Curtin Engineering

Assessment and Feedback Specification

Unit: ENGR2000 Fluid Mechanics
Title: Assessed Group Exercise (also known as ‘Group Mini-Project’)
Activity: Students work in a group to investigate and report upon a Fluid-mechanics application of their choice. This
activity serves to evaluate student attainment in Unit Learning Outcomes 3, 4 and 5 (see unit outline) with the level
of learning defined as ‘Application’ (Use of a learned concept to resolve some situation or solve a new problem in an
appropriate way)
For a detailed Assessment description and specification of work to be done see briefing sheet on BlackBpard in
the area entitled Group Mini-Project

Assessment criteria and marking distribution and Engineers Australia competencies addressed
Value of the assessment based on the rubric provided below is 10% (of total unit assessment)
The total assessment mark awarded is made up of the marks awarded to each element assessed.
Each item of the assessment in the rubric shows the EA competencies (ENGINEERS AUSTRALIA Stage 1 competencies)
to be demonstrated. ‘Level of learning’ (Levels of learning) is specified for those elements of the assignment when it is
appropriate.

Detailed guidelines and feedback

This detailed assessment rubric sets out assessment expectations so that you will be aware of the competencies to
be developed and the expected standards. This table will also be used for assessing your work to provide sufficient
feedback on how you performed against these standards. This sheet is NOT the assignment cover sheet.

Item Engineers Australia Excellent standard < Competency range > < Unsatisfactory

assessment
Percentage
competencies 1 standard
and (if appropriate) (meets all expectations Highest Lowest (fails to meet minimum
Level of Learning 2 set out below) expected)

of
Quality / Knowledge accessed
1.1. Science/Engineering Irrelevant or wrong
Relevance relevant to topic of
fundamentals information. All
of investigation. Information
1.2. Conceptual information obtained from
Information from reliable (peer-
understanding a single source 20%
Accessed reviewed) sources.
Understanding of Poor understanding of
Interpretation
theory/concepts evident. theory/concepts.
and
1.2. Conceptual Theory related to topic is Theory related to topic is
Synthesis of
understanding coherent. Excellent not coherent. Gaps
Information 30%
meshing of information evident between different
accessed
from different sources. sources of information.
Absence of structure in the
Well-structured report
report and/or over or
meeting page limit.
under length. Excessive
Written clearly, correctly
reliance on cut-and-paste
Presentational 3.2. Communication (use of English) and
material. Poor use of
Quality of Report 3.3. Creativity succinctly. Excellent use of
written expression and 30%
figures and (self-
figures/schematics. Source
generated) schematics.
material not or incorrectly
Correct use of references
referenced.
Evidence that the team
has had sufficient No evidence/record of
Effectiveness of meetings and allocated team meetings, imbalance
3.6. Team work
Team-Working tasks so as to optimise the of work allocated within
20%
quality of the final the team.
outcome.

Expected time required after completion of all necessary preparation to complete this assessment 15 hours (per group) of
focused work.
Overall mark awarded ___________ out of a maximum of _____________
Marker comments (continued overleaf if necessary)

Marker: …………………………………… Date of return: …………….. Student : Group members as written on assignment cover sheet.

Assessment Specification and Marking Schedule 1