Marking sheet Task 3
Survey of the Literature; 1500 words limit. (not including title page or references).
Excellent
Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Loading
Title page
Clear, attractive title page with student name/ ID. Single technology clearly identified.
Poor grade title page included
No title page, no student name and ID
5
Co
ect Report format
All report requirements meet – title,
abstract/exec summary,
intro, discussion, literature review, conclusion, etc.
All report requirements mainly there.
Some report requirements missing.
20
Wide reading
Evidence of wide and quality reading.
Majority of primary and peer reviewed materials. More than 5 sources used.
Evidence of wide reading to some quality. Major use of primary and peer reviewed sources. 3-5 sources used.
Wide reading not clear. Few sources and low quality.
30
Critical analysis
Sources are compared and contrasted in depth and thoughtfully and then related to the EA Code of Conduct.
Sources are compared and contrasted a little and show to be relevant to the topic.
Sources are not compared and contrasted effectively
20
Effective conclusions
The conclusion follows obviously and clearly from the review of literature
The conclusion has a little connection with the review.
Conclusion does not connect with the earlier discussion.
10
Spelling,
grammar and sentences to high standard
All language use is sound and professional. Complete sentences, co
ect grammar, etc. all clearly shown.
Language is fine with few e
ors.
Language is not to a professional level.
5
Citations
All references are co
ectly cited in the reference list and in text to full Harvard standards.
Citations mostly co
ect and to Harvard standard.
Citations leave out significant information or are missing.
10
Professional Engineering
Task 1 was a basic plan for task 3 and you chose three (or more) articles to work with.
Task 2 asked you to compare and contrast those three (or more) selected articles.
In Task 3 you need to present a full report/essay presenting your comparisons and contrasts between your chosen articles as well as some critical analysis of how your artiles fit with cureent engineering literature today.
Task 3 Detail
Assessment 3: Ethics Essay - Review of cu
ent literature on ONE ethics theme
Your task: to compare and contrast at least 2 articles by cu
ent engineers as they discuss your chosen topic. (More about how and why they are saying it than exactly what they are saying).
Presentation
Students will submit an essay
eport and demonstrate an ability to a
ange ideas logically in the introduction, the body and the conclusion.
The introduction should show how they plan to proceed, discuss their argument in the body and give examples to illustrate points.
The conclusion should relate back to the introduction, describing how they have done what they said they would do.
A minimum of 2 references will be required (Choose any 2 from task 1 and 2 is ideal). They must be published the last 5 years.
Reports will follow standard industry practice (refer to Lecture 2 notes for these).
Word limit: 1500 words max.
Due: end (Friday) Week 7
Value: 20%
Some time will be allocated for this task during workshop sessions.
Submissions will be run through Turnitin software for plagiarism checks.
Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
(
1
)ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Engineering Code of Ethics
Professional Engineer Technologist
Muhammad Khaqan
XXXXXXXXXX
Chisholm Institute, Dandenong
Task 2
PROMOTE SUSTAINABILITY
“Crafting Usable Knowledge For Sustainable Development”
Anadon LD, et al. (2015) Making technological innovation work for sustainable development. Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP15-079 (Harvard Kennedy School, Cam
idge, MA)
1. How do you know its quality?
· The citation figure for this article is 487. Out of which, 153 citations were by Web of Science, Scopus with 170 citations and Cross Ref with 164 citations.
· It is examined by Researchers Lo
ae Van Kerkhoff, Louis Lebel and Gilberto C. Gallopin and an Author William C. Clark.
· It was published by National Academy of Sciences on 18th of April 2016.
2. What is the author actually saying?
· Authors argues about how more usable knowledge is needed to help diffuse the challenges of sustainable development.
· Authors also explains on how core lessons about how Engineers, Researchers, scientists etc are interested in promoting sustainable development which can increase the production of usable knowledge.
· Great improvements have taken place in people’s well-being over recent generations through usable knowledge making them work and conquer from generations to generations.
3. What are the differences or similarities with other articles?
· Other articles are not showing much citations.
· Some researchers debates on the same content.
· This article is of 2016, very recent, and there are not much competing articles after this year, others are with very less citations.
“Yes, But This Other One Looks Bette
Works Better”: How Do Consumers Respond To Trade-Offs Between Sustainability And Other Valued Attributes.
Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Burke, P. F XXXXXXXXXXDo social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 183–191.
1. How do you know its quality?
· This article is written by Research Professors, Michael G. Luchs, a Research Professor at Raymond A. Mason School Of Business, United States, and by Marketing Research Professor Minu Kumar, a PhD at San Francisco State University.
· This article have crossed over 1600 Accesses.
· This article was published in 2015, May. So the abstract is fresh and healthy.
2. What is the author actually saying?
· Author elaborates the situations that how consumers have to make certain decisions between a product trade-off over its sustainability or glowing attribute.
· Author also explains how marketing managers need to be well prepared to make incredible responds and decisions that reflects how consumers will respond between trade-off scenarios.
· Furthermore, results show that consumers are most likely to opt for sustainable products after a trade-off.
3. What are the differences or similarities with other articles?
· A reviewer was also obtained to do the observations and to review the decision based upon crystal clear outcome, which makes it more compatible to deliver.
· A bit of a similarity can be found in other articles also in which Authors conclude on same point as in this article.
CM 100 The Professional Engineering Technologist
Task 2 asked you to compare and contrast two (or more) cu
ent (last 4 years) selected articles relating to ONE topic selected from the Engineering Australia ethics statement.
In Task 3 you need to present a full report/essay presenting your comparisons and contrasts between your chosen articles as well as some critical analysis of how your articles fit with cu
ent engineering literature today.
Task 3 Detail
Assessment 3: Ethics Essay - Review of cu
ent literature on ONE ethics theme
Your task: to compare and contrast at least 2 articles by cu
ent (last 4 years) engineers as they discuss your chosen topic. (More about how and why they are saying it than exactly what they are saying).
Presentation
Students will submit an essay
eport and demonstrate an ability to a
ange ideas logically in the introduction, the body and the conclusion.
The introduction should show how they plan to proceed, discuss their argument in the body and give examples to illustrate points.
The conclusion should relate back to the introduction, describing how they have done what they said they would do.
A minimum of 2 references will be required (Choose any 2 from task 2 is ideal). They must be published the last 4 years.
Reports will follow standard industry practice (refer to Lecture 2 notes for these).
Word limit: 1500 words max.
Due: end (Friday) Week 7
Value: 20%
Some time will be allocated for this task during workshop sessions.
Submissions will be run through Turnitin software for plagiarism checks.
A Suggested plan
Title – your choice from the EA ethics headings
Author – YOU with your ID
Abstract/Executive Summary – a summary of the whole of your paper, written last but put here. NOT a second introduction.
Introduction –
iefly explain the topic, introduce the articles and that you will look for similarities (comparisons) and Differences (Contrasts).
Body.
Para 1 – outline your choice of articles and why they are of high quality – with citations.
Para 2 – discuss the similarities/comparisons – with citations.
Para3 – discuss the differences/contrasts – with citations.
Conclusion – sum up the important similarities and differences. For best marks add a comparison with one other article.
References – co
ect Harvard format reference for each article and source used.
Running head: ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
(
1
)ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Engineering Code of Ethics
Professional Engineer Technologist
Muhammad Khaqan
XXXXXXXXXX
Chisholm Institute, Dandenong
Task 2
PROMOTE SUSTAINABILITY
“Crafting Usable Knowledge For Sustainable Development”
Anadon LD, et al. (2015) Making technological innovation work for sustainable development. Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research Working Paper Series RWP15-079 (Harvard Kennedy School, Cam
idge, MA)
1. How do you know its quality?
· The citation figure for this article is 487. Out of which, 153 citations were by Web of Science, Scopus with 170 citations and Cross Ref with 164 citations.
· It is examined by Researchers Lo
ae Van Kerkhoff, Louis Lebel and Gilberto C. Gallopin and an Author William C. Clark.
· It was published by National Academy of Sciences on 18th of April 2016.
2. What is the author actually saying?
· Authors argues about how more usable knowledge is needed to help diffuse the challenges of sustainable development.
· Authors also explains on how core lessons about how Engineers, Researchers, scientists etc are interested in promoting sustainable development which can increase the production of usable knowledge.
· Great improvements have taken place in people’s well-being over recent generations through usable knowledge making them work and conquer from generations to generations.
3. What are the differences or similarities with other articles?
· Other articles are not showing much citations.
· Some researchers debates on the same content.
· This article is of 2016, very recent, and there are not much competing articles after this year, others are with very less citations.
“Yes, But This Other One Looks Bette
Works Better”: How Do Consumers Respond To Trade-Offs Between Sustainability And Other Valued Attributes.
Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Burke, P. F XXXXXXXXXXDo social product features have value to consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 183–191.
1. How do you know its quality?
· This article is written by Research Professors, Michael G.