ASSESSMENT BRIEF 2023-2024

Programme: BSc (Hons) Health, Safety and Environmental Management

Module Code/Module Title: OM 3075 / Introduction to Research and Innovation
Module Tutor: Rasha A. Abdelrahim
Assessment Title/ Number: OM3075-CW2
Date of Issue: 11th February 2024
Date of Submission: 2nd May 2024

Date of Presentation: w/s

(Tick in the appropriate box)

You are encouraged to word process your assessment, although handwritten work
is acceptable.
You are required to word process this assessment. 
You are required to submit this assessment electronically through Turnitin in the

module’s area on the blackboard.

Instructions:

 This paper contains one (1) task.

 Answer the questions / complete the tasks fully with all possible evidence for achieving
the learning outcome/s.
Please do not submit this assessment brief with your work.

Page 1 of 10
 ASSESSMENT COVER SHEET 2023-2024
Programme: BSc (Hons) Health, Safety and Environmental Management
Module Code/Module Title: OM 3075 / Introduction to Research and Innovation
Module Tutor: Rasha A. Abdelrahim
Assessment Title/ Number: OM3075-CW2
Date of Issue: 11th February 2024
Date of Submission: 2nd May 2024

Date of Presentation: w/s

(Tick in the appropriate box)

I confirm that this piece of work which I have

Question/ Task Max. Mark Mark in Percentage
submitted is all my own work and that references
Proposed Project Title 5 5%
and quotations from both primary and secondary
sources have been fully identified and properly Research Rationale 5 5%
acknowledged. I am fully aware that plagiarism
and collusion are academic offences. Aim(s) and Objectives 10 10%
I also confirm that I have not used translation
A Brief Literature 10 10%
services or translation software in the production of
Review
this assignment.
Element of Originality 5 5%
Student’s signature:
Date: Proposed Programme 55 55%
of Work (methods and
Please note the following penalties for late techniques (20),
analyses (10) data (10)
submission: timescale(5)
Date of Facilities, Equipment 5 5
Submission Maximum Mark and Permissions /
Authorisations
1-5 working days References 5 5
late 40%
More than 5 Total 100 100%
working days late 0%

External Examiner
1st Marker 2nd Marker* UCLan Verification Initials
Name: Name: Name: Name:
Date: Date: Date: Date:
* 2 Marking on sample basis. Please note that all marks are provisional subject to confirmation by the
nd

Module Assessment Board of the University of Central Lancashire, UK.

Page 2 of 10
Task 1: Research Proposal (60%)
Overview:

This assignment includes one task a research project proposal of no less than 2500
words. You are required to write a formal proposal outlining the research project you
want to conduct in your final year. Usually, the proposal expands upon your initial
coursework CW1 (Literature Review). However, if you like, you may write your
proposal on a different subject.

Below are the details of your assignment’s tasks:

The student is expected to design and apply research methods and innovative ideas
to solve HSE issues in the industry and prepare a detailed proposal accordingly. The
2500-word proposal prepared for the individual research project the student will
undertake in their final year. The proposal must include research design, data
collection, analysis, and interpretation through a research study etc.

This research project proposal of 2500 words should follow the template attached to
this document, which includes:
1. Proposed project/ dissertation title
2. Hypothesis
3. Aim(s) and objectives.
4. A brief literature reviews.
5. Element of originality
6. Proposed programme of work (methods and techniques which you intend to use
to gather, analyse and present your data (including timescales)
7. Facilities, equipment, and permissions/ authorisations
8. References

General Guidelines:

1. Use preferably Microsoft Word for word processing.

2. The section headings
3. The pages should be numbered according to the section required, starting with
the introduction page.
4. The number of words must be stated at the end of the work submitted.
5. Referencing: Referencing is a system that allows you to acknowledge the
contributions of others in your writing. Whenever you use ANY sentences, ideas
Page 3 of 10
 or information (e.g., map drawings, photographs, illustrations, diagrams etc.)
from ANY source in your assignments, you must reference those sources. This
means that if you use the exact phrase or a sentence of an author, if you
paraphrase their words or if you summarise their ideas, you must provide a
reference. Not referencing your sources means you may be charge with
plagiarism and your work could be deemed as fail. For citation and referencing,
follow the Harvard referencing system strictly.

Assessment and Marking Criteria

Mark (out
No. Section % Grade band
of 100)
1 Proposed Project Title 5
2 Research Rationale 5
3 Hypothesis 5
4 Aim(s) and Objectives 5
5 A Brief Literature Review 10
6 Element of Originality 5
7 Proposed Programme of Work
(Methods and techniques (25),
analyses (15) data (10)
timescale (5) 55
8 Facilities, Equipment and
5
Permissions / Authorisations
9 References 5
Total 100 Total mark

LEVEL Six
PASSING GRADES
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title. Knowledge and
understanding is comprehensive in both breadth and depth. Student
(80-100%) demonstrates an exceptional ability to contextualise, to critically
appreciate concepts and their inter-relationship, and/or to relate theory
with evidence. Exceptional ability to apply, in the right measure, the
skills necessary to achieve a desired outcome. Evidence of very
extensive, if not exhaustive reading and study beyond the course
content. Clear evidence of independent thought. The presentation is
highly sophisticated, fluent and accurate and in an appropriate format.
The material is presented in a focused way, so as to help sustain the
argument. Citation and referencing are impeccable. The work may be
as good, if not better, than you imagine a professional tutor could write,
and is possibly of publishable quality.
FIRST Written work is directly relevant to the title. Knowledge and
understanding is comprehensive in both breadth and depth. Student
(70-79%) demonstrates a clear ability to contextualise, to critically appreciate
concepts and their inter-relationship, and/or to relate theory with
evidence. Outstanding ability to apply, in the right measure, the skills
necessary to achieve a desired outcome. Evidence of extensive

Page 4 of 10
 reading and study beyond the course content. Clear evidence of
independent thought. The presentation is highly sophisticated, fluent
and accurate and in an appropriate format. The material is presented
in a focused way, so as to help sustain the argument. Citation and
referencing are impeccable.
UPPER SECOND Written work is directly relevant to the title. The knowledge-base is up-
to-date and relevant, but may also be broad or deep. Work reflects a
(60-69%) thorough grasp of concepts and of the inter-relationship, and a
significant ability to relate theory to practice. The presentation is very
good and in an appropriate format, the material generally well-focused,
reflecting a high degree of literacy. Arguments may sometimes be
outstanding and reflective of genuine independent thought but are not
always consistently at that level. Material is very well presented and
citation and referencing are very good.
LOWER SECOND Written work is directly relevant to the title. Arguments may be
generally relevant but not necessarily comprehensive. The student
(50-59%) displays an awareness of what concepts are, but the ability to
conceptualise, and/or to relate theory to evidence, is clearly limited.
Frequent use of assertion rather than argument. Grammar and spelling
sound, but perhaps with occasional lapses. Material is well presented
and in an appropriate format. Citation and referencing are generally
good but may contain some errors.
THIRD Written work is predominantly relevant to the title. Knowledge is
adequate but limited and/or superficial, with a tendency to inaccuracy.
(40-49%) Limited awareness of concepts. Limited ability to contextualise, and to
relate theory to evidence. Frequently, evidence (which may be
accurate) is deployed superficially with lack of focus. Almost always
offers description/assertion rather than argument. Grammar may be
poor, or the linkage between paragraphs may be weak. Competent
presentation and an acceptable format, although deficiencies are
clearly evident. Citation and referencing are present but may contain
quite a few errors.
FAILING GRADES
COMPENSATABLE FAIL At least 45% of material presented is relevant but there may be limited
reference to the question. A generally poor but compensatable answer
(35-39%) with 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. Little evidence of appropriate reading but
citation and referencing must be present, although there may be a
substantial number of errors. (Note – absence of citation and
referencing at Level 3 must be regarded as a clear failure and must be
awarded <30%)).
UNCOMPENSATABLE At least 40% of material presented is relevant but there may be limited
FAIL reference to the question. A generally poor but compensatable answer
with extensive errors and omissions, or a substantial answer on the
(30-34%) 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. Little evidence of appropriate reading but
citation and referencing must be present, there may be a substantial
number of errors. (Note – absence of citation and referencing at Level
3 must be regarded as a clear failure and must be awarded <30%).
FAIL Less than 40% of material presented is relevant. . A generally weak
answer with extensive errors and omissions, or a quite substantial
(20-29%) answer on the general topic in which the specific, central question is
misinterpreted or avoided. Limited 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 relevant knowledge, or a good essay in note form.
(10-19%) Presentation is very poor, often inarticulate and incomprehensible. No
evidence of background reading.

Page 5 of 10
FAIL Answer not attempted, or limited to only a few paragraphs, or of little or
no relevance to the general topic of the question. Zero is reserved for
(0-9%) failure to attempt an answer, or no, or late submission.

The Project Proposal Template 2500 words

1. Proposed Project/ Dissertation Title

2. Introduction
Including:
A. Research Rationale
What is the purpose of your research?

B. Aim(s)
C. Objectives
D. Hypotheses

3. A Brief Literature Review

Place your dissertation in context with the existing literature and identify gaps
in the knowledge that your project addresses (1,000 – 1,500 words)

4. Element of Originality
Explain in what way(s) your proposed research can be considered to be
original work.

5. Proposed Programme of Work

Describe in detail the methods and techniques which you intend using to
gather, analyse and present your data (including timescales)

6. Facilities, Equipment and Permissions / Authorisations

Provide details of the facilities, equipment, and any permission/authorisation
that you require to undertake the research (including any monetary costs)

7. References
Provide references in the Harvard Style.

Academic Misconduct Definitions

 Cheating is any deliberate attempt to deceive and covers a range of offences

described in the ICEM Policy on Unfair Means to Enhance Performance.
 Plagiarism describes copying from the works of another person without suitably
attributing the published or unpublished works of others.

Page 6 of 10
  Collusion is an attempt to deceive the examiners by disguising the true
authorship of an assignment by copying or imitating in close detail another
student’s work - this includes with the other student’s consent and also when 2
or more students divide the elements of an assignment amongst themselves and
copy one another’s answers.
 Re-presentation is an attempt to gain credit twice for the same piece of work.
 Fabrication is making up research data or results and reporting the same.
 Falsification is manipulating the research data or results such that inaccurate
information is reported.

Accepted Similarity Index

 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.

Penalties of Academic Misconduct

All instances or allegations of the use of unfair means within summative assessment will
be investigated in line with the college UMEP policy. If an allegation is found to be
proven, then the appropriate penalty will be implemented:
 For the first time: the penalty will be 0% for the element of assessment, the
plagiarized element of assessment must be resubmitted to the required standard
and the mark for the module following resubmission will be restricted to the
minimum pass mark (i.e. 40%).
 In the event of a repeat offence of cheating, plagiarism, collusion or re-
presentation on the same or any other module within the course; the
appropriate penalty will be 0% for the module with no opportunity for
reassessment and you being able to retake the module in a subsequent year.
 Penalties for Over-length Assignments

Page 7 of 10
 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.
 Academic Misconduct
 Unfair means (which includes cheating, plagiarism, collusion, re- presentation or
using Artificial Intelligence to prepare assignments).
 Cheating is any deliberate attempt to deceive and covers a range of offences
described in the ICEM Policy on Unfair Means to Enhance Performance. Cheating
may include any technique intentionally misused by students in the submitted
reports such as intended misuse of quotation marks, using hidden quotes, hidden
characters and replaced characters.
 Plagiarism describes copying from the works of another person without suitably
attributing the published or unpublished works of others.
 Collusion is an attempt to deceive the examiners by concealing the true
authorship of the student’s work by copying, or imitating another student’s work
in detail. This includes copying other student’s consent with his/her consent. It
also includes when 2 or more students divide the elements of an assignment
amongst themselves and copy one another’s answers.
 Using technological aids and Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, without specific
authorization is considered academic misconduct.

Page 8 of 10
 Re-presentation is an attempt to gain credit twice for the same piece of work.
 Fabrication is making up research data or results and reporting the same.
 Falsification is manipulating the research data or results such that inaccurate
information is reported.
 Academic penalty:
 For the first time: the penalty will be 0% for the element of assessment, the
plagiarized element of assessment must be resubmitted to the required standard
and the mark for the module following resubmission will be restricted to the
minimum pass mark (i.e. 40%).
 In the event of a repeat offence of cheating, plagiarism, collusion or re-
presentation on the same or any other module within the course; the
appropriate penalty will be 0% for the module with no opportunity for
reassessment and you will have to retake the module in a subsequent year.
 Artificial Intelligence Guidance
 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.
Page 9 of 10
 Failure to follow this advice may lead to allegations of academic misconduct and
will impact students’ ability to defend themselves.

Page 10 of 10