Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018 Assignment Paper

ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018
Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
1
ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering
Management for a Sustainable Future
Assignment 1 – Annotated bibliography
and supplementary paragraphs

Assignment One Requirements:
This assignment has two parts therefore please read each section carefully and address the
requirements.
Part A: Draft – Partial annotated bibliography and introduction paragraph
Due Date: 19 November 2018 9:00 AM
Length: Search terms, references and approximately 200 to 300 words of introduction
Format: Use template Word document only
Weighting: 20% deduction of assignment mark 1 if not submitted
Submission: Through Turnitin in the “Assessment Details” section of the unit Black Board site.
Referencing Harvard
Part B: Introduction, full annotated bibliography, answer and conclusion
Due Date: 10 Dec 2018 9:00 AM
Length: Approximately 2500 words total including introduction, annotated bibliography, an
answer to the question and a conclusion
Format: Report format Word document only
Weighting: 40% of total unit marks
Submission: Through Turnitin in the “Assessment Details” section of the unit Black Board site.
Referencing Harvard
Assignment One Guiding Question:
What does the literature suggest that engineering managers need to do
to achieve effective Sustainable Engineering Management practices in
your area of specialisation?
Note: Please use cover sheets in accordance with standard assignment submission requirements
mentioned in the Unit Information Guide.
ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018
Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
2
Part A Brief
Part A: Draft – Partial annotated bibliography and introduction paragraph
Due Date: 19 November 2018 9:00 AM
Length: Search terms, references and 200 to 300 words of introduction
Format: Use template Word document only
Weighting: 20% deduction of assignment mark 1 if you do not submitted
Submission: Through turn it in the Assessment Details section of the unit Black Board site.
Referencing Harvard
The aim of the assignment is to build your academic searching skills and to compose an introduction
that can be used in the Annotated bibliography (Part B). To do this you will search for 3 appropriate
academic journals and 2 popular web sites. The introduction could include a critical analysis of two or
three key definitions applicable to the subject of sustainability in engineering. The introduction should
be 200 to 300 words in length. Feel free to either use and submit the table provided below or develop
your own but please cut and paste this table into a new document. I strongly urge you to read the
Guiding information that is provided below. You will have lots of opportunity to do this assessment in
the advanced engineering Class that is held each Tuesday.
Section 1 Search terms (see notes below)
Section 2: Reference
in Harvard Format
(Export from
EndNote or enter
manually)
Comment (One or two sentences about each
important point)
Classification 1
e.g. Definition? (Y/N)
Classification 2
Classification 3
1
2
3
4
5
Section 3: Introduction paragraph (200 to 300 words long)
ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018
Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
3
Guiding information for Part A
Experience has shown that the academic skills and integrity of new participants is often unsatisfactory
but can be improved significantly via early feedback. Hence this draft assignment submission has
been designed as a mechanism for you to obtain specific guidance in relation to your work.
Part A is designed to get you to start searching the academic and industry references and provide you feedback
to help you in your final assessment submission. Doing Part A will assist you to understand how literature can
be used to support your arguments and assertions. There are no marks given for Part A as it is designed to assist
you to complete Part B however, failure to submit Part A will result in an automatic 20% deduction for
assignment number one.
Section 1: Compile relevant search terms and combinations including the associated Boolean logic
needed for the completion of the entire Annotated bibliography assignment. As you review each piece
of literature, additional search terms may be identified. Add these search terms to the list and indicate
(using an in-text citation) where they were first discovered.
Section 2: Using EndNote configured to the Harvard referencing style or by typing manually, generate
a reference list. In a separate column, alongside reference, make a comment of one or two sentences
about each important point. Note, there may be several points about different aspects of that paper each
being one or two sentences. Be sure to use quotation marks if a direct quote is made. The “Literature
Comment table” format shown above can be used. Hint: Using Microsoft Excel for this table will enable
comments to be easily classified and sorted. For example, comments pertaining to key definitions could
be one handy classification category.
Section 3: Using relevant literature references, compose an introduction to the annotated bibliography.
The introduction must include a critical analysis of two or three key definitions applicable to the subject
of engineering for sustainability outcomes. The introduction should be 200 to 300 words in length.

ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018
Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
4
Part B Final Assignment Brief
Part B: Introduction, full annotated bibliography, answer and conclusion
Due Date: 10 Dec 2018 9:00 AM
Length: Approximately 2500 words total including introduction, annotated bibliography, an
answer to the question and a conclusion
Format: Report format Word document only
Weighting: 40% of total unit marks
Submission: Through Turn-it-in the Assessment Details section of the unit Black Board site.
Referencing Harvard
You are required to develop a comprehensive annotated bibliography of the Sustainable Engineering
Management Body of Knowledge presented in a report format. You need to critically analyse the
literature and provide an answer to the below question.
What does the literature suggest that engineering managers need to do
to achieve effective Sustainable Engineering Management practices in
your area of specialisation?
In addition to this, you must provide a conclusion. For a suggested report format, please refer to
“Assignment 1 Annotated bibliography Template.docx”.
Hint! To build your knowledge in your area of specialisation for example you may be an Electronics
Engineer, Electrical Engineer, Civil Engineer, Aerospace Engineer, Asset Manager, and so on refine
your search to your area of discipline. In your introduction it is suggested that you make it very clear
to the marker that you are focusing your literature review on a specific area of engineering practice.
General Guiding information for the Assessments:
• Start writing early
• Please ensure that you go and visit the library to get assistance on how to search for academic
journals.
• As discussed in class, you must read widely and deeply
• Focus on the current peer reviewed literature i.e. 2005 to 2018.
• Think, for instance about the materials used for production, the energy and other materials
consumed in operation, the human resources needed, and where impacts (both positive and
negative) from the activities in your practice area will occur.
• Remember to think about sustainability in engineering when looking for sources and potential
impact on environmental, social and economic factors.
• Please remember that using graphs, tables, charts, and figures enhance content without adding
words. Use your imagination and include these items where possible.
• References, tables, charts and appendices are not included in the word count.
• Please review the associated marking guide so that you can meet all the requirements.
• Please ensure that your document is written legibly so that it will be acceptable in an
academic and industry context.
ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018
Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
5
• Please note that failure to meet the minimum appropriate academic references will
automatically result in a maximum mark of 40% for the complete assignment as you have not
based your literature review in evidence based research.
• Refer to the links that have been put up on blackboard to assist you. For example the library
lib-guides, how to write a report, how to search for academic journals, and so on.
ENG93000 ENG93000-2018-3: Engineering Management for a Sustainable Future S3 2018 Assignment 1 Author Dr Jeremy P. Novak
6
Marking Rubric for Assignment 1 (literature review)
Excellent
85%‒100%
Very Good
75%‒84%
Good
65%‒74%
Satisfactory
50%‒64%
Unacceptable
0%‒49%
WARNING! If assignment 1 Part A was not submitted there is an automatic 20% of final marks will be deducted.
WARNING! failure to meet the minimum academic references will automatically result in a maximum mark of 40% for the complete assignment
Response to assigned topic, the understanding of relevant literature, theory, and literature review Structure:: (about 75% of total mark for the assignment)
Structure:
The Annotated bibliography was
very comprehensive and had
excellent structure with no errors.
The Annotated bibliography was
comprehensive and had very
good structure with some
errors.
The Annotated bibliography had good
structure and appropriate content but
with some errors.
The Annotated bibliography consisted of
suitable information, had generally
suitable structure although some aspects
could have been improved
The Annotated bibliography did
not have suitable structure and
information
Response to assigned topic:
The Annotated bibliography
responded directly to the topic
and to every separate part of the
topic in an exceptionally
balanced manner with no
irrelevant material.
The Annotated bibliography
responded directly to the topic
and to every separate part of
the topic in a balanced manner
with minimal irrelevant material.
The Annotated bibliography responded
directly to the topic and to every
separate part of the topic in a
reasonably balanced manner, perhaps
with a small amount of irrelevant
material and some issues not properly
developed.
Overall the Annotated bibliography
responded directly to the topic but with
some digressions and irrelevancies. Some
aspects of the topic were not developed
properly and some less important aspects
may have been overlooked.
Taken as a whole, the
assignment did not respond
adequately to the topic.
Important aspects were
overlooked and/or much of the
material was irrelevant.
Grasp of core unit theory:
The Annotated bibliography
demonstrated deep, accurate
understanding of unit principles
and concepts at a very high level
of sophistication.
Demonstrated deep, accurate
understanding of unit principles
and concepts.
Demonstrated accurate understanding
of unit principles and concepts, although
a little superficial or flawed in places.
Sound grasp of unit principles and
concepts, perhaps one-dimensional and
superficial in places and perhaps some
misconceptions.
One or more important unit
concepts or principles seriously
misunderstood, or no relevant
theoretical framework
established.
Academic Journals:
Annotated bibliography was
supported with appropriate
peered reviewed academic
journals (7 minimum) and other
quality sources
Annotated bibliography was
supported with appropriate
peered reviewed academic
journals (6 minimum) and
other quality sources
Annotated bibliography was supported
with appropriate peered reviewed
academic journals (5 minimum) and
other quality sources
Annotated bibliography was supported
with appropriate peered reviewed
academic journals (4 minimum)
Annotated bibliography was not
supported with the minimum
amount of appropriate peered
reviewed academic journals
Other technical matters (about 25% of total mark for the assignment) Assignment must be in Font 12, 1.5 Spacing, and Times New Roman
English expression:
Spelling, syntax and grammar
completely correct.
Spelling, syntax and grammar
generally correct although there
were two or three minor errors.
Spelling, syntax and grammar generally
correct although there were more than
three minor errors.
Spelling, syntax and grammar acceptable
but there were frequent minor or serious
errors.
Unacceptably high number of
minor and/or numerous serious
errors in spelling, syntax and/or
grammar.
In-text referencing:
Harvard or APA referencing
system used with 100%
accuracy.
Harvard or APA referencing
system used with high level of
accuracy.
Harvard or APA referencing used
correctly although with some errors.
Harvard or APA referencing used correctly
although with some significant errors.
No referencing or many serious
errors in using Harvard or APA
referencing.
Reference list:
Reference list comprehensive
and had no errors.
Reference list comprehensive
with no omissions but some
minor errors.
Reference list had one or two omissions
and/or significant errors.
Reference list had more than two
omissions and/or significant errors (but a
small number).
Reference list had numerous
errors and/or omissions (or is
missing).