1. BIRMINGHAM CITY UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF COMPUTING ENGINEERING AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
COURSEWORK ASSIGNMENT BRIEF
[ENG7142 – Research Methods]
1
Coursework Assignment Brief
Postgraduate
Academic Year 2022-23
Module Title: Research Methods
Module Code: ENG7142
Assessment Title: Academic Poster Presentation
Assessment Identifier:
In-Person
Weighting: 25%
School: School of Engineering and the Built Environment
Module Co-ordinator: Dr. Volkan Cakir
Hand in deadline date:
12pm Mid-day on Monday 1nd May 2023
Return of Feedback date
and format
Face-to-face and then on Moodle within 7 working days
Re-assessment hand in
deadline date:
12pm Mid-day on Monday 24th July 2023
Note: the reassessment work may be different. TBC
Support available for
students required to
submit a re-assessment:
Timetabled revisions sessions will be arranged for the period
immediately preceding the hand in date
NOTE:
At the first assessment attempt, the full range of marks is
available. At the re-assessment attempt the mark is capped
and the maximum mark that can be achieved is 50%.
Assessment Summary Individual Academic Poster - 10 minutes.
The module aims to provide you with a foundation for
academic research skills employed in all modules, but
particularly the master’s dissertation. This assessment
enables you to demonstrate effective delivery of your
research findings in the form of an Academic Poster
delivered to 2 academics – one will be a subject matter
expert.
The module is assessed as follows:
Literature Review 75% Course work
Academic Poster Presentation 25% In person
IMPORTANT STATEMENTS

2. 2
Standard Postgraduate Regulations
Your studies will be governed by the BCU Academic Regulations on Assessment, Progression and
Awards. Copies of regulations can be found at https://www.bcu.ac.uk/student-info/student-
contract
For courses accredited by professional bodies such as the IET (Institution of Engineering and
Technology) there are some derogations from the standard regulations and these are detailed in
your Programme Handbook
For courses accredited by professional bodies such as the IET (Institution of Engineering and
Technology) there are some exemptions from the standard regulations and these are detailed in
your Programme Handbook
Cheating and Plagiarism
Both cheating and plagiarism are totally unacceptable and the University maintains a strict policy
against them. It is YOUR responsibility to be aware of this policy and to act accordingly. Please
refer to the Academic Registry Guidance at https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/Academic-Registry/Information-
for-Students/Assessment/Avoiding-Allegations-of-Cheating
The basic principles are:
• Don’t pass off anyone else’s work as your own, including work from “essay banks”. This is
plagiarism and is viewed extremely seriously by the University.
• Don’t submit a piece of work in whole or in part that has already been submitted for
assessment elsewhere. This is called duplication and, like plagiarism, is viewed extremely
seriously by the University.
• Always acknowledge all of the sources that you have used in your coursework assignment
or project.
• If you are using the exact words of another person, always put them in quotation marks.
• Check that you know whether the coursework is to be produced individually or whether you
can work with others.
• If you are doing group work, be sure about what you are supposed to do on your own.
• Never make up or falsify data to prove your point.
• Never allow others to copy your work.
• Never lend disks, memory sticks or copies of your coursework to any other student in the
University; this may lead you being accused of collusion.
By submitting coursework, either physically or electronically, you are confirming that it is your own
work (or, in the case of a group submission, that it is the result of joint work undertaken by
members of the group that you represent) and that you have read and understand the University’s
guidance on plagiarism and cheating.
You should be aware that coursework may be submitted to an electronic detection system in order
to help ascertain if any plagiarised material is present. You may check your own work prior to
submission using Turnitin at the Formative Moodle Site. If you have queries about what
constitutes plagiarism, please speak to your module tutor or the Centre for Academic Success.
Electronic Submission of Work
It is your responsibility to ensure that work submitted in electronic format can be opened on a
faculty computer and to check that any electronic submissions have been successfully uploaded. If
it cannot be opened it will not be marked. Any required file formats will be specified in the
assignment brief and failure to comply with these submission requirements will result in work not
being marked. You must retain a copy of all electronic work you have submitted and re-submit if
requested.

3. 3
Learning Outcomes to be Assessed:
3. Design a poster presentation, outlining integrated and analysed data using appropriate
research methods & techniques.
Assessment Details:
Title: Academic Poster Presentation
Type: In-person
Style: Presentation format
Rationale:
The delivery and assessment of this module will involve researching, presenting and writing
of a literature review, demonstrating critique, author analysis and evidence of academic
underpinning.
You are to consider a topic within a subject area or choose from a suggested list, and
critically evaluate, applying appropriate research methods in the development of a literature
review and a supporting academic poster.
Description:
You will need to present the development and findings of the literature review by means of
an academic poster presentation and then a report.
A formative PowerPoint presentation (on topic & findings so far) would be given by you prior
to the poster presentation. Similar to the literature review report, the poster should be
designed with intention of presenting to subject matter experts in the field, such as
conference proceedings.
The final piece of work written as a literature review, must demonstrate an understanding of
research philosophies and methods used by the most important references detailing the
contributions of major authors, noting arguments and contestations. This should also be
written to the standard requirements of international journals appropriate to the chosen
research topic.
Additional information:
Assessment (25%): Academic Poster (L.O. 3)
What is a poster session?
A poster session is a common term used in conferences. It enables people to present their
academic work without having to make a formal presentation, in the form of a poster. The
poster is not exactly like an advertising poster but some of the techniques could be used to
your advantage.

4. 4
You are to produce an A3 poster focusing on your literature review. You will present and
defend your findings in a 10-minute pre-determined time slot. Two markers will be viewing
your poster.
You may consider the following:
1. What was the aim of my assignment?
2. Why did I choose the subject?
3. What background information did I find useful?
4. What problems did I encounter?
5. What conclusions did I draw?
The main purpose of the assessment is not to judge the beauty of the posters (though a nice
poster will always be appreciated).We want to see how well you are able to summarise the
major features and achievements of your literature review in a very tightly constrained way.
We also want to see how well you can articulate and justify what you have done.
A suggested (logical) structure would be:
• Title of paper / Research Question / topic
• Introduction
• Key items/themes – evidence from literature
• Results – what you found (agreements / disagreements)
• Conclusion and recommendations
• References
For your consideration:
This will be the piece of work which will encapsulate the whole of your assignment; so
present yourself and your poster in the best possible way.
Prepare your poster for an audience of non-experts: use clear language.
Try to think what elements of your work will be most interesting to your audience.
You do not have much space so include only the things that are really important in your
assignment.
For example:
Introduction
• Gives background information such as:
• What is your topic?
• Why did you choose it?
• Key terms/definitions
Findings and Results
• Summarises key findings of your project
• Preferably in graphical/visual form
• If you borrow a diagram, make sure it’s referenced.

5. 5
Conclusion
• Summary of key discussion points
• What have you learnt?
Recommendation
• What will the future look like for the chosen topic
References
• Acknowledge data gained from other sources such as Books, Journals or the Web
• Use Harvard Referencing Style
Presentation hints:
Keep the material simple
Be concise and DO NOT WAFFLE
Do not cram the poster full of info - messy
A picture can say more than 1000 words
Be selective
Be prepared to defend your work
Give yourself enough time to be successful!
Note! If you want to keep a permanent record of your poster, it is suggested that you
arrange to have it photographed.
For advice on writing style, referencing and academic skills, please make use of the Centre
for Academic Success: https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/celt/centre-for-academic-success
Workload:
This assessment is equivalent to 3000 words and a typical student would be expected to
take 30 hours to pass this assessment.
Transferable skills:
This module enables students to:
• develop and enhance presentation and communication skills
• problem solve using academic language and academic underpinning
• develop critical analysis skills
• become a subject matter expert in the chosen field
• be able to effectively present and report on findings from an academic standpoint –
argue and debate appropriately
• apply skills and knowledge to other modules and the dissertation
The literature review can be considered for further development into the master’s
dissertation – subject to discussions with potential supervisors.

6. 6
Marking Criteria:
Table of Assessment Criteria and Associated Grading Criteria
You are being marked for L.O.3 as in the table below:
Learning
Outcome
s
3. Design a poster presentation, outlining integrated and analysed data using
appropriate research methods & techniques.
Assessme
nt
Criteria
→
1.Oral Presentation 2. Visual Display 3. Academic
References &
Critical Analysis
4. Discussion /
Defence
Weighting: 0.30 0.20 0.30 0.20
Grading
Criteria
0 – 29%
F
Major shortcomings in
clarity and/or relevance.
Poster either
incoherent or
lacking
awareness of
basic
presentation
requirements, or
lacking relevant
content.
No or limited
evidence of
research.
Responses are
incoherent or display
lack of essential
knowledge and/or
relevance.
30 – 39%
E
Oral presentation lacks
clarity and/or relevance.
However, there is
sufficient evidence to
suggest that some
additional preparation
time would enable a
pass standard to be
achieved.
Poster lacks
information on
key aspects of
research, but
should be able to
attain pass
standard with
some additional
time in
preparation
Little evidence of
research. Poster
reiterates
information
gathered from few
sources.
Serious shortfall in
ability to explain
fundamentals, but
should be able to reach
pass standard with
some additional
preparation.
40 – 49%
D
Some hesitance in
responses/discussion
indicates lack of
familiarity with the topic
and wider issues,
and/or lack of
understanding in some
areas. However there
are adequate
responses to questions
on key points of
knowledge/understandi
ng.
Some
deficiencies of
key points,
lacking clarity,
and/or with little
impact and some
errors. There
may be indication
of a shortage of
planning and
care in
composing/creati
ng the display.
However it
adequately
presents some of
the main points.
Some relevant
research but
lacking in extent
and level required.
Some hesitance in
responses/discussion
indicates lack of
familiarity with the topic
and wider issues,
and/or lack of
understanding in some
areas. However there
are adequate
responses to questions
on key points of
knowledge/understandi
ng.
50 – 59%
C
Fair description of
major features and
achievements, some
aspects lack clarity.
Reasonable
encapsulation of
key points,
although the
poster may be
over-detailed or,
in part, lacking a
clear message
and/or including
minor errors.
Generally
competent
research but not all
relevant to the
subject in question.
Reasonable responses
to questions and is able
adequately to discuss
straightforward aspects.
There may be some
minor deficiencies in
knowledge.

7. 7
60 – 69%
B
Good oral description of
main features of
research;
straightforward to
follow, confident and
interesting.
Good
encapsulation of
key points,
generally clear,
with good impact
and error free.
Broad and relevant
research
demonstrating
methodical
approach and
analysis.
Good responses to
questions and in
discussion appear to be
generally familiar with
the specific topic and
with relevant wider
issues.
70 – 79%
A
Very good oral
description of main
features of research;
straightforward to
follow, confident and
interesting.
Very good
encapsulation of
key points,
generally clear,
with good impact
and error free.
Broad and relevant
research
demonstrating
methodical
approach and
analysis.
Very good responses to
questions and in
discussion appear to be
generally familiar with
the specific topic and
with relevant wider
issues.
80 – 89%
A+
Well planned, coherent
oral presentation
expressed with
confidence and interest,
appropriate to the
audience, and
summarises research,
approach taken,
activities and
achievements.
Excellent
encapsulation of
key points,
extremely clear,
high impact, error
free.
Succinctly
summarises/critiqu
es findings in a
well-structured,
coherent manner,
with supporting &
appropriate
evidence of
academic
underpinning and
grounded with
theoretical
concepts displayed
in context.
Confident, succinct and
informative responses
to questions. In
discussion, appears to
be well informed on
specific subject
knowledge as well as
wider issues associated
with research.
90 –
100%
A*
An outstanding, well
planned and coherent
oral presentation
expressed with
confidence and interest,
appropriate to the
audience, and
summarises research,
approach taken,
activities and
achievements.
Outstanding
encapsulation of
key points,
extremely clear,
high impact, error
free.
Concisely
summarises/critiqu
es findings in a
well-structured,
coherent manner,
with supporting &
appropriate
evidence of
academic
underpinning and
grounded with
theoretical
concepts displayed
in context.
Confident,
(authoritative) succinct
and informative
responses to questions.
In discussion, appears
to be well informed on
specific subject
knowledge as well as
wider issues associated
with research.
Should be considered
as publishable.

8. 8
Submission Details:
Format:
Work will be submitted on Moodle using Microsoft Office files. The documents will be
uploaded using Word and PowerPoint ONLY.
Regulations:
• The minimum pass mark for a module is 50%
• Re-sit marks are capped at 50%
Full academic regulations are available for download using the link provided above in the IMPORTANT
STATEMENTS section
For IET accredited courses ONLY (MSc Mechanical Engineering and MSc Automotive
Engineering)
• For modules with multiple items of assessment, you must achieve a minimum of 40%
in each item of assessment in order to pass the module.
e.g. assessment 1 - coursework 50% and assessment 2 - Exam 50%,
You must achieve an aggregate mark of 50% WITH every single assessment having
a minimum mark of 40% or greater. For example if you achieved 90% in example
assessment 1 and 20% in example assessment 2, the aggregate would be over 50%
((90+20)/2 = 55%), however you will still fail the module due to the 40% qualifying
rule.
Late Penalties
If you submit an assessment late at the first attempt then you will be subject to one of the
following penalties:
• if the submission is made between 1 and 24 hours after the published deadline the
original mark awarded will be reduced by 5%. For example, a mark of 60% will be
reduced by 3% so that the mark that the student will receive is 57%. ;
• if the submission is made between 24 hours and one week (5 working days) after
the published deadline the original mark awarded will be reduced by 10%. For
example, a mark of 60% will be reduced by 6% so that the mark the student will
receive is 54%.
• if the submission is made after 5 days following the deadline, your work will be
deemed as a fail and returned to you unmarked.
The reduction in the mark will not be applied in the following two cases:
• the mark is below the pass mark for the assessment. In this case the mark achieved
by the student will stand
• where a deduction will reduce the mark from a pass to a fail. In this case the mark
awarded will be the threshold (i.e. 50%)
Please note:
• If you submit a re-assessment late then it will be deemed as a fail and returned
to you unmarked.

9. 9
Feedback:
For 25% Poster Assessment:
You will be provided instant feedback at the end of your poster presentation and then an
unconfirmed mark, subject to exam board ratification, will be uploaded to Moodle within 7
working days.
Marks and Feedback on your work will normally be provided within 20 working days of its
submission deadline.
Where to get help:
Volkan and Ian will be available for appointments upon request by email.
Students can get additional support from the library support for searching for information
and finding academic sources. See their iCity page for more information:
http://libanswers.bcu.ac.uk/
The Centre for Academic Success offers 1:1 advice and feedback on academic writing,
referencing, study skills and maths/statistics/computing. See their iCity page for more
information: https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/celt/centre-for-academic-success
Additional assignment advice can be found here: https://libguides.bcu.ac.uk/MA
Fit to Submit:
Are you ready to submit your assignment – review this assignment brief and consider
whether you have met the criteria. Use any checklists provided to ensure that you have
done everything needed.
Make sure the submissions dates and word counts are met (so you maximise your marks).
Please check your spelling, Grammar and Formatting are all correct and to an acceptable
professional standard.
Make sure your files are not corrupt and the files open up in MS Word (failure to open will
result in a zero award).