Faculty of Engineering and Environment
|Module title: Construction Technology 3||Module number BE1286|
|Academic year: 2014/15||Semester :||1||2||YL||Credit Points:20|
|F/T Year 4 and P/T Stage 5 – Construction Project Management|
|Year: PT4&FT4||Level: 6||Is this an option module?||Yes||No|
|Coursework title: Building Technology 3 Portfolio|
|Learning Outcomes measured in this assessment (from the Module Descriptor):
On completion of the module, students will be able to:
|Background information / introduction (& how this assessment fits the overall strategy):
The purpose of this module is to provide students with a critical appreciation of the technologies used to construct sustainable and contemporary buildings. Consideration will be given to the criteria that dictate appropriateness of building form and constructability within the constraints imposed by context, functionality, and legislative requirements. An integrated and evaluative approach to sustainable assessment criteria and the technological specification of building elements will be applied. Learning will be via a case study approach to engender learning in context and practice.
|Nature of the submission required:
Full Time 4 and Part Time 5 :
Assessment is in the form of a portfolio which addresses strategic, application and testing of technology solutions set in the context of the final year project building and a local ‘significant’ building in the North East of England of your choice.
Part time 4 :
Assessment is in the form of a portfolio which addresses strategic, application and testing of technology solutions set in the context of, and applied to a project with which you are, or have recently, been involved with and a local ‘significant’ building in the North East of England of your choice.
|Instructions to students:
The portfolio will be assembled by the student to record and illustrate their learning through the semester and should include the following as a minimum:
– or –
Carry out a detailed critical evaluation of the technology used in the construction of your chosen building. Your evaluation should include (but not be limited to) background information on the building to set your evaluation in context, a consideration of the construction technology used, how the chosen technology enables the building to meet its functional performance criteria and an appraisal of emerging and innovative technologies used in its construction.
The portfolio is to be structured in such a way that each of the sections listed above are clearly identified within it.
The portfolio will be marked against achievement of the learning outcomes of the module and using the grading matrix below. The following weighting is applied for each section of the portfolio as follows:
|Maximum size of the submission (word length, number of pages, etc):
The portfolio is to be no larger than 20 sides of A3, excluding cover sheet, contents page, reference list and back page.
Additional information :
Academic Integrity Statement: You must adhere to the university regulations on academic conduct. Formal inquiry proceedings will be instigated if there is any suspicion of plagiarism or any other form of misconduct in your work. Refer to the University’s Assessment Regulations for Northumbria Awards if you are unclear as to the meaning of these terms. The latest copy is available on the University website.
Failure to submit: Note that failure to submit work or submission of work after the required deadline without an authorised late approval will result in a record of incomplete (IC) for the assessment component. Referral in that component will then be required even when the module is passed overall.
|% assessment weighting in the module: 50%|
|Date of handout to students:
This coursework brief will be made available to the students, via the eLP, on Monday 19th January 2015. In addition, the content will be discussed during the first lecture of semester 2.
|Date and time of submission by student:
|Date of return to students:
BE1286Portfolio Assessment Criteria Student No:
||Introduction supported by an excellent analysis of learning achievements||Good introduction and attempt at an analysis of learning achievements.||Intro and exec summary are not well considered and descriptive rather than analysed||Poorly considered intro and exec summary||Not attempted or contents not relevant to the assessment|
|Excellent analysis of major meeting points, with fully justified choices and their influence on working practices, buildability principles, logical sequences and acceptable tolerances..
|Good analysis of major meeting points with some justification of choices and their influence on working practices, buildability principles, logical sequences and acceptable tolerances..
|Analysis is not clear and key issues are poorly described or lacking in detail||Poor analysis with influences on project decisions not well defined||Not attempted or contents not relevant to the assessment|
|Excellent, fully detailed sketches which clearly illustrate and demonstrate good working practices and principles.||Good standard of detailed sketches which clearly illustrate and demonstrate good working practices and principles.||Sketches do not fully describe or illustrate good working practices and principles. Lacking detail.||Details are brief and of a poor standard. Not fully describing or illustrating principles. Lacking in detail.||Not attempted or contents not relevant to the assessment|
|Excellent critical evaluation and understanding of chosen technology used to meet functional performance issues and appraisal of emerging and innovative technologies.||Good critical evaluation and understanding of chosen technology used to meet functional performance issues. Good appraisal of emerging and innovative technologies.||Evaluation not fully detailed. Little evaluation of technology or how it meets the functional performance issues. Little appraisal of emerging and innovative technologies.||An attempt is made but is brief, poor in quality, unclear in places and lacking in sufficient detail.||Not attempted or contents not relevant to the assessment|
||Professional standard, excellent balance of quality text and images, accurately and fully referenced.||Good standard, an attempt is made to balance image and text and to reference correctly||Text and images poorly balanced, text is poor and contain frequent mistakes, referencing not to standard||Poor standard, lack of referencing||Extremely poor submission, not to standard expected.|