4ENG002 Professional Engineering Skills Assessment 1 Brief - Technical Presentation 25-26.pdf

Published: 24 Oct, 2025

Category	Assignment	Subject	Engineering
University	Canterbury Christ Church University (CCCU)	Module Title	4ENG002 Professional Engineering Skills

Academic Year	2025/26

ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS

Course Name	All Engineering Pathways
Module Title	Professional Engineering Skills
Module Code	4ENG002
Module Start Date /Cohort	September 2025
Module Level	4	Assessment Type(s)	Technical Presentation/Skills Presentation
Word Length / Duration	5-minute Presentation 3-5 minutes discussion	% weighting	25% of the module
Deadline (date & time) for Submission	2 pm, Monday 2^nd December 2025. Submit Slides to Turnitin. The presentation will be in the class	Format/Location of submission	PDF of the slides on Turnitin

WHAT TO SUBMIT:

Presentation slides in a one PDF document via Turnitin Assessment Feedback

On Turnitin

This assessment will require you to demonstrate in-depth knowledge of a specific area of the module. You will choose a single topic, tooling, or design you have worked on and present a focused, detailed overview of it. The purpose of this task is to show your mastery of a specific skill and your ability to articulate complex technical information clearly.

Assessment Task: You will create and deliver an in-lab presentation focused on one chosen topic from the module's content. This could be a specific skill you learned (e.g., a milling operation), a tool you used (e.g., a particular end mill or a calliper), or a design you have made. Your presentation should act as a technical deep dive into this single subject.
Presentation and Q&A:
oPresentation Time: 5 minutes
oQ&A Session: 5 minutes. The questions from the audience and your tutor can be on any of the topics covered in the first 8 weeks of learning, not just your chosen topic.

Submission Deliverables:

Your presentation should be a focused exploration of your chosen topic and must cover the following: (Does not have to be the exact headings)

Introduction: Clearly state the topic you have chosen to present.
Technical Breakdown: Provide a detailed walkthrough of the process, design, or tool. Explain the steps involved and the technical specifications.
Rationale: Justify the decisions you made. If it's a design, explain why you chose certain features. If it's a process, explain why you selected a specific tool or a particular approach.
Safety and Standards: Highlight the specific health and safety considerations related to your topic and any relevant engineering standards (e.g., GD&T) you applied.
Conclusion: Summarise the key learnings from your work on this topic.

Are You Looking The Solution of 4ENG002 Assessment 1

Order Non Plagiarized Assignment

Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) and Assessments

Before approaching any assessment you should read the student guidance on the use of GenAI: Welcome to your generative AI guidance
This will ensure you are aware of the ethical, legal and learning aspects of using GenAI for your studies.
Each module’s assessments will require a different approach to the use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI). Your Module Lead has evaluated this module’s assessment(s) using the Artificial Intelligence Assessment Scale (AIAS).
You can learn more about the AIAS at aiassessmentscale.com.
If you would like to understand more about how CCCU’s staff understand the use of GenAI in your learning, you can read the Staff Guidance.

4ENG002 Professional Engineering Skills Assessment 1

Your Module Lead has evaluated this module’s assessments as requiring the following level of interaction with GenAI:

Assessment 1: Level 3 – AI Collaboration

At CCCU all assessments require a declaration regarding the level of GenAI use.
Under CCCU’s Academic Integrity Policy unacknowledged inclusion of GenAI is considered academic misconduct.
See the Academic Integrity and Misconduct webpages for more information.

Please select the most appropriate statement from the choice below and insert it at the start of your work:

a.No GenAI was used in the preparation, planning or creation of this work. [AIAS Level 1]
b.I acknowledge the use of outputs from [insert the name of generative AI tool(s) used] in the learning, preparation, planning or proofreading of this work. [AIAS Level 2]
c.I acknowledge collaboration with [insert the name of generative AI tool(s) used] in this work, and the inclusion of outputs in modified form. [AIAS Level 3]
d.I acknowledge [insert the name of generative AI tool(s) used] as partner(s) in the creation of this work. [AIAS Levels 4 & 5]

Referencing GenAI
If your assessment is rated at levels 2, 3 or 4, you are required to reference where you have used GenAI outputs in the body of your work. For guidance on how to reference GenAI in your work see Cite Them Right 13th Edn, or later. You can use the textbook or visit the Cite Them Right website – both are accessible via LibrarySearch (for the web version, login using your CCCU email).

You can speak to your module tutor, module lead, subject Librarian or Learning Developer for more guidance on the use of GenAI in your learning and assessment.

Referencing
For the University guide to referencing use this link Introduction to referencing.

Marking Criteria
At the end of the document.

Further Information

Only use relevant information, meaning that information making make your case stronger without diluting the whole story, e.g. raw data, testimonials and more.
- Do not use unnecessary information: if your case is already strong and compelling, unnecessary information may be detrimental or redundant.

MARK SCHEME (RUBRIC)

MARK SCHEME (RUBRIC) - Group Report rubrics of marking criteria
Marks for the separate areas are typified by grades indicated below. All marks can be adjusted up or down for poor or good practice not mentioned in the scheme.

TERION	100-80 Excellent	79-70 Very good	69-60 Good	59-50 Sound	49-40 Satisfactory	39-20 Fail	19-0 Fail
A. KNOWLEDGE & UNDERSTANDING
1. Knowledge	Knowledge and	Demonstrates	Shows a	Sound	Selection of	In this	In this
and application	understanding of	an accurate,	systematic and	descriptive	theory is	assignment	assignment
of subject and	theory are	systematic	accurate	knowledge of	satisfactory, and	some of the	there is a lack
theories (20%)	detailed and	theoretical	understanding of	key theories with	terminology,	theories	of relevant
	beyond what has	understanding of	key subject-	appropriate	facts and	presented are	subject-specific
	been taught.	the subject and	specific theories,	application;	concepts are	not appropriate.	theory.
	Appreciation of	a range of key	which are	sometimes	handled	Terminology,
	the limits of	theories.	appropriately	balanced	accurately, but	facts, and
	subject-specific	Appropriately	integrated within	towards the	application and	concepts are
	theories	selected	the context of	descriptive	understanding	presented
	demonstrated in	theoretical	the assessment	rather than the	are generalised.	inaccurately
	the work.	knowledge is	task.	critical or		and/or with
	Approach to	synergised into		analytical.		omissions in key
	assessment task	the overall				areas. The
	is clearly,	assessment task				application
	appropriately, and	with some				and/or
	theoretically	appreciation of				understanding
	informed.	the limits of				demonstrated is
		subject specific				extremely
		theories.				limited.

2. Evaluation of process and the quality of information / data developed (10%)	Evaluates information and/or data and the inquiry process perceptively using appropriate criteria some of which is self- determined.	Evaluates information and/or data and the inquiry process perceptively using appropriate criteria some of which may be self-determined.	Effectively evaluates information and/or data and the inquiry process using prescribed guidelines.	Shows sound, basic evaluation of information and/or data and the inquiry process used.	Shows basic evaluation of the inquiry methodology and information and/or data generated.	In this submission, evaluation of process and the information and/or data is incomplete.	The work shows limited or no evaluation of either process or outcomes.
3. Clarity of objectives and focus of work (10%)	This work defines appropriate objectives in detail and addresses them logically, coherently, comprehensively showing sophisticated interpretation of complex ideas.	This work defines appropriate objectives in detail and addresses them logically, and coherently, interpreting complex ideas clearly.	This work defines appropriate objectives and addresses them coherently and logically throughout the work providing a clear focus to the work.	This work outlines some appropriate objectives and addresses them in a coherent manner which gives focus to the work.	This work uses generalised objectives to provide adequate but limited focus to the work	In this piece of work objectives are not appropriate and/or clearly identified – focus is not logical or coherent.	In this piece of work no objectives are identified, and the submission lacks focus and coherence.

Performance (10%)

Compelling, communicative, and convincing performance demonstrating thorough understanding of style. Accurate, flexible, focused, well-rehearsed, convincing, and precise performance.

Improvisations are imaginative, creative, and stylistically assured. Stage craft presentation of a very high standard.

Focused, performance demonstrating communication, commitment, and thorough understanding of style with careful attention to detail, displaying consistently high level of technical ability.

Improvised passages are stylistically correct and considered. Performance well-prepared, assured and persuasive.

Stage craft presentation of a very high standard.

Performance demonstrates communication, commitment, and an understanding of the genre with careful attention to detail, displaying a good level of technical ability. Improvised passages show a sound understanding of style.

Performance well- rehearsed. Stage craft presentation of a good standard.

Performance demonstrates communication, commitment and understanding of the genre with some attention to detail and technical ability. Improvised passages show a sound understanding of style. Limited confidence and attention to stage craft presentation.

Performance that mostly demonstrates communication, commitment and understanding of the genre but with little attention to detail and displaying a basic level of technical ability. Improvised passages show some understanding of style. Lacks confidence and little attention given to stage craft presentation.

Performance in which communication, commitment and style are limited by struggles with technical control. Improvised passages show poor understanding of the style and may be inappropriate.

Performance is under-rehearsed and unconvincing and stage conduct is barely addressed.

Performance in which fluency and focus are severely limited by a lack of technical control.

Improvised passages do not yet show understanding of style/genre or conventions of performance here. This performance is under- rehearsed, lacking in confidence and stage conduct is not appropriate.

Decision making (15%)

Uses a range of appropriate information to evaluate options. Makes clear decisions which give due weight to alternatives and justify the final choice.

Uses appropriate information to evaluate options and applies clear criteria to demonstrate reasons for final decision.

Uses appropriate information to evaluate options. Final decision is clear and linked to the evaluation.

Recognises benefits and disadvantages of some viable options but provides limited clarity on rationale for final decision.

When decisions are made, a limited, but tenable, rationale for decisions is provided.

Here, the rationale behind the final choice is unclear or untenable.

Here, the final choice is unclear or absent. In this work the student has not demonstrated ability to make decisions.

Communication and presentation (appropriate to discipline) (25%)

Effective and polished communication which demonstrates a strong and sophisticated understanding of the discipline.

Accomplished communication in a format appropriate to the discipline showing strong understanding of disciplinary requirements.

Very effective communication in a format appropriate to the discipline.

Effective communication in a format appropriate to the discipline.

Clear communication and general evidence of an appropriate academic style for the discipline.

Here the communication is unstructured and unfocused and/or in a format inappropriate to the discipline.

Here the communication is disorganised and/or incoherent and does not show understanding of the discipline’s style.

Time management / self- management (10%)

Meets deadlines. Sets self- determined targets and contingency plans allowing sufficient time to receive and act on guidance.

Meets deadlines. Plans and monitors progress to allow sufficient time for development of the work.

Makes plans and implements them in a satisfactory manner to meet deadlines.

Meets important deadlines.

Exhibits some limited evidence of planning.

Usually meets important deadlines.

Exhibits limited evidence of planning.

Some deadlines met, but most deadlines missed.

Extremely limited evidence of effective time management shown here.

Deadlines not or rarely met. Not yet demonstrating ability to make and implement plans.

Buy Answer of 4ENG002 Assessment 1 & Raise Your Grades

Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized Assignment

Request Answer of this Assignment

Share this with your Friends

Facebook

Instagram

If you are worried about the 4ENG002 Professional Engineering Skills Assignment at CCCU? then no need to worry anymore! Our experts provide engineering assignment help that has been designed for the students. You will get expert guidance and help on assignments that will strengthen your concepts. We also provide you with free assignment samples that will help you understand. And the best part? All the content is 100% original, written by PhD expert writers, and well-researched, so that you get the best quality. So don’t delay now; boost your grades with our help!