IPLADCM01 Topics in Emerging Technologies Assessment Brief 2026 | UoS

Request Plagiarism Free Answer Published: 11 Mar, 2026

Category	Assignment	Subject	Engineering
University	University of Suffolk	Module Title	IPLADCM01 Topics in Emerging Technologies

Word Count	5000 Words
Assessment Title	Critical Review Essay
Academic Year	2026

IPLADCM01 The Critical Review Essay

For the assessment, you are tasked with writing a critical review essay of an emerging technology of your choice. The essay must provide a critical analysis of how and why the technology has emerged, the need that it satisfies or could potentially satisfy, as well as a critical review of how this technology relates to similar or competing technologies. The essay must then include a forecast of how you and other technology experts predict the technology in the future. This forecast should be supported by and related to recognised forecasting techniques and a critical review of the effectiveness of those forecasting techniques.

The essay must be underpinned with academic citations whenever possible to support your critical analysis. This essay requires that at least 40% of your references are peer-reviewed journal or conference papers. If you face challenges with this limit and can demonstrate exhaustive research with limited results, then please discuss this with the module leader.

Requirements

In this module, the critical review essay has some unique requirements that must be met. As in industry, when writing technical reports, funding bids or tender documents, clients may state very specific requirements for those documents. The following requirements simulate the need to follow specific instructions.

1. Word Limit: 5,000 words.

If your submission exceeds the word count by up to, but not beyond 10%, then there will be no penalty applied.
Submissions that exceed the word count by more than 10% will be subject to a fixed penalty of 5 percentage points (i.e., 5 marks).
If your submission is more than 10% below the word limit, a penalty will not be applied. However, this is likely to result in your essay not containing enough content and depth, which will negatively impact the grade.
In all cases, the penalised mark will not be reduced below a pass level, assuming the work merits a pass.
Tables, diagrams (including associated legends), appendices, reference lists, bibliographies (if used), tables of contents, footnotes, and endnotes (if used) are excluded from the word count; these should be used appropriately.
Titles and section headings are included in the word count.

2. 40% of your references must be peer-reviewed journal or conference papers

3. Appendices can be included. Any text or information placed in the appendix will NOT be considered for assessment. An appendix should only be used for optional information that may or may not be of interest to the reader; it is good practice to assume the reader will not read the appendix. This is why any information placed there will not be considered for marking, although the marker may consult it if they are interested.

Excessive use of appendices will be penalised. For every page the appendices are longer than the essay (not including the reference list and bibliography if used), 5% will be deducted from the overall mark. The penalised mark will not be reduced below a pass level, assuming the work merits a pass.
For example, if the main text of the essay is 10 pages (not including the reference list and bibliography if used) and there are 15 pages of appendices then 25% will be deducted from your final grade (the appendix is 5 pages more than the essay, so 5 x -5% = -25%).
If, for some reason, you do feel it necessary to submit large appendices, please talk to the module leader in advance of the submission date.

4. The report must be submitted in Microsoft .docx format AND Adobe .pdf format.

5. Essays are usually written as continuous flowing paragraphs of text and do not typically use section headings. However, in this module, you are expected to use sensible and descriptive section headings to help the reader more clearly understand the structure of the essay.

6. You must write your essay for a reader who has a general interest in computer science but is not an expert in the subject you have chosen for your essay.

7. Your essay will be checked for plagiarism, collusion, and fabrication using Turnitin and other techniques. Any plagiarism, collusion, fabrication or any other form of academic misconduct will be dealt with seriously according to the University’s policy for academic misconduct.

8. Paraphrase and cite your references carefully. The University of Suffolk has strict rules dealing with plagiarism, and the university reserves the right to call any student to a viva examination of any piece of assessed work.

9. You must have your essay topic approved by the module leader.

Assessment Support

There is an abundance of support available to you within the university to help you learn how to write an effective essay. Please make use of them:

Three timetabled sessions within the module will be dedicated to helping you with your essay.

The Academic Skills Hub offers help with: https://bit.ly/3DwymaK

Academic Writing
Academic Language
Finding Information
Managing your Studies
Referencing & Plagiarism
121 Appointments with Academic Skills Advisors

eBooks and physical books available in the library on essay and academic writing, see below.

CiteThemRight website for Harvard referencing style help and examples.

The Recommended Essay Writing Ebooks

I recommend you at least read chapter 1 of Connelly and Forsyth (2012) and chapter 2 of Bottomley, Pryjmachuk and Waugh (2018). I have chosen the books below as these are all eBooks and therefore available to everyone in the class.

Bottomley, J., Pryjmachuk, S. and Waugh, D. (2018). Academic writing and referencing for your education degree. St Albans: Critical Publishing Ltd.
Connelly, J. and Forsyth, P.B. (2012). Essay writing skills: essential techniques to gain top marks. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Taylor, G. (2009). A student’s writing guide: how to plan and write successful essays. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Warburton, N. (2007). The basics of essay writing. Milton: Taylor & Francis Group.

If you have any questions regarding the assessment, I recommend that you do not ask other students, as they may not know the correct answer, even if they think they do. Please feel free to ask me in class or email me at steven.harris@uos.ac.uk

Submitting Your Essay

You must submit your essay to the submission portal on the module Brightspace page.

When submitting, you must:

1. Ensure that your work is submitted as a SINGLE document in both Word and PDF formats with the two filenames matching the patterns SXXXXXX.pdf and SXXXXXX.doc(x) (.doc and .docx are both permitted), where sXXXXXX is your UCS userid. Submissions made in other formats will not be marked.

2. You must display the following information on the first page of your essay:

essay title
module name
module code
your full name
your student ID

IPLADCM01 Assessment Criteria

The assessment criteria on the next page will be used to assess your submissions. Please do familiarise yourself with the criteria, as they can act as an aid to the construction of the essay. They also clearly identify important pass/refer criteria, which you must be aware of.

There are five columns, one for each criteria which assess a different aspect of the essay. For each column, there is guidance on what is expected at each grade level. I suggest you start with the 70-79% row, and read across the expectations for each criterion in that row. Read the expectations carefully and use that information to structure your report.

For example, in the first column, “Coherent and detailed knowledge…” you will see that the report should be informed by knowledge at the forefront of the field of study. What does that mean? Well, as you should know by now, journal/conference papers are peer reviewed and therefore are a much more credible and detailed source of current knowledge, so they should form the bulk of your citations. However, it can take some time for new research to appear in academic journals, and it may be necessary to cite a technical website with up-to-date information not yet available in a journal paper. For the nature of this module, citations from technical/business websites (after due diligence as to their authenticity) may be appropriate, as long as they are recent and not several years old. By taking this approach, you will also be satisfying the criteria in the third column, which requires varying levels of the application of academic literature and reasoned judgments.

If you take the time to reflect on the assessment criteria on the following pages, you will see that they can help you keep focused on the requirements for the essay.

Topics in Emerging Technologies: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
In accordance with the FHEQ, at the end of Level 7 students should have a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of their academic discipline, field of study or area of professional practice. They will be able to demonstrate originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge in the discipline. They should have a conceptual understanding that enables them to evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline and to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses. They will also be able to deal with complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences. In addition, they will be able to demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional or equivalent level.
		Assessment category
		Coherent and detailed knowledge and understanding of the subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline	Cognitive and intellectual skills	Application of theory to practice (for courses with a professional practice element)	Reading and referencing	Presentation, style and structure Work that significantly exceeds the specified word limit may be penalized
Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes	90% - 100%	Exemplary systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at or informed by the forefront of the field of study, demonstrating highly sophisticated grasp of the subject matter.	Exceptional critical evaluation and awareness of current problems, and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates exemplary ability to synthesise current research and advanced scholarship in an original, creative and innovative manner.	Flawless use of systematically selected literature to justify and express reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. Sophisticated, systematic and innovative application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	A very high level of critical engagement across a systematic and fully appropriate range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating deep and selective reading and initiative along with highly consistent accurate referencing. 40% or more of the references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. All references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Exemplary presentation of work that is fluent and flawless throughout.
	80% - 89%	Excellent systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing sophisticated depth, breadth, detail and clarity.	Sophisticated critical evaluation and awareness of current problems, and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates a very high level of originality and creativity in the student’s approaches to synthesising current research and advanced scholarship within the subject area	Demonstration of excellent critical awareness and evaluation and the ability to effectively critique and employ current academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. An excellent level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	A very high level of critical engagement across an extensive range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating deep and appropriate reading and initiative along with highly consistent accurate referencing. 40% or more of the references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. All references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Outstanding presentation of work that is logically and coherently structured with a strong or original central argument(s), conveyed with a high level of fluency and eloquently communicates compelling, coherent conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences
	70% - 79%	A high level of systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing considerable depth, breadth, detail and clarity.	A high level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems, and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates a significant level of originality and creativity in synthesising current research and advanced scholarship within the subject area	Demonstration of excellent critical awareness and evaluation and the ability to select and use academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. A high level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	A high level of critical engagement across an extensive range of relevant and current literature demonstrating wide and appropriate reading and initiative along with highly consistent accurate referencing. 40% or more of the references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. All references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Excellent presentation of work that is logically and coherently structured with a strong or original central argument(s), conveyed with a high level of clarity of expression and which clearly communicates valid, coherent conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences
Level 7		Coherent and detailed knowledge and understanding	Cognitive and intellectual skills	Application of theory to practice	Reading and referencing	Presentation, style and structure
Pass mark, demonstrating achievement of all associated learning outcomes	60% - 69%	An effective, systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge mostly at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing good depth, breadth, detail and clarity.	An effective level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates some effective originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area	Demonstration of consistently good critical awareness and evaluation and reasonable ability to use the academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. A good level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	A good level of critical engagement across a good range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating appropriate reading and some initiative along with consistent accurate referencing. 40% or more of the references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. All references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	High quality presentation of work that is largely logically and coherently structured with a generally strong central argument conveyed with a clarity of expression and which communicates clear conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences
	50% - 59%	A sufficient but limited level of systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at times at or informed by the forefront of the field of study but showing adequate depth, breadth, detail and clarity.	A sufficient but limited level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates, with some reference to new insights or perspectives within the field. Limited evidence of originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area	Demonstration of some good critical awareness and evaluation and some ability to use the academic literature in developing judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. A reasonable but limited level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	Sufficient critical engagement with a reasonable range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating mainly appropriate reading but limited initiative and/or some minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing. 40% or more of the references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. All references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Generally good presentation of work that is sufficiently logical and coherent in structure with a discernible central argument. May present limited originality and lack some clarity of expression, but an identifiable conclusion reasonably communicated to specialist and non-specialist audiences
Marginal fail	45% - 49%	Knowledge and understanding of the subject matter is incomplete, uninformed or limited in its scholarship within the field of study, or lacking sufficient depth, breadth, detail or clarity.	Critical evaluation is limited or lacks awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. Insufficient reference made to new insights or perspectives within the field, or insufficient evidence of originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area	Demonstration of poor critical awareness and evaluation or a lack of ability to use the academic literature in developing judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. Insufficient degree of originality or innovation in the application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	Insufficient critical engagement with relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature. Lack of evidence of wider reading or a lack of initiative or inconsistent and inaccurate referencing. Less than 40% of references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. Not all references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Presentation of work shows insufficient organisation or central argument, and is lacking in logical and coherent structure. Poor clarity of expression weakly communicating to specialist or non-specialist audiences
Fail	30% - 44%	Limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter shown. Work is not sufficiently informed by scholarship within the field of study and is insufficient in depth, breadth, detail or clarity.	Insufficient evidence of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. Insufficient reference to new insights or perspectives within the field and lacking in originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area	Demonstrates little critical awareness and evaluation and a lack of ability to use the academic literature to make judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level. Little evidence of originality and innovation and a significant lack of application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	Little evidence of critical engagement with relevant and current literature. Poor use of appropriate sources and/or inconsistent and inaccurate referencing. Less than 40% of references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. Not all references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Presentation of work shows insufficient organisation or central argument, and is lacking in logical and coherent structure. Poor clarity of expression weakly communicating to specialist or non-specialist audiences
Fail	< 30%	Inadequate and limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter shown. Work is not informed by scholarship within the field of study and significantly lacks depth, breadth, detail or clarity.	Descriptive work with little or no evidence of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. No evidence of awareness of new insights or perspectives within the field. Little or no synthesis of current research and scholarship within the subject area	Demonstrates no critical awareness and evaluation and a distinct lack of ability to use the academic literature in an effective manner. No evidence of originality and innovation and little to no application of knowledge and theory of the chosen technology and technology forecast techniques.	No evidence of critical engagement with relevant and current literature. Lack of use of appropriate sources and inconsistent and inaccurate referencing. Less than 40% of references are peer reviewed sources such as journal or conference papers. Not all references are supplied with a URL or DOI to their source.	Often poorly presented work that is disorganised, has an ill-formed central argument, and lacks a logical and coherent structure. A lack of clarity of expression or fails to communicate effective conclusions to specialist or non-specialist audiences