Page 1 of 6

UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND

FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY

MODULE CODE: ENGM91

MODULE TITLE: Project Management and Control
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.

You must retain a duplicate of your assignment.

All assignments submitted to Canvas will automatically be checked by the TurnItIn system
which will produce a report on the level of similarity within the assignment.

THE MODULE LEARNING OUTCOMES WILL BE ASSESSED AS FOLLOWS:

Note: These are not the assignment topic. The actual assignment is on the next page.

1. A critical understanding of appropriate project management methodologies and

tools. Assignment 1

2. Students should be able to develop, evaluate and assess the feasibility of project
proposals, utilising appropriate tools, techniques and methods. Assignment 2

3. Students should be able to apply appropriate methods of planning, monitoring,

control and change to the various aspect of a project.
Assignment 2
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 2pm GMT on 8th January 2024

Submission Location Via the ENGM91 Canvas assignment 1
submission link.

Ian Ridley
November 23
 Page 2 of 6

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL

ENGM91
Assignment One of Two (module weighting 50%)

The Assignment

Your task is to research and write a critical referenced research report on the current
thinking on how effective planning can help to ensure the success of a project during
the execution phase.

In particularly the assignment should discussed how effective planning can assist with
managing costs and expenditure during the execution phase as well as helping the
project execution phase to deliver on time. All discussion must be backed by relevant
academic references

Within the report the way various methods and tools that can assist in these project
task should be discussed backed by relevant academic references.

The assignment must have the following sections

Cover page
Introduction (around 100 word)
Main report section using appropriate headings (around 2800 words)
Conclusion (around 100 word)
Reference list

You must not include an abstract, a content page or any appendix, doing so will lose
you marks.

Note:
If you refer to any methods or tools you must not provide a description of them, as
you must assume that the marker will know about the methods and tools referred to.
Instead any methods or tools must only be referred to in the context of how they assist
with what you are discussing.

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
academic 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.

Ian Ridley
November 23
 Page 3 of 6

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.

Your list of cited references at the end must have the heading Reference List.

There must be a single line space between each reference in the reference list.

A general reading bibliography must not be included.

The Harvard Reference System must be used, see link on module web page.
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 in 'Times New Roman', the body of the report being font
size 12pt.

The report should be single spaced.

The assignment cover page must include your name and University of Sunderland
student number, module number and assignment number failure to do this will
result in a reduction of the presentation mark given.

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

Ian Ridley
November 23
 Page 4 of 6

See marking criteria sheet and marking sheet that is below.

Issue date: 4th December 2023

Hand-in date: 2pm GMT on 8th January 2024

Ian Ridley
November 23
 Page 5 of 6

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
November 23
 Page 6 of 6

Student number ………………………………… ENGM91 On Campus, BAC, MDIS

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
November 23