ECC589: ENGINEERS IN SOCIETY

Service-Learning Malaysia University for Society (SULAM)

1.0 Introduction
Service-Learning Malaysia University for Society or known as SULAM is an initiative that
provides a learning experience by integrating theory and practice to expose students to real-
world problem solving in the community which is based on love, happiness, and mutual
respect. The continuous assessment for SULAM is divided into two parts namely: (1) A Case
Study (Interim Report & Presentation) (CO2-PO8) and (2) Integrated Society Project (ISP)
(Final Report & Video Montage) (CO1-PO6). The percentage distribution for both
assessments can be referred to Table 3 in Section 6.
2.0 Objective of SULAM through ISP
The main objective of SULAM is to enable students to contribute to the community by applying
knowledge and skills learned in the classroom to help solve local problems. It is one of the
important agendas in Ministry of Higher Education to be translated at the university level and
can be considered as a noble effort by the university in producing holistic graduates by
engaging them in helping the local community.
Currently, SULAM is being integrated in the Engineers in Society course (ECC586 /ECC589)
for EC220 Civil Engineering programme which is offered in the final year of the curriculum
through a project-based learning (ProjBL) known as Integrated Society Project (ISP).
Engineers in Society course consists of 2 credits with continuous assessment (without
test/examination).
The ISP is a group project of NOT MORE than 5 students per group.
3.0 Course Outcomes (CO), Programme Outcomes (PO) and Complex Engineering
Problems (WP) & Knowledge Profiles (WK)
There are two (2) course outcomes (CO) and two (2) programme outcomes (PO) integrated
with complex engineering problems (WP) and knowledge profiles (WK) as shown the mapping
in Table 1.
Complex Problem Characteristics/
Course Outcomes Programme Outcomes
Taxonomy level
CO1: Engage with PO6: Engineers in WP1- in-depth engineering knowledge at the
the community as a Society - Apply level of one or more of WK3, WK4, WK5, WK6 or
prospective civil reasoning inf ormed by WK8 which allows a fundamental based, first
engineer in solving contextual knowledge to principles analytical approach
problems involving assess societal, health,
the civil saf ety, legal and cultural
Required WKs are:
engineering issues and the
prof ession. consequent WK3: A systematic, theory-based formulation of
responsibilities relevant engineering fundamentals required in the
to prof essional engineering discipline
engineering practice and
solutions to complex WK4: Engineering specialist knowledge that
engineering problems provides theoretical frameworks and bodies of
knowledge for the accepted practice areas in the
(WK7).
engineering discipline; much is at the forefront of
the discipline.
WK6 Knowledge of engineering practice
(technology) in the practice areas in the
engineering discipline
WK7: Comprehension of the role of engineering
in society and identified issues in engineering

1|Pa g e
 practice in the discipline: ethics and the
prof essional responsibility of an engineer to
public safety; the impacts of engineering activity:
economic, social, cultural, environmental and
sustainability
WK8: Engagement with selected knowledge in
the research literature of the discipline
WP2 – Involves wide-ranging or conflicting
technical, engineering and other
issuer/requirements
WP3 – Depth analysis required: No obvious
solution and requires abstract thinking, originality
in analysis to formulate suitable model.
WP4: Unfamiliar or infrequently encountered
issues
WP6 – Extent of stakeholder involvement:
Diverse groups of stakeholders with widely
varying needs/conflicting requirements

CO2: Comprehend PO8: Ethics - Apply Af fective Domain – A4 (Organization)

the ethical and ethical principles and
WK7: Comprehension of the role of engineering
prof essional commit to professional
in society and identified issues in engineering
conduct that guide ethics and
practice in the discipline: ethics and the
a civil engineer’s responsibilities and
prof essional responsibility of an engineer to public
prof essional norms of engineering
saf ety; the impacts of engineering activity:
practice and practice (WK7)
economic, social, cultural, environmental and
service to the
community. sustainability

4.0 Learning Outcome (LO)

At the end of the ISP, the students should be able to:
1. Identify specific community (ies) that need help related to civil engineering practices.
2. Observe the selected community’s activities and engage with the community
3. Apply critical thinking based on Design Thinking approach to identify and define problem
(s) that can be solved as prospective civil engineers followed by design/develop solution (s)
to the problem and get feedbacks from the community on the proposed solution for further
improvement.
5. Adopt ethical and professional behavior that guides the professional practice and
services of civil engineers to the community.
6. Present your ISP activities using various tools required (Case study, interim & final report,
and video montage).

5.0 Specific Tasks

As a group, you are required to participate in a structured service activity (community project)
related to civil engineering that meets identified community needs through complex
engineering problem solving using the Design Thinking process. In addition, you must be able
to comprehend the role of engineering ethics and the professional responsibility of an engineer
to public safety; the impacts of engineering activity: economic, social, cultural, environmental
and sustainability.

The overall DT process is shown below.

2|Pa g e
5.1 DT Process

Design thinking is needed to produce engineers who have the knowledge and experience
specifically needed to prepare the graduates to build a unique array of personal, inter-personal
and system – building experiences.

Figure 1 shows the Design Thinking process flow. It emphasises “deep user understanding”
through detailed survey/ observation of users and subsequent analysis of the data colle cted.

Figure 1: Design Thinking Process (Hasso-Plattner Institute of Design, University of

Stanford)

A systematic DT process are as follows:

Stage 1: Empathy

Students must find out the key problems of the situation given through an empathy study.
Students need to observe what people/community do and how they interact with their
environment that contributes to the problem. Besides that, students need to do as much as
possible the observations in relevant contexts, engage, watch, and listen from many sources
such as media, you-tube, interview, books, research paper and other relevant and validated
sources.

Stage 2: Define

The students need to define the purpose of the project or assignment, the challenge they are
taking on, based on what they have learned from the previous step (empathy study). After
becoming an instant expert on the subject and gaining invaluable empathy, this stage is about
making sense of the widespread information that have been gathered. The g oal of the “define”
mode is to create a meaningful and actionable problem statement. This should be a guiding
statement that focuses on insights and needs of a specific problem. This stage is critical to the
design process because it based on their new understanding of problem.

Stage 3: Ideate

At this stage, the students concentrate on idea generation. They will come out with many
suggestions to solve the problems through many brainstorming sessions and propose
possible solutions that may help to solve the user’s problem. Concept sketches can be drawn
to capture the ideas. Particularly early in a design project, ideation is about pushing for a
widest possible range of ideas from which they can select, not simply findings a single best

3|Pa g e
solution. The determination of the best solution will be discovered later, through user testing
and feedback (prototype stage).
Stage 4: Prototype

In order to avoid losing all the innovation potential, students need to b ring multiple ideas
forward into prototyping, thus maintaining their innovation potentials. At this stage, all the
possible solutions are presented for comments from the facilitator, group members and
community. Then, the feedback obtained used to refine the proposed solution. For instance,
if (during ideation) the team discovers that they do not really have enough understanding of
the user requirements to propose a good solution, they may have to repeat the “Empathy”
studies.

Stage 5: Test
Test used as an opportunity to understand the problem. The purposes of conducting the test
are:

- To refine prototypes and solutions;

- Testing informs the next iterations of prototypes. Sometimes this means going
back to the drawing board;
- To learn more about your user;
- Testing is another opportunity to build empathy through observation and
engagement – it often yields unexpected insights;
- To refine your Point of View (POV);
- Sometimes testing reveals that not only did you not get the solution right, but
also that you failed to frame the problem correctly.

The tasks are to be carried out based on a systematic DT process as shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Details of tasks for both case study and ISP

No Task Notes
1 Identif y the specific or key problems of the situation faced CO1-PO6
by the chosen community/society within economic, social, WP1: Depth of
cultural, environmental and sustainability contexts and the Knowledge (WK3,
consequent responsibilities relevant to professional civil WK4, WK6 & WK7)
engineering practices. WP4: Unf amiliarity
Issues);
2 Observe what the community do and how they interact with CO2-PO8
EMPATHY STAGE

their environment that contributes to the problems and perform WK7

a detail assessment of the problem supported by relevant WP2: conflicting
and validated sources and highlighting conflicting requirements).
requirements by various stakeholders.
Note: You need to do as much as possible the observations in
relevant contexts, engage, watch, listen and read/refer from WK8: Research
many sources such as media, you-tube, interview, books, Literature)
research paper, reports, press statement, online news etc.
3 Engage with specified industrial linkages to conduct the CO1-PO6
assessment on the community problems and describe the WP6: Extent of
industrial linkage and community engagement stakeholder
involvement

4|Pa g e
 4 Def ine the purpose of the ISP, the challenges you are taking on CO1-PO6
and making sense of the widespread issues and inf ormation WP1: Depth of
that have been gathered including the justification of standards Knowledge
DEFINE STAGE

and codes of practice.

Note:
Based on what you have gained learned f rom the empathy
stage create a meaningful and actionable problem statement
as a guiding statement that focuses on insights and needs of a
specific problem. This stage is critical to the design process
because it based on their new understanding of problem.

5 Generate ideas to come out with many (multiple) suggestions WP3: Depth of
to solve the problems. Carry out many brainstorming sessions analysis – Non-
and propose possible solutions that may help to solve the obvious solutions
community’s problems.

Note:
IDEATION STAGE

Ideation is an early stage in a design project in pushing for a

widest possible range of ideas from which you can select, and
NOT SIMPLY findings a single best solution The determination
of the best solution will be discovered later, through user testing
and f eedback (prototype stage)

6 Discuss in detail, potential ethical issues, and prof essional CO2-PO8

misconduct (based on the code of conduct by prof essional WK7: Comprehension
bodies) among engineers when implementing your proposed on issues &
solution and propose solution on how to overcome the identified approaches
ethical issues and misconducts

Submission of Interim Report (Week 6)

7 Submit an interim report f or Tasks 1 to 6 above using the CO1-PO6
INTERIM

specified format of report as described in Section 7.0 CO2-PO8

WK7: Comprehension
on issues &
approaches
8 Discuss the multiple ideas f orwarded into prototyping to CO1-PO6
maintain your innovation potentials. At this stage, all possible
solutions are presented f or comments by each member of the WP3: Depth of
groups and by the stakeholders to obtain their f eedback to Analysis
ref ine the proposed solution.
PROTOTYPE STAGE

WP6: Extent of
9 • Design an innovative Civil Engineering solution to the stakeholder
problem and produce the proposed innovative solutions involvement
(are also known as “quick and dirty prototypes”) in f orm of
a model, drawing, simulation, a video, a skit, a comic strip
or simply a good sketch or any other suitable means.
• Identif y with justification the challenges f rom the relevant
authorities’ regulations to the professional engineering
practices and propose solutions to overcome them.

10 Build a f unctional prototype

11 • Engage and obtain the user/community or user’s feedback WP6: Extent of

to ref ine/improve the proposed solution stakeholder
TESTING

• Engage the user/community to test-drive/operate/use the

STAGE

involvement
f inal product or service
12 Present your comprehensive assessment f or the case study
through group presentation. (Week 10)

5|Pa g e
 Submission of Final Report (Week 14)
13 • Extend the Interim Report indicating all Tasks 1 - 6 in the CO1-PO6
Case Study into Final Report (adding Tasks 8 – 15)
• Report on the activities conducted displaying the industrial
linkages and community engagement
• Conduct the survey questionnaire of the activity’s feedback
bef ore and after program
FINAL

• Fill up the Borang Pelaporan Impak (Lampiran 2 in the

Course Content)
• Submit the final report that follows the existing format as per
interim report.
14 Create a video montage projecting all the activities conducted CO2-PO8
during interim until the f inal report which should be made with
maximum duration of 3 minutes and in a f orm of .mp4 saved
f ile.

6|Pa g e
6.0 Assessment
The assessments are carried out by the lecturer and project mentor based on the four (4) tools
with the allocation of percentage as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Mapping of CO-PO, Assessment, tool, percentage of mark distribution and person-
in-charge (PIC)
No CO-PO Taxonomy Assessment Tool % PIC
Level/WP/WK
1 CO1- C5-C6/ WP&WK Case Study Interim Report 10% Lecturer
PO6 (C6/WP&WK)
CO2- A4 Presentation 20% Lecturer
PO8 (A4)
2 CO1- C5-C6/ WP&WK Integrated Final Report 60% Lecturer
PO6 Society Project (C6/WP&WK)
CO2- A4 (ISP) Video Montage 10% Lecturer
PO8 (A4)

7.0 Format of Report

Specific format for the interim and final report:
No Section/Item Interim Final
A Front Page – Names, UiTM no, Group, Name of Project
B Table of Contents
C List of Tables and Figures
Content of report shall follow the given tasks: (Please refer to the rubrics – App. A)
D • Introduction/Background of Project (Task 1a) Max 1 Max 1 page
• Evaluation of identified problems (Task 1b) page

• Observation and Assessment of Problem (Task Max 1 Max 2 pages

2a). page
• Discussion on the contradicting requirement by
different stakeholders and explain the nature of
conflicts between the technical, engineering and
other issues (due to the rules and regulations of
authorities, code of professional practices, health
and safety regulations, stakeholders’ varying
needs, etc.) relevant to the problems. (Task 2b)
• Brief description of the industrial linkage and Max 1 Max 1 page
community engagement. (Task 3) page
• Identification and justification of standards and Max of 1 Max of 1
codes of practice relevant to the problem. (Task page page
4)

• Generation of ideas to come out with many Max of 1 Max 2 pages

(multiple) suggestions to solve the problems. page
Explain the conduct of brainstorming sessions

7|Pa g e
 and propose possible solutions that may help to
solve the community’s problems (Task 5)

• Identification and elaboration of potential ethical Max of 1 Max 2 pages

issues and professional misconducts and page
propose solution on how to overcome the
identified ethical issues and misconducts (Task
6a)
• Identify with justification the challenges from the
relevant authorities’ regulations to the
professional engineering practices and propose
solutions to overcome them. (Task 6b)

• Detail discussion on the multiple ideas forwarded Max of 1 Max of 2

into prototyping with possible solutions are page pages
presented for comments by each member of the
groups and by the stakeholders to obtain their
feedback to refine the proposed solution. (Task
8)
• Explanation on the proposed innovative solutions Max of 1 NA
(are also known as “quick and dirty prototypes”) page
in form of a model, drawing, simulation, a video,
a skit, a comic strip or simply a good sketch or
any other suitable means. (Task 9)
•
Detail final design and elaboration on an NA Max of 2
innovative Civil Engineering solution (prototype, pages
system, process, model) to the problem (Task
10)
• Engagement with user/community to test the Max 1 Max 2 pages
solutions to the problems (Task 11) page
E Task 13
• Report on the activities conducted displaying the NA Max 1 page
industrial linkages and community engagement
• Conduct the survey questionnaire of the activity’s
feedback before and after program
• Action plan for the activities (including the readily Max. of 1
of the survey questionnaire for activity feedback) page
• Fill up the Borang Pelaporan Impak (Lampiran 2 Appendix
in the Course Content) Lampiran 2
• Timeline Appendix
• General format: Font: Arial (size 11 single
spacing)
• References Max of 1 Max of 1
page page
Maximum pages including References 10 pages 18 pages

8|Pa g e
8.0 Video Montage

The video must clearly show all the activities conducted during interim until the final report and
should be made with maximum duration of 3 minutes and in a form of .mp4 saved file. (Task
17)

9.0 Performance Criteria Matrix

The assessment of the case study and ISP are based on the performance criteria matrix in
Appendices.

Appendix A: PCM for Case Study (Interim Report) – 10%

Appendix B: Final Report (60%)
Appendix C: PCM for Presentation of Case Study – 20%
Appendix D: PCM for Video Montage – 10%

Prepared by:

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Che Maznah Mat Isa (Resource Person)

Dr. Mohd Khairul Kamarudin (Lecturer)
Dr. Hamidah Abdull Rahman
SULAM Committee

Updated March 2021

9|Pa g e
 Appendix A: Performance Criteria Matrix for Interim Report (10%)
Performance Criteria Complex Engineering Description of Performance Criteria
Problem
Characteristics/
Taxonomy Level
Introduction/ WP1: Depth of Ability to identify the specific or key problems of the situation faced by the chosen community/society within
Background of Study Knowledge Required = economic, social, cultural, environmental and sustainability contexts and the consequent responsibilities based on
(Task 1a) in-depth engineering specified knowledge profiles namely: (WK3: Engineering Fundamental; WK4: Specialist Knowledge, WK6 -
a. Identif ication of key knowledge at the level of Engineering Practices; WK7-comprehension and WK8 – literature research)
problems using one or more of WK3, 1 2 3 4 5
relevant Knowledge WK4, WK5, WK6 or Very Poor Poor Satisfactory Good Very Good
Prof iles WK8 (WK’s) Acceptable
(CO1-PO6) f undamental, first Demonstrate only Demonstrates only Good demonstration Excellent demonstration
demonstration of all
principles analytical two (2) or less three (3) specified of all four (4) of all four (4) specified
f our (4) specified
approach specified of WKs WKs specified WKs WKs
WKs
Problem Statement Ability to evaluate the infrequently encountered issue/problem under various circumstances related to economic,
(Task 1b) WP4: Familiarity of social, cultural, health, safety, legal, environmental and sustainability relevant to professional civil
Evaluation of the issues: engineering practices towards providing effective solutions.
identified problems Inf requently encountered
1 2 3 4 5
(CO1-PO6) issues
Evaluate 1 Evaluate 2 Evaluate 3
Evaluate more than 3
No evaluation of circumstances with circumstances with circumstances with
circumstances with
any circumstance acceptable acceptable acceptable
acceptable justification
justif ication justif ication justif ication
Observation and WP2: Conflicting Ability to carry out the observation what the community do and how they interact with their environment that
Assessment of requirement: Wide- contributes to the problems and perform a detail assessment of the problems supported by relevant and
Problem (Task 2a) ranging or conflicting validated sources, data and information (pictures, interviews, primary/secondary data, reports, press statement,
technical, engineering, online news etc.)
(CO1-PO6) and other issues 1 2 3 4 5
Supported by 2
Lack of
sources literature Supported by 2 Supported by 3 Supported by more than
supporting
search but not sources of literature sources of literature 3 sources of literature
sources (not valid
relevant and search search search
and not relevant)
validated

10 | P a g e
Task 2b: Ability to highlight the contradicting requirement by different stakeholders and explain the nature of conflicts
between the technical, engineering and other issues (due to the rules and regulations of authorities, code of
Highlighting and WP6: Extent of
professional practices, health and safety regulations, stakeholders’ varying needs, etc.) relevant to the
explaining the nature stakeholder
problems.
of conflicts relevant to involvement and
the problems conflicting 1 2 3 4 5
requirements = diverse Provide technical, Provide technical, Provide technical, Provide technical, Provide technical,
(CO1-PO6) groups of stakeholders engineering, and engineering, and engineering, and engineering, and engineering, and other
with widely varying other issues with other issues with other issues with other issues with issues with
needs poor explanation quite acceptable acceptable excellent comprehensive
on the nature of explanation on the explanation on the explanation on the elaboration on the
conf lict between nature of conflict nature of conflict nature of conflict nature of conflict
at least 2 between at least 2. between 2. between 3 between more than 3.
Task 3: Engagement Ability to engage with specified industrial linkages to conduct the assessment on the community problems and
with specified able to describe the industrial linkage and community engagement
stakeholders 1 2 3 4 5
(CO1-PO6) High level of High level of High level of
Poor level of
No engagement/ engagement and engagement and engagement and
engagement with
description of the comprehensive comprehensive comprehensive
some description of
engagement description of the description of the description of the
engagement
engagement engagement engagement
Task 4: Def inition of WP5: Extent of Ability to define the purpose of the ISP, the challenges you are taking on and making sense of the widespread
ISP, challenges faced applicable codes: issues and information that have been gathered including the justification of standards and codes of practice.
and justification on outside problems 1 2 3 4 5
standards/codes of encompassed by Acceptable
practices standards and codes of No def inition of Lack of definition of Good definition of
def inition of ISP Well-def ined ISP with
(CO1-PO6) practice ISP and no ISP with poor ISP with good
with acceptable excellent justification
justif ication justif ication justif ication
justif ication
Task 5: Initial Stage of WP3: Depth of analysis Ability to generate ideas to propose many suggestions/possible solutions that may help to solve the community’s
Design/Development No obvious solution and problems by carrying out many brainstorming sessions
of Solutions require abstract thinking,
1 2 3 4 5
(CO1-PO6) originality in analysis to
f ormulate suitable Generate only 2 Generate only 3 Generate 4 Generate 4
Generate more than 4
models ideas/suggestions ideas/suggestions ideas/suggestions ideas/suggestions
ideas/suggestions to
to solve the to solve the to solve the to solve the
community’s community’s community’s community’s solve the community’s
problems
problems problems problems problems

11 | P a g e
Task 6a: Elaboration C5 – Evaluation Ability to elaborate in detail on potential ethical issues and professional misconduct (based on the standards, rules
of potential ethical C6 – Create/Synthesis and regulations, code of conduct by professional bodies) among engineers when implementing your proposed
issues and solution
professional WK7: Comprehension 1 2 3 4 5
misconducts of the role of engineering
Lack of Acceptable
in society and identified Some elaboration of Good elaboration of Comprehensive
elaboration with elaboration of 3
Task 6b: Proposal on issues in engineering only 2 potential 4 potential ethical elaboration of more
only 2 potential potential ethical
how to overcome the practice in the discipline: ethical issues and issues and than 4 potential ethical
ethical issues and issues and
potential ethical ethics and the prof essional prof essional issues and professional
prof essional prof essional
issues and prof essional misconducts misconducts misconducts
misconducts misconducts
professional responsibility of an
misconducts engineer to public safety; Ability to propose solution on how to overcome the identified potential ethical issues and professional misconducts
(CO2-PO8) the impacts of
engineering activity: 1 2 3 4 5
economic, social, Poor proposal Acceptable Acceptable
Good proposal with Excellent proposal with
cultural, environmental with no proposal with poor proposal with
justif ication clear justification
and sustainability justif ication justif ication justif ication
Task 8: Discussion WP3: Depth of Analysis Ability to discuss the multiple ideas forwarded into prototyping to maintain the innovation potentials. At this stage,
on the multiple ideas No obvious solution and all possible solutions are presented for comments by each member of the groups and by the stakeholders to
forwarded into require abstract thinking, obtain their feedback to refine the proposed solution.
prototyping originality in analysis to
CO1-PO6 f ormulate suitable 1 2 3 4 5
models Acceptable In-depth and good
Very poor Poor discussion on discussion on discussion on In-depth and
WP6: Extent of discussion on multiple (only 2 multiple (more than multiple (more than comprehensive
stakeholder
only 1 idea with dif ferent ideas) with 2 dif ferent ideas) 3 dif ferent ideas) discussion on multiple
involvement and irrelevant lack of relevant with relevant with relevant (more than 4 different
conflicting
comments by the comments by the comments by the comments by the ideas) with relevant
requirements = diverse member of the members of the members of the members of the comments by the
groups of stakeholders
groups with NO group with NO group with at least group with at least members of the group
with widely varying community’s community one round of one round of with at least two rounds
needs
f eedback to refine f eedback to refine community’s community’s of community’s feedback
the proposed the proposed f eedback to refine f eedback to refine to ref ine the proposed
solution solution the proposed the proposed solution
solution solution

12 | P a g e
Task 9: Explanation WP3: Depth of analysis Ability to explain on the proposed innovative solutions (are also known as “quick and dirty prototypes”) in form of a
on the proposed No obvious solution and model, drawing, simulation, a video, a skit, a comic strip or simply a good sketch or any other suitable means.
innovative solutions require abstract thinking,
1 2 3 4 5
originality in analysis to
f ormulate suitable Clear and
Very poor Acceptable Clear and
models Poor explanation in substantial
explanation explanation in a comprehensive
a f orm suitable explanation in a
without any form f orm of suitable explanation in a form of
means f orm of suitable
of suitable means means suitable means
means

13 | P a g e
 Appendix B: Performance Criteria Matrix for Final Report (60%)
Performance Criteria Complex Engineering Description of Performance Criteria
Problem Characteristics/
Taxonomy Level
Task 1: Introduction/ WP1: Depth of Knowledge Ability to identify the specific or key problems of the situation faced by the chosen community/society
Required = in-depth within economic, social, cultural, environmental and sustainability contexts and the consequent responsibilities
Background of Study engineering knowledge at based on specified knowledge profiles namely: (WK3: Engineering Fundamental; WK4: Specialist
a. Identif ication of key the level of one or more of Knowledge, WK6 -Engineering Practices; WK7-comprehension and WK8 – literature research)
problems using WK3, WK4, WK5, WK6 or
1 2 3 4 5
relevant Knowledge WK8 (WK’s) f undamental,
f irst principles analytical Very Poor Poor Satisfactory Good Very Good
Prof iles
approach Demonstrate Acceptable
Demonstrates only Good demonstration Excellent demonstration
(CO1-PO6) only two (2) or demonstration of all
three (3) specified of all four (4) of all four (4) specified
less specified of f our (4) specified
WKs specified WKs WKs
WKs WKs
WP4: Familiarity of
Task 1b: Problem issues: Ability to evaluate the infrequently encountered issue/problem under various circumstances related to
Statement economic, social, cultural, health, safety, legal, environmental and sustainability relevant to professional
Inf requently encountered civil engineering practices towards providing effective solutions.
Evaluation of the issues
identified problems 1 2 3 4 5
Evaluate 1 Evaluate 2 Evaluate 3
(CO1-PO6) No evaluation of Evaluate more than 3
circumstances with circumstances with circumstances with
any circumstances with
acceptable acceptable acceptable
circumstance acceptable justification
justif ication justif ication justif ication
Task 2a: Observation WP2: Conflicting Ability to carry out the observation what the community do and how they interact with their environment that
and Assessment of requirement: Wide- contributes to the problems and perform a detail assessment of the problems supported by relevant and
Problem ranging or conflicting validated sources, data and information (pictures, interviews, primary/secondary data, reports, press statement,
technical, engineering, online news etc.) and highlighting conflicting requirements by various stakeholders.
(CO1-PO6) and other issues 1 2 3 4 5
Lack of Supported by 2
supporting sources literature Supported by 2 Supported by 3 Supported by more than
sources (not search but not sources of literature sources of literature 3 sources of literature
valid and not relevant and search search search
relevant) validated

14 | P a g e
Task 2b: Ability to highlight the contradicting requirement by different stakeholders and explain the nature of conflicts
between the technical, engineering and other issues (due to the rules and regulations of authorities, code of
Highlighting and
professional practices, health and safety regulations, stakeholders’ varying needs, etc.) relevant to the
explaining the nature problems.
of conflicts relevant to
1 2 3 4 5
the problems
Provide
(CO1-PO6) WP6: Extent of technical, Provide technical, Provide technical, Provide technical, Provide technical,
stakeholder involvement engineering and engineering and engineering and engineering and engineering and other
and conflicting other issues other issues with other issues with other issues with issues with
requirements = diverse with poor quite acceptable acceptable excellent comprehensive
groups of stakeholders explanation on explanation on the explanation on the explanation on the elaboration on the
with widely varying needs the nature of nature of conflict nature of conflict nature of conflict nature of conflict
conf lict between between at least 2. between 2. between 3 between more than 3.
at least 2
Task 3: Engagement Ability to engage with specified industrial linkages in order to conduct the assessment on the community
with specified problems and able to describe the industrial linkage and community engagement
stakeholders 1 2 3 4 5
(CO1-PO6) High level of High level of High level of
No Poor level of
engagement and engagement and engagement and
engagement/ engagement with
comprehensive comprehensive comprehensive
description of some description of
description of the description of the description of the
the engagement engagement
engagement engagement engagement
Task 4: Def inition of WP5: Extent of Ability to define the purpose of the ISP, the challenges you are taking on and making sense of the widespread
ISP, challenges faced applicable codes: outside issues and information that have been gathered including the justification of standards and codes of practice.
and justification on problems encompassed 1 2 3 4 5
standards/codes of by standards and codes of
practices practice
Acceptable
No def inition of Lack of definition of Good definition of
(CO1-PO6) def inition of ISP Well-def ined ISP with
ISP and no ISP with poor ISP with good
with acceptable excellent justification
justif ication justif ication justif ication
justif ication

15 | P a g e
Task 5: Final Stage WP3: Depth of analysis Ability to generate ideas to propose many suggestions/possible solutions that may help to solve the community’s
of Design/ problems by carrying out many brainstorming sessions
Development of No obvious solution and
Solutions require abstract thinking, 1 2 3 4 5
originality in analysis to Generate only 2 Generate only 3 Generate 4 Generate 4
Generate more than 4
(CO1-PO6) f ormulate suitable models ideas/suggestio ideas/suggestions ideas/suggestions ideas/suggestions
ideas/suggestions to
ns to solve the to solve the to solve the to solve the
solve the community’s
community’s community’s community’s community’s
problems
problems problems problems problems
Ability to elaborate in detail on potential ethical issues and professional misconduct (based on the standards,
rules and regulations, code of conduct by professional bodies) among engineers when implementing your
proposed solution
Task 6a: Elaboration C5 – Evaluation
of potential ethical 1 2 3 4 5
issues and Lack of
Acceptable
prof essional elaboration with Some elaboration of Good elaboration of Comprehensive
elaboration of 4
misconducts only 2 potential only 3 potential 4 potential ethical elaboration of more than
potential ethical
ethical issues ethical issues and issues and 4 potential ethical issues
Task 6b: Proposal on issues and
and prof essional prof essional and professional
prof essional
how to overcome the prof essional misconducts misconducts misconducts
potential ethical issues misconducts
misconducts
C6 – Create/Synthesis
and professional Ability to propose solution on how to overcome the identified potential ethical issues and professional
misconducts misconducts
(CO2-PO8) 1 2 3 4 5
Poor proposal Acceptable Acceptable
Good proposal with Excellent proposal with
with no proposal with poor proposal with
justif ication clear justification
justif ication justif ication justif ication
Task 8: WP3: Depth of Analysis Ability to discuss the multiple ideas forwarded into prototyping to maintain the innovation potentials. At this
No obvious solution and stage, all possible solutions are presented for comments by each member of the groups and by the stakeholders
Discussion on the require abstract thinking,
multiple ideas to obtain their feedback to refine the proposed solution.
originality in analysis to
forwarded into 1 2 3 4 5
f ormulate suitable models
prototyping Very poor Poor discussion on Acceptable In-depth and good In-depth and
(CO1-PO6) WP6: Extent of discussion on multiple (only 2 discussion on discussion on comprehensive
stakeholder involvement multiple (only 1 dif ferent ideas) with multiple (more than multiple (more than discussion on multiple
and conflicting idea) with lack of relevant 2 dif ferent ideas) 3 dif ferent ideas) (more than 4 different
requirements = diverse irrelevant comments by the with relevant with relevant ideas) with relevant

16 | P a g e
 groups of stakeholders comments by members of the comments by the comments by the comments by the
with widely varying needs the member of group with NO members of the members of the members of the group
the groups with community group with at least group with at least with at least two rounds
NO f eedback to refine one round of one round of of community’s feedback
community’s the proposed community’s community’s to ref ine the proposed
f eedback to solution f eedback to refine f eedback to refine solution
ref ine the the proposed the proposed
proposed solution solution
solution

Task 9: Explanation WP3: Depth of analysis Ability to explain on the proposed innovative solutions (are also known as “quick and dirty prototypes”) in form of
on the proposed No obvious solution and a model, drawing, simulation, a video, a skit, a comic strip or simply a good sketch or any other suitable means.
innovative solutions require abstract thinking, 1 2 3 4 5
originality in analysis to
f ormulate suitable models Very poor Clear and
Acceptable Clear and
explanation Poor explanation in substantial
explanation in a comprehensive
without any a f orm suitable explanation in a
f orm of suitable explanation in a form of
f orm of suitable means f orm of suitable
means suitable means
means means
Task 10: Ability to provide a detail design of an innovative CIVIL ENGINEERING SOLUTION (product/prototype/model,
process, system) to the problems to resolve infrequently encountered issues faced by the community
Detail final design
1 2 3 4 5
and elaboration on
an innovative Civil Proposed an
Engineering solution Proposed a good Proposed an
Proposed a poor acceptable
(Task 10) (CO1-PO6) Proposed a and an innovative outstanding and a very
CIVIL innovative CIVIL
NON-CIVIL CIVIL innovative CIVIL
ENGINEERING ENGINEERING
ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING
SOLUTION with SOLUTION with
SOLUTION SOLUTION with SOLUTION with detail
poor elaboration acceptable
some elaboration elaboration
elaboration

Task 11: WP6: Extent of Ability to engage with user/community to test the solutions to the problems and to get constructive/practical
Engagement with stakeholder involvement feedback to improve the proposed innovative solution.
user/community to and conflicting 1 2 3 4 5

17 | P a g e
test the solutions to requirements = diverse No engagement High level of
Low level of Acceptable level of Good level of
the problems and to groups of stakeholders with lack of engagement with
engagement with engagement with engagement with
get f eedbacks for with widely varying needs elaborations comprehensive
elaborations on 2 elaborations on 3 good elaborations
improvement constructive/ elaborations of more
constructive/ constructive/ on 3 constructive/
practical than 3 constructive/
Elaboration on new practical feedback practical feedback practical feedback
f eedback practical feedback
relevant issues
pertaining to the Ability to elaborate on new relevant issues relating to professional engineering practices (PEP) for effective
ef f ective implementation of the proposed solution
implementation of the 1 2 3 4 5
proposed solution
Provide new Provide 2 new Provide more than 3
(CO2-PO8) Provide at least 1 Provide 3 new
issues but not issues relevant to new issues relevant to
new issue relevant issues relevant to
relevant to PEP. PEP with PEP with
to PEP with brief PEP with good
acceptable comprehensive
elaboration, elaboration
elaboration elaboration
Task 13: Final Report (CO1-PO6) Ability to submit a complete and quality report based on the following elements (1) Extension form Interim
Report to Final Report, (2) Include activities conducted displaying the industrial linkages and community
i. Extend the Interim Report indicating all items 1-
engagement and (3) Submit a final report that follows the required format
9 in the Case Study into Final Report (adding
1 2 3 4
Tasks 10 – 16) 5
ii. Report on the activities conducted displaying the A very poor
industrial linkages and community engagement An acceptable A good, complete, A comprehensive and
report and A poor report that
quality report that and high-quality high-quality report that
A f inal report that follows the required format lacking the almost fulfills all
f ulf ills all three report that fulfills all f ulf ills all three
three three requirements
requirements three requirements requirements
requirements

18 | P a g e
 Appendix C: Performance Criteria Matrix for Video Montage (10%) (CO2-PO8)
Performance Criteria Complex Engineering Problem Very Poor Poor Satisfactory Good Very Good
Task 16 Characteristics/ Knowledge
1 2 3 4 5
Profile/ Taxonomy Level
Ability to provide a very clear picture of the activities and description of the final project
A. Presentation of CO2-PO8 Has brainstormed the Moderate clear Has a very clear
Has a clear picture of
Concept, Activities Affective Domain – A4 Little effort in refining concept but no clear picture of the picture of the activities
the activities and
and Description of (Organization) the concept and focus and project activities and limited and adequate
adequate description
Project unclear goals description has no description of the final description of the final
of the final project
clear definition project project
B. Problem Statement CO2: Comprehend the ethical Ability to provide problem statement and the purpose or theme creatively and clearly in a compelling, ethical and
and Purpose/Theme and professional conduct that professional manners
guide a civil engineer’s 1 2 3 4 5
professional practice and service
to the community. Very poor problem
Poor problem Acceptable problem
statement and
statement and statement and Very clear problem
purpose or theme Clear problem
purpose or theme purpose or theme statement and purpose
PO8: Apply ethical principles and having no creativity, statement and purpose
having lack of having some or theme and very
commit to professional ethics not compelling and or theme and creative,
creativity, less creativity, quite creative, very
and responsibilities and norms of very much lacking in compelling, ethical and
compelling, ethical compelling, ethical compelling, ethical and
engineering practice (WK7) ethical and professional manners
and professional and professional professional manners
professional
manners manners
manners
C. Video Quality LO4: Adopt ethical and Ability to capture audience’s attention by producing a quality video through ethical and professional coordination and
professional behavior that guides transitions
the professional practice and 1 2 3 4 5
services of civil engineers to the Bad video quality Video was made with Video was not Video was coordinated Video was well
community. with unedited and little editing and many properly coordinated but with improper coordinated and edited
bad transitions poor shots remain with improper editing editing process with proper use of
WK7: : Comprehension of the Capture a bit of process Capture attention transitions
role of engineering in society and attention (70% - 80% Capture some (Most of the time 89% Capture full attention
identified issues in engineering of the time attention (70% - 80% to 90%) (All the time 90%–
practice in the discipline: ethics of the time 100%)
and the professional
D. Conformance to the responsibility of an engineer to Ability to adopt the ethical and professional behaviours to produce a video within the required duration and to make proper
Duration Requirement public safety; the impacts of reference/ citation and acknowledgement
by adopting ethical and engineering activity: economic,
1 2 3 4 5
professional behavior social, cultural, environmental
and sustainability Less than 1 minute Less than 2 minutes Exactly 2 minutes Between 2-3 minutes Exactly 3 minutes
without any with lacking reference with acceptable with substantial according to the
reference and and reference and references and requirement with
acknowledgement acknowledgement acknowledgement acknowledgement. rightful references and
acknowledgement.

19 | P a g e
 Appendix C: Performance Criteria Matrix for Presentation (20%) (CO2-PO8) & LO3
Performance Criteria Complex Engineering Problem 1 2 3 4 5
Characteristics/ Knowledge Very Poor Poor Satisfactory Good Very Good
Profile/Taxonomy Level Description of Performance Criteria
A. Delivery of Ideas CO2-PO8 Ability to deliver ideas to solve the identified problems to fulfil the societal needs and requirements.
Affective Domain – A4 (Organization)
1 2 3 4 5
Not able to deliver Able to deliver ideas Able to deliver ideas Able to deliver ideas Able to deliver ideas with
ideas clearly and no but lack in confidence fairly, clearly and clearly and confidently great clarity and with
CO2: Comprehend the ethical and
professional conduct that guide a civil confidences which thus requires further confidently which great confidence
requires major improvements requires minor
engineer’s professional practice and
service to the community. improvements. improvements

B. Demonstration of Ability to demonstrate the ethical and professional behavior that guides the professional practice and services of civil engineers to the
Ethical and Professional community based on the solutions provided
Behaviors
PO8: Apply ethical principles and 1 2 3 4 5
commit to professional ethics and Very poor reflection on Poor reflection on Acceptable ethical and Good ethical and Excellent demonstration
responsibilities and norms of ethical and ethical and professional professional behaviours professional behaviours ethical and professional
engineering practice (WK7) professional behaviours behaviours
behaviours
C. Participation of group Ability of all group members to show active roles during the presentation (that reflect behaviour that guides the professional practice and
member that reflect services of civil engineers to the community based on the solutions provided)
behavior in guiding the LO3: Adopt ethical and professional
behavior that guides the professional 1 2 3 4 5
professional practice and
services practice and services of civil Focus of the Not all group members Partial of the group All group members have All group members have
engineers to the community. presentation is on one have an active role in members have an active a relatively active role in an active role in the
group member only the presentation role in the presentation the presentation presentation

D. Comprehension of the WK7: Comprehension of the role of Ability to understand and comprehend the role of engineers in society on identified issues related to ethics and professional responsibility
role of engineers in engineering in society and identified of an engineer to public safety and impacts of engineering activities
society on identified issues in engineering practice in the 1 2 3 4 5
issues related to ethics discipline: ethics and the professional
and professional responsibility of an engineer to public Very poor Poor understanding and Adequate understanding Good understanding and Excellent understanding
responsibility safety; the impacts of engineering understanding and comprehension on the and comprehension on comprehension on the and comprehension on
activity: economic, social, cultural, comprehension on the identified issues related the identified issues identified issues related to the identified issues
environmental and sustainability identified issues related to ethics and related to ethics and ethics and professional related to ethics and
to ethics and professional professional responsibilities professional
professional responsibilities responsibilities responsibilities
responsibilities
E. Response to Ability to respond to questions with elaboration on new relevant ethical and professional issues pertaining to the effective implementation
questions with of the proposed solution
elaboration on new Unable to response Poor response with lack Respond well with Respond quite well with Respond very well with
relevant ethical and and no elaboration on of elaboration on issues acceptable elaboration substantial elaboration on comprehensive laboration
professional issues issues on the issues the issues on the issues

20 | P a g e
21 | P a g e