Coursework Title: Group poster presentation Module Information Module Title: Research, Analysis and Presentation Module Code: KD4014 Module Tutor: Academic Year: 2023-24 Northumbria University NEWCASTLE Dates and Mechanisms for Assessment Submission

and Feedback Date of hand out to students: Mechanism to be used to disseminate to students: via e-learning portal Date and Time of submission by student: Mechanism for submission of work by student: Submit an electronic version to Blackboard (elp). Present a hardcopy version of the poster at a live session. Date by which work, feedback and marks will be returned to students: by w/c Mechanism(s) for return of assignment work, feedback and marks to students: Written feedback via email and oral feedback following presentation. Assignment Brief Learning Outcomes assessed in this assessment: AHEP4 C4: Search technical literature and evaluate information on a given research topic. AHEP4 C16: Understanding of the need to work effectively in a team and disseminate information clearly. AHEP4 C17: Communicate technical information about a research topic by written report and oral presentation. Bloom's taxonomy (domain and verbs relevant examples using the 2001 revised model) Domain Create Evaluate Analyse Apply Understand Remember Verbs Design, Create, Invent Select, Critique, Defend Organise, Examine, Use, Demonstrate, Sketch Describe, Explain, Discuss Memorise, List, State Clear statement of the work that students are expected to undertake: You are required to prepare and deliver a group poster presentation on an open topic. You can choose a subject area that is interesting to you and relevant to your course. The choice of topic must be agreed by all group members. The topics include but are not limited to renewable energies, power, communication systems, electronics, condensed matter, soft matter, solar magnetohydrodynamics, dynamical systems or smart materials and surfaces etc. The presentation must convey a technical or scientific message. As part of the assignment, you are expected to explore the background literature (1) and answer the questions (2-5) in relation to the chosen topic: 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology/topic operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology/topic have (if applicable)? 5. What is the current state of research and possible future development on this topic? Additional Instructions to students: The group poster presentation should be approximately 15 minutes in duration for a group of 5 students (or 12 minutes for a group of 4) and should cover the background literature and questions (2-5 above) in the assignment brief. You will need to submit an electronic version of your poster to the Blackboard (elp) submission point. You will also need to print an A0 version of your poster to present at a live session with your 15-minute explanation of the poster. Group formation: this assignment will be carried out in groups of five students. The module tutor will allocate groups of four students, if needed. You must submit a grouping by Assessment Criteria/Mark Scheme: No Item ● 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. ● Quality of background research (poster + presentation) Content and Adventure (poster) Layout (poster) Delivery and Q&A (presentation) Timing Total Your presentation should last 15 minutes (or 12 minutes for a group of 4) and should reflect a balanced allocation of time to each speaker. The assessment of the presentation timing will be done following the following criteria: Mark scheme (%) 15 25 20 30 10 100 10% for presentations within 1.5 minute of the 15-minute allocation. 5% for presentations within 2 minutes of the 15-minute allocation. 0% for presentations that fall short or exceed 15 minutes by more than 2 minutes Expected size of the submission: The poster presentation is one PowerPoint (or equivalent) slide based on A0 dimensions in the template provided. Do not exceed this limit. Assignment weighting: This assignment is worth 50% of the module marks. Referencing Style: If you need to use any references, please do so and reference them using an appropriate style (Harvard or APA or British standards). Assessment Regulations: You are advised to read the guidance for students regarding assessment policies. They are available online here. Late submission of work: The University requires all students to submit assessed coursework by the deadline stated in the assignment brief. Where coursework is submitted without approval, after the published hand-in deadline, the following penalties will apply (link here). For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment shall be deducted from the assessment mark. Coursework submitted more than 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval will be regarded as not having been completed. A mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment and the module will be failed, irrespective of the overall module mark. These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis. The full policy can be found here. Academic Misconduct: The Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards (ARTA) contain the Regulations and procedures applying to cheating, plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct. You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion and other forms of academic misconduct as referred to in the Academic Misconduct procedure of the assessment regulations are taken very seriously. Assignments in which evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct is found may receive a mark of zero. Further Information on Mark Scheme: Quality of background research Content 86-100% Exemplary research into the topic. •Evidenced by a diverse set of citations from peer-reviewed and reputable sources. Comments extensively on an active research area. Exemplary content reflective of in-depth background research. Addresses the key questions below in exceptional detail with appropriate citations. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have? 70-85% Excellent research into the topic. Evidenced by a select set of citations from peer-reviewed and reputable sources. Comments on an active research area not covered in the lectures. Excellent content reflective of detailed background research. Addresses the key questions below in high detail ideally with the support of citations. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have? 60-69% Good research into the topic. •Evidenced by a diverse set of citations but very few are from peer-reviewed journals. Comments briefly on an active research area. Good content reflective of detailed background research. Addresses the key questions below in sufficient detail but some parts may be missing. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have? 50-59% Sound levels of research into the topic. •Evidenced by a diverse set of citations but almost none from peer-reviewed journals. May not cover any recent research developments and focuses on historical literature. Sound content reflective of some background research Addresses the key questions below but significant parts may be missing. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have? 40-49% Acceptable levels of research. Citations are not diverse and may be from unreliable sources e.g. Wikipedia. No mention of current research and developments. Acceptable content reflective of minor background research. Addresses one or two of the key questions below but significant parts may be missing or not relevant. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have? 0-39% Unacceptably low levels of research below even the level of having read just the provided materials. •No to little citations No mention of current research. Unacceptable content reflective of no additional background research Addresses barely any of the questions in any detail. 1. Background literature. 2. How does the device/technology operate and what are the fabrication methods (if applicable)? 3. What are the underlying theories (if applicable)? 4. What applications does the device/technology have?