ES2631 Critique and Communication of Thinking and Design
AY2023/2024 Semester 1
Assignment 2
Critique of Engineering Design Presentation
In Assignment 1, you teamed up with two to three classmates to identify a problem and propose a
potential solution to address the problem. You were expected to apply the Engineering Reasoning
Framework to highlight three elements of thought to show the thinking process that went into your
project.
For Assignment 2, you are to critique the reasoning articulated by the team whose presentation you
have been assigned to evaluate.
Task
1. Consider and critique three elements of thought surfaced and articulated by the team in their
presentation. If you are not sure of what the three elements emphasised by the team, please
consult them on which elements they would like you to critique.
2. In your critique, use the Engineering Reasoning Framework by applying one most applicable
intellectual standard to each of the three elements of thought. The same standard may be
applied to all three elements but avoid repetitive explanations.
3. Support your evaluation with appropriate examples and evidence from the presentation.
4. Write a critique of 500-600 words that:
●
Questions and assesses the quality of the elements of thought conveyed in the presentation.
●
Makes evaluative claims on the reasoning articulated in the presentation and substantially
support these claims with clear evidence and well-reasoned arguments/explanations.
●
Uses appropriate academic language in arguing and supporting your assessment of the
presentation, to effectively convey your stance.
●
Arranges ideas in a clear and logical organizational pattern.
Submission Guidelines
1. There are two draft submissions as follows:
a. Submit the first draft (ungraded) of your assignment a week after your Week 7 tutorial. For
example, if your tutorial is on Monday, you should submit the draft by 2359 hours, Monday,
Week 8.
b. Meet your tutor for an individual conference on your draft in Week 9 or 10.
c. Submit your final (graded) draft a week after your conference. For example, if your
conference is on Monday in Week 9, you should submit your final draft by 2359 hours,
Monday, Week 10. If your conference is on Monday in Week 10, your final draft should be
submitted by 2359 hours, Monday, Week 11.
2. Please note that there is a penalty for late submission and for exceeding the word limit by 10%.
The 661st word onwards will not be read nor taken into consideration for grading.
1
Assessment Criteria
•
Content (50%)
o Text explicitly and competently demonstrates understanding of task requirements,
i.e., purpose (stating the elements that will be critiqued) is addressed and supported
throughout, and the reader is compelled to agree with the writer.
o Evaluative claims are substantially supported through the critical use of evidence
from the presentation (information, points of view, concepts) and/or the writer
demonstrates competent and credible analysis of assumptions, inferences and
implications conveyed in the presentation.
•
Language (30%)
o Text is expressed in clear and appropriate scientific style, i.e., vocabulary, tone,
syntactic structure and citations.
o Use of linguistic features is competent and effective in conveying the writer’s voice
and stance.
o Competent proofreading is demonstrated, with hardly any mistakes.
o Connection of ideas between and within paragraphs is effective.
•
Organisation (20%)
o All body paragraphs have clear topic sentences that support the thesis.
o Ideas are logically developed within and across paragraphs and all connections are
clear.
o The conclusion is logical and the overall organizational pattern is sophisticated and
effective.
2