SEJ101 – Case Study Analysis
Criteria HD – High Distinction DN (Distinction) CR (Credit) PP (Pass) NN (fail) Engineering artefact Research The student has identified and addressed to a high quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a good quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to an average quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a low quality the associated criteria The student has not identified and failed to address the associated criteria Functionality, Ergonomics, Aesthetics The student has identified and addressed to a high quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a good quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to an average quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a low quality the associated criteria The student has not identified and failed to address the associated criteria DfX principles The student has identified and addressed to a high quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a good quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to an average quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a low quality the associated criteria The student has not identified and failed to address the associated criteria Process, develop and justifications of the engineering design / artefact The student has identified and addressed to a high quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a good quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to an average quality the associated criteria The student has identified and addressed to a low quality the associated criteria The student has not identified and failed to address the associated criteria Report Presentation Faultless presentation with a good word-processed document with almost no errors, section headings with page numbers, appropriate headers and footers, equations, diagrams, tables etc. English is of a scholarly style with a natural flow from one section to the next. Full Conclusions leave the reader fully satisfied of the findings. Referenced material is included English standard is excellent – readable with limited rereading necessary. Sections are clearly delineated. Conclusions are sound. Minimal typographical / grammar / spelling standards mistakes. English standard is good – readable with some rereading necessary. Sections are delineated. Conclusions are sound. Some minor typographical / grammar / spelling standards mistakes. Understandable but lacking in clarity and finesse. No real section delineation. Professionalism is questionable Content is not clear and there is no real logical order to placement of sections and no professionalism