 
additional references 
and/or does not include at 
least 1 of these to be a 
journal article. These 
eferences are in addition 
to the 2 set journal 
articles. References are 
not formatted as per RMIT 
Harvard reference style 
equirements. 
Table 1: Assessment matrix.
 
Assessment support 
Please use the links below to inform and avail yourself of the academic and other support services 
that are available to you at RMIT. 
 Study Support HUB: You can find out about academic expectations, receive feedback on 
your assignments from a Learning Advisor, access learning resources and discuss any study 
issues. 
 Smart thinking feedback:  E‐tutors provide comprehensive feedback on students' writing 
within a 24‐hour turnaround.  
 
Academic Integrity 
Students are reminded that cheating, whether by fa
ication, falsification of data, or plagiarism, is 
an offence subject to University disciplinary procedures. Plagiarism in written submissions is not 
acceptable. It is also an offence for students to allow their work to be plagiarised by another student 
or to include names of colleagues/team members who did not contribute to the project. 
Remember to always provide full citation of the reference material used throughout your 
submission. Details of the University policy regarding academic integrity can be found at the 
following link: 
http:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/academic‐integrity 
Plagiarism and Collusion 
Plagiarism and collusion constitute extremely serious academic misconduct and are forms of 
cheating. You are reminded that cheating, whether by fa
ication, falsification of data, or plagiarism, 
is an offence subject to University disciplinary procedures. Plagiarism is the presentation of the 
work, idea or creation of another person as though it is your own. It is a form of cheating and is a 
very serious academic offence that may lead to expulsion from the University. Plagiarised material 
can be drawn from, and presented in, written, graphic and visual form, including electronic data, and 
oral presentations. Plagiarism occurs when the origin of the material used is not appropriately cited. 
Plagiarism is not acceptable. It is also an offence for students to allow their work to be plagiarised by 
another student or to include names of colleagues/team members who did not contribute to the 
project.  
The student responsibilities are outlined in the RMIT Academic integrity and plagiarism procedure: 
https:
www.rmit.edu.au/students/student‐essentials
ights‐and‐responsibilities/academic‐integrity