Page 1 of 5

UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY

MODULE CODE: ENGM117

MODULE TITLE: Project Delivery and International
Project Management
MODULE ASSESSOR:
ASSIGNMENT One of Two
TITLE OF ASSIGNMENT: Assignment one

PLEASE READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION CAREFULLY.

This assignment contributes 50% to your final module mark.

Please ensure that you retain a duplicate of your assignment. We are required to send samples
of student work to the external examiners for moderation purposes. It will also safeguard in the
unlikely event of your work going astray.

All assignments are to be upload to the relevant Canvas submission link for checking by
TurnItIn.

The following module learning outcomes are assessed by this assignment:

Note: the actual assignment is on page 2

Outcome 1.
A critical understanding of aspects of project delivery
and
Outcome 3.
The ability exploit aspects of project delivery when required.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION
It is your responsibility to ensure that any assessed assignment that you submit does not
infringe the University Academic Misconduct Regulations.

On the module Canvas area, you will be provided with links to the University Academic
Misconduct Regulations and the associated “Academic Integrity and Academic Misconduct - A
Guide”.

By uploading your assessed assignment, including any draft version of the assessed
assignment, you will be confirming that you have read, understood accept both the University
Academic Misconduct Regulations and the associated guidance document.

If required, the University Library can provide advice on how to ensure your assignment does
not infringe the University Academic Misconduct Regulations.

The University Students Union can provide advice on the seriousness of infringing the
University Academic Misconduct Regulations and how this can affect your studies.

Submission Date and time No later than 11:59pm on Friday 19th May
2023
Submission Location Upload to ENGM117 assignment 1
submission area on Canvas

Ian Ridley
March 23
 Page 2 of 5

PROJECT DELIVERY AND INTERNATIONAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT

ENGM117
Assignment One of Two (module weighting 50%)

The Assignment
Your task is to write a critical evaluation of recent academic thinking on the
following.

What are the challenges faced when developing a project business case for projects
like the UN slum upgrading project covered during the module? (around 2300 word)
See the Project Business Case Tutorial 1 page on the ENGM117 Canvas unit’s area.

If you had to use PRINCE2 on the above type of project what would be the principle
challenges? (around 500 words)

Appropriate academic references must be cited within the assignment text to back-up
and validate your discussion.

Appropriate section heading must be used throughout the assignment and there must
be a short introduction (around 100 words) and short conclusion (around 100 words).

References
It is expected that you will mainly use appropriate academic literature (journals
articles and conference papers) to support your findings. All data sources used and
cited in the report should be correctly referenced utilising the Harvard Reference
System.

An assignment should use at least eight academic literature references, at least four
references must be from 2022 or later.

A good assignment will have at least sixteen academic references and a really good
assignment will have a lot more.

Except in exceptional circumstances all references must be less than ten years old.

References from general project management textbooks are not acceptable.

References from commercial and other web pages are to be use very sparingly and
will not be counted as an academic literature reference. Excessive use of such web
pages will be reflected in a reduction of the use of references mark, due to using none
academic references.

A general reading bibliography must not be included.

The Harvard Reference System must be used, see link on module web page.

Ian Ridley
March 23
 Page 3 of 5

Failure to use the Harvard reference system will result in the ‘Use of references’ mark
being 0 (zero). There will be no exceptions to this rule.

Further Information

The assignment must be presented as a simple report and not as an essay.

The report should be professional in its nature and of a high standard and quality.

The report should be 3000 words long + 10%. The reference list is not part of the
word count.

The report must be typed and printed in 'Times New Roman', the body of the report
being font size 12pt.

The report should be single spaced.

The assignment must uploaded to TurnItIn using the module assignment submission
link in the VLE.

The uploaded assignment must have a cover sheet and this must include:
your name as registered with the University of Sunderland,
your 10 digit University of Sunderland student number,
the module number,

Failure to do the above will result in a reduction of the presentation mark.

Marks will be awarded as follows:

Element Weighting

Quality, relevance and coherence of 45%

report narrative

Use, interpretation and relevance of 40%

references

Logical sequence of presentation within 15%

the report and presentation

See marking criteria sheet and marking sheet that is below.

Issue date: 27th March 2023

Hand-in date: No later than 11:59pm on Friday 19th May 2023

Ian Ridley
March 23
 Page 4 of 5

Marking Criteria Sheet

A - 70% and above
• Thorough understanding of key theories and distinguishing features/factors
and trends;
• Overview of the field used as a basis for independent judgement;
• Clear structure and good critical analysis;
• + points below.

B - 55-69%
• Accurate description and understanding of the distinguishing factors;
• Reasonable interpretative analysis of the factors;
• Evidence of use of background knowledge and reading;
• Sound structure and good 'flow';
• Presence of reasonable critical evaluation;
• Demonstration of knowledge across substantive areas;
• + points below.

C - 40-54%
• Clear understanding of processes and factors;
• Adequate structure and evaluative conclusion;
• Question analysed and material relevant;
• Grasp of basic issues in substantive areas;
• Attempt to relate material to the essay or report question;
• Some reading in evidence and appropriately incorporated;

_____________________________________________________________________

F - 39% or less
• Long on description with little or no analysis or evaluation;
• Theoretical positions (concepts) lacking or confused;
• Little evidence of use of conceptual tools or of reading;
• Irrelevant, unrelated and muddled material.

Ian Ridley
March 23
 Page 5 of 5

Student number …………………………… ENGM117 Ass1 On Campus

Student name ……………………………………………

Quality, relevance and coherence of report narrative (45%)
Poor Excellent
A simple descriptive account of Considerable critical evaluation of report
report topic topic
No references to back up report
References back up report discussion
discussion
Irrelevant, unrelated discussion Accurate, pertinent discussion with
and/or material reference to the question

Discussion is not coherent Good coherent discussion

Comments
mark
/45

Use, interpretation relevance of references (40%)

Reference use poor and do not Reference use excellent with in text
develop the discussion citations that develops the discussion
Very poor interpretation of
Excellent interpretation of references
references

No references cited A considerable number cited

Comments
Journal Refs < 10 yrs ….. mark
/40

Journal Refs > 10 yrs ….. Other refs .....

General presentation, clarity and readability (15%)

Illogical and without structure Logical and well formatted structure

Very poor presentation and quality Excellent presentation and quality

No introduction No conclusion

Comments
mark
/15

Word count ……………

FINAL MARK /100

Ian Ridley
March 23