Professional Documents
Culture Documents
OM 2071 CW1
OM 2071 CW1
You are required to word process this assessment.
Instructions:
References 10
UCLan External
2nd Verificati Examiner
1st Marker Marker* on Initials
Name: Name: Name: Name:
Date: Date: Date: Date:
* 2nd Marking on sample basis. Please note that all marks are provisional subject to confirmation by the Module
Assessment Board of the University of Central Lancashire, UK.
Task
The students are requested to conduct a virtual tour or visit any of the manufacturing
company and prepare a 1500 words report based on machinery hazards.
1. Introduction
2. Mechanical Machinery hazards
3. Noise hazards analysis of Machineries
4. Control measures of Mechanical Machinery Hazards
5. Control measures of Noise Hazards
6. Conclusion
Guidelines:
1. The report should normally contain an introduction and conclusion sections with
appropriate sections explaining the above details.
3. Page setup margins normal. Use A4 paper size settings and use 2.5cm margins all
around, Leave the Gutter at 0 cm.
4. Body text is Arial 12 point, single-spaced with no paragraph spacing attached before
or after. Text is left justified. Leave one blank line between paragraphs.
6. All symbols and abbreviations must be defined and used only when absolutely
necessary.
7. The number of words must be shown at the end of the work submitted. The title
page and contents page will not count; neither will the list of reference at the end of
the work.
10. You are advised to different references to complete this assignment, some of which
need to be books.
11. Remember that the style of your work, and its language accuracy, are indicators of
how much care you have given to the assignment, and how capable are you in
expressing your thoughts in a presentable and professional way.
12. The piece of course work should be submitted using TurnitinUK in UCLan
blackboard.
13. The module tutor would take decision to evaluate your work based on the similarity
index from the Turnitin submissions, however there is no acceptable limit and it’s
based on the judgement.
14. There are nominal marks allotted for the document structure and format of the report
and it’s important to follow all the assessment instruction while preparing.
15. There is no possible extension allowed beyond the due date for submissions in the
blackboard Turnitin.
Referencing
The College uses an online Assessment Tool called Turnitin. Students are
required to self-submit their own assignment on Turnitin and will be given access
to the Originality Reports arising from each submission.
The accepted similarity percentage for an assessment is about 10%. However,
the case may still be reported for investigation if the similarity percentage is
below 10% subject to the Module Tutor's academic judgment.
Similarity percentages above 10 % will be reported to the Unfair Means to
Enhance Performance Committee subject to the discussion with the Module
Tutor/justification from the Module Tutor. The case may or may not be formally
investigated.
Assignment briefs will include clear instructions about word counts. Students are
expected to adhere to the word count requirements for each assessment. If
students exceed these word count limits, they may receive a reduction in marks
as follows.
For written assignments that exceed a word count limit by
0-10% - no penalty
+>10.1% - 20% : 2.5% reduction in mark
+>20.1% - 30% : 5% reduction in mark
+>30.1% - 40% : 7.5% reduction in mark
+>40.1% - 50% : 10% reduction in mark
+>50.1% - 60% : 12.5% reduction in mark
+>60.1% - 70% : 15% reduction in mark
+>70.1% - 80% : 17.5% reduction in mark
+>80.1% - 90% : 20% reduction in mark
+>90.1% - 100% : 22.5% reduction in mark
>100%: 25% reduction in mark but no student will fail an assessment because of
a penalty for exceeding the word limit.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) will breach the academic regulations when: “Using
technological aids and AI, including translation software, paraphrasing tools, text
generating software (essay bots), and tools to generate graphics or artworks, without
specific authorisation.” (source QAA April
Initial Key Principles for Students on the use of Artificial Intelligence
Using AI under the tutor’s guidance will be acceptable in certain situations but
students need to ensure that they comply with the academic regulations on
Academic Integrity.
Ensure the use of the AI tool is in line with the assessment brief and any further
advice from the tutor setting the assignment.
Do not rely solely on AI tools to complete assignments. Use AI tools to enhance
your work, not as a replacement for it.
Acknowledge the extent to which AI has been used as part of referencing their
sources, clarifying the contribution of AI to make clear what is their own work.
Students have to cite AI tool they used (such as ChatGPT) and describe how
they used it.
Avoid assuming that AI responses are always accurate. AI-generated information
may sometimes be inaccurate or misleading.
Keep drafts to evidence the thinking and development of the work if requested.
Students may be asked to respond to questions to test their knowledge of their
assessed work.
Failure to follow this advice may lead to allegations of academic misconduct and
will impact students’ ability to defend themselves.
Marking Criteria
The course work will be assessed and graded on the overall report submitted and
weightage is indicative to knowledge, analysis, supporting evidences, presentation
of the overall piece of work. However, the more weightage of marks is allotted to the
main elements of the report as mentioned above.
LEVEL FIVE
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title.
Knowledge and understanding is impressive and
(80-100%) reflects extensive reading. Citation and
referencing are impeccable. Theory and evidence
are invariably related. Argument is always
relevant and well sustained. The student
LEVEL FIVE
demonstrates a willingness to challenge received
wisdom and to sustain a dialogue in these terms.
Presentation is highly sophisticated and in an
appropriate format.
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title.
Knowledge and understanding is impressive and
(70-79%) reflects wide reading. Citation and referencing are
excellent. Theory and evidence are clearly
related. Argument is relevant and well sustained.
The student demonstrates a willingness to
challenge received wisdom and to sustain a
dialogue in these terms. Presentation is
sophisticated and in an appropriate format
UPPER SECOND Written work is directly relevant to the title. The
knowledge base is judged sound and relevant.
(60-69%) The student is judged to be developing an ability
to relate theory and evidence, concepts and
ideas. Content is always relevant and well
presented, and generally well focused, but can
lack breadth or depth. Material is well presented
and in an appropriate format. Citation and
referencing are very good.
LOWER SECOND Written work is predominantly directly relevant to
the title. Knowledge base is sound but
(50-59%) unimpressive. Occasional analysis but generally
cannot rise above well-articulated assertion.
Alternatively, some analysis but can lack clarity of
focus. Occasional grammatical lapses. Material is
well presented and in an acceptable format,
although a few deficiencies are apparent. Citation
and referencing are generally sound but may
contain some errors.
THIRD Written work is relevant but largely descriptive.
Student appears not to grasp the difference
(40-49%) between assertion and analysis, or may see
nothing wrong on offering unjustified, perhaps
polemical assertions. Written work may contain
some analysis but is poorly expressed. Syntax
and grammar sometimes unsound. Competent
LEVEL FIVE
presentation and an acceptable format, although
deficiencies are clearly evident. Citation and
referencing are present but may contain quite a
few errors.
COMPENSATABLE At least 40% of material presented is relevant but
FAIL there may be limited reference to the question. A
generally poor but compensatable answer with
(35-39%) extensive errors and omissions, or a substantial
answer on the general topic in which the specific,
central question is misinterpreted or avoided, or a
very good essay in note form. Presentation is
poor and sometimes inarticulate. Limited
evidence of appropriate reading but citation and
referencing must be present, there may be a
substantial number of errors.
UNCOMPENSATABLE At least 40% of material presented is relevant but
FAIL there may be limited reference to the question. A
generally weak answer with extensive errors and
(30-34%) omissions, or a quite substantial answer on the
general topic in which the specific, central
question is misinterpreted or avoided.
Presentation is poor and often inarticulate. Little
evidence of appropriate reading but citation and
referencing must be present, there may be a
substantial number of errors.
FAIL Less than 40% of material presented is relevant.
A very weak answer with extensive errors and
(20-29%) omissions, or an insubstantial answer on the
general topic in which the specific, central
question is seriously misinterpreted or avoided, or
a good essay in note form. There is only partial
understanding demonstrated. Presentation is
poor, often inarticulate and sometimes
incomprehensible. Very limited evidence of
background reading; citation and referencing may
be absent.
FAIL An exceptionally poor answer with extensive
errors and omissions and limited evidence of
(10-19%) relevant knowledge, or a weak essay in note
LEVEL FIVE
form, or an answer that ignores the question to an
extent that hardly any of the content can be
construed as being relevant to the general topic
of the question. Presentation is very poor, often
inarticulate and incomprehensible. No evidence of
background reading.
FAIL Answer not attempted, or limited to only a few
paragraphs, or a very weak answer in note form,
(0-9%) or of little or no relevance to the general topic of
the question. Zero is reserved for failure to
attempt an answer, or no, or late submission.