Construction project planning and delivery

Department of Mechanical and Construction Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Environment

MCE | Learning and Teaching Version 2.0 | Page 1 of 4

Coursework Specification

1 Module Information

1.1 Module Title Construction project planning and delivery

1.2 Module Code Number KB7039

1.3 Module Level and Credit Points 7 20 credits

1.4 Module Leader Hazel Ponton

1.5 Assessment Component Number (on Module Specification) 01

1.6 Assessment Weighting (on Module Specification) 100%

1.7 Coursework Title Solutions to a construction industry problem

1.8 Coursework Specification Author Hazel Ponton

1.9 Academic Year and Semester(s) 2020-2021 Semester 2 only

2 Coursework Submission and Feedback

2.1 Release Date of Coursework Specification to Students W/c 25th January 2021

2.2 Mechanism Used to Disseminate Coursework Specification to Students eLP

2.3 Date and Time of Submission of Coursework by Students 11:59 pm 10th May 2021

2.4 The mechanism for Submission of Coursework by Students eLP

2.5 Return Date of Unconfirmed Internally Moderated Mark(s) and Feedback to Students 7th June 2021

2.6 The mechanism for Return of Unconfirmed Internally Moderated Mark(s) and Feedback to
Students eLP

MCE | Learning and Teaching Version 2.0 | Page 2 of 4

3 Assessment Details

3.1 Module Learning Outcomes (MLOs) Assessed by Coursework

What will I be expected to achieve?

Knowledge & Understanding:

MLO1 – Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the work-based practice through the analysis and
evaluation of research-based theory and relevant case studies, by formulating solutions to the effective
and efficient delivery of construction engineering projects.

Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:

MLO2 – Critically evaluate innovative approaches to product, process and services delivery in
construction engineering through consideration of theory and practice.

Personal Values Attributes:

MLO3 – Formulate strategies for improvement within the global construction engineering industry to
demonstrate cultural, ethical and sustainable awareness.

3.2 Coursework Overview

The assessment requires you to consider a single existing problem related to poor productivity in the
construction industry, relating to one of the 8 forms of lean waste. Once you have selected a single
problem and can define the problem in relation to lean waste, you need to critically analyse the potential
solutions formulated from the module and provide considered solutions to the problem, with clear links
between the problem and the potential solutions.

3.3 Coursework Tasks to be Completed by Students

You will produce an individual illustrated journal of no more than 6no. A3 pages (landscape) (Excluding
front page, Content page and Reference List). The illustrated journal needs to include all of the following:

1. Select a single construction industry problem related to poor productivity and one of the 8 forms of lean

waste discussed during the module, include a short description and a statement that clearly and concisely

defines the scope of the problem in the boundaries of this module.

2. Justify (through good quality industry and academic literature) why this is a problem, who the problem affects,

and the impact of the problem on a project/industry.

3. Critically analyse possible solutions to the problem from learning during this module AND independent

research.

4. Create a visual illustration that links the problem to the solutions, i.e. fishbone diagram, mind map or

another suitable visual tool.

5. Create a visual improvement model which summarises HOW the problem can be solved.

6. The illustrated journal should use an effective combination of text AND images to provide an interesting and

visually engaging document. All images should be relevant and of an appropriate size and quality.

The illustrated journal should include cited, good quality academic literature and industry literature.
The content should be guided by the learning outcomes, the marking criteria and the learning from
this module.

3.4 Expected Size of Submission

An individual illustrated journal of no more than 6no. A3 pages (landscape) (Excluding front page,
Content page and Reference List). If more than 6 pages of content are provided, only the first 6 pages will
be marked and assessed. The illustrated journal is to include approximately 50% text (using font size 10)
and approximately 50% images of appropriate size.

MCE | Learning and Teaching Version 2.0 | Page 3 of 4

3.5 Referencing Style

You are to write your coursework using the Cite Them Right version of the Harvard referencing system.
An online guide to Cite Them Right is freely available to Northumbria University students at:

https://www.citethemrightonline.com/

3.6 Assessment Criteria

Quality of presentation (including the ability to generate audience interest) 10%
Depth of analysis of the industry problem 30%
Selection and analysis of possible solutions 40%
Ability to relate the problems to the solutions (visual illustration) 10%
Quality and originality of the improvement model. 10%

4 Referral

The Referral Attempt opportunity will generally take place after the end-of-level Progression and Awards
Board (PAB). If you become eligible to complete a Referral Attempt but are subsequently unable to
undertake the opportunity when required, you will be permitted to re-sit the module at the next scheduled
sitting of the module assessment. This will typically entail the suspension of your progression on your
programme of study until such time that you have completed the level and become eligible to proceed.

5 Guidance for Students on Policies for Assessment

The University has several policies for assessment. The following information, which is available to you
from the link below, provides guidance on these policies, including relevant procedures and forms.

(1) Assessment Regulations and Policies
(a) Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards
(b) Group Work Assessments Policy
(c) Moderation Policy
(d) Retention of Assessed Work Policy
(e) Word Limits Policy

(2) Assessment Feedback
(a) Anonymous Marking Policy

(3) Late Submission of Work and Extension Requests
(4) Personal Extenuating Circumstances
(5) Technical Extenuating Circumstances
(6) Student Complaints and Appeals
(7) Academic Misconduct
(8) Student Disability and Unforeseen Medical Circumstances

https://www.northumbria.ac.uk/about-us/university-services/academic-registry/quality-and-teaching-
excellence/assessment/guidance-for-students/

https://www.citethemrightonline.com/

MCE | Learning and Teaching Version 2.0 | Page 4 of 4

KB7039 Construction Project Planning and Delivery – Component 1

Name ………………………………… Mark:

OUTCOMES I CAN’T BELIEVE
IT!

[ 100%]

WOW! [ 85%] DISTINCTIVE [ 75%] COMMENDABLE [
65%]

PASS [ 55%] FAIL [ 45%] POOR FAIL [ 0%]

Quality of
presentation

(including the ability
to generate
audience interest)

10%

This work is of
outstanding quality

and has surprised
the markers.

Shows deeper learning
than would normally be

expected.

Excellent and very
clear with few

problems.

Very good and
reasonably clear with

some problems.

Quite a few problems
but overall the

message was received

Too many problems so
the presentation was

unclear.

Very poor with little
ability to express the

ideas in a clear and
interesting manner.

Depth of analysis of

the industry
problems
30%

A good attempt with

few mistakes – the
student clearly
understands the

problems.

A good attempt with

some mistakes – the
student’s
understanding is

generally good

Some attempt with

some mistakes – the
student’s
understanding is

acceptable.

Little attempt with

many mistakes – the
students show little
understanding.

Very little effort has

gone into this – the
student shows no real
understanding.

Analysis of possible
solutions

40%

The student has an
excellent grasp of

possible solutions.

The student has a
good grasp of possible

solutions although
there are some minor
problems.

The student does not
fully grasp the

solutions but there is
some merit in what is
said.

The student is not able
to analyse solutions

though there is
evidence of a fair
attempt.

The student has little
or no grasp of the

issues.

Ability to relate the
problems to the
solutions (visual)

10%

Solutions are clearly
and cogently linked to
problems.

Solutions arise from
problems in most
instances although

there is some lack of
clarity.

Some linkage of
solutions and problems
but the work lacks

depth.

Evidence of only
surface understanding
of linkages.

Little evidence of ability
to derive the solutions
from the problems.

Clarity and

relevance of the
improvement model
10%

The clarity of

expression and
cogency of the
argument are generally

excellent with few
problems.

The clarity of

expression and
cogency of the
argument are generally

good though there are
a few problems.

The clarity of

expression and
cogency of the
argument are generally

acceptable but there is
some confusion.

The work lacks clarity

and cogency – difficult
to follow

The work is confusing

and has little merit.

Feedback – 3 areas of good practice, 3 areas for potential improvement: