Page | 1
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
Unit Code and Title: SBM3307 Project Development and Optimisation
Assessment Overview
| Assessment Task | Weighting | Due | Length | ULO |
| Assessment 1: Online Quiz MCQ of key content areas to identify further support needs |
10% | Week 3 | 30 mins | ULO1,2 |
| Assessment 2: Article Summary: | 20% | Week 7 | 1000 words | ULO1,2,3 |
| Assessment 3: Project Report | 30% | Week 10 | 1500 words | ULO1,2,3 and 4 |
| Assessment 4: Essay | 40% | Week 12 | 2000 words | ULO1,2,3,4,5 |
Assessment Details
Page | 2
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
Assessment 1: Online Quiz
| Due date: | Week 3 |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count / Time provided: | 30 minutes |
| Weighting: | 10% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1 |
Assessment Details:
This online quiz will assess your knowledge of key content areas (Week 1 & 2 content) and to identify
further support needs. For successful completion of the quiz, you are required to study the material
provided (lecture slides, tutorials, and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, and in the
discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommended
reading material. By completing this assessment successfully, you will be able to identify key aspects
of scope management as per best project management practices. This will then help in achieving ULO1
and ULO2 and ULO-3.
Marking Information: The quiz will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 10% of the total
unit mark.
Assessment 2: Article Summary
| Due date: | Week 7 |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count / Time provided: | 1000 words |
| Weighting: | 20% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1, 2 and 3 |
Assessment Details:
The purpose of this assessment is to write a clear and objective summary of the original text. To
write the assignment, you need to select One recent article published in peer reviewed journals
relevant to the topic of Project Development and Optimisation. Student need to provide a link to
the article summary that will be inserted in their article summary page and a full
reference. Guidelines for writing a summary of an article:
Page | 3
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
• State the main ideas of the article.
• Identify the most important details that support the main ideas.
• Write in your own words and avoid copying phrases and sentences from the article unless
they are direct quotation.
• Express the underlying meaning of the article, not just the superficial details.
• Your summary should be max 500 words.
• provide a link to the article summary that will be inserted in their article summary
page and a full reference
Marking Information: The article summary will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 10% of
the total unit mark.
Marking Rubric
| Marking Criteria |
Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) |
Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark |
Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark |
Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark |
Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark |
| Article choice (10 marks) |
The selected article does not reflect the subject’s main concept and is not peer reviewed. |
The selected article is in the field of the subject and reflects one of the main concepts suggested by the lecturer and is peer reviewed. |
The selected article is in the field of the subject, covers the main concepts suggested by the lecturer and is peer reviewed. |
The selected article is in the field of the subject and covers the concepts suggested by the lecturer and is scholarly and relatively current. |
The article directly discusses the main concepts suggested by the lecturer and is highly relevant, scholarly and recently published. |
| Clarity of Expression (20 marks) |
Writing lacks clarity and coherence. Points have not been paraphrased well. There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. |
Writing is generally clear with some lapses in coherence. Some points have been paraphrased well. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. |
Writing is clear and coherent. Most points have been paraphrased well. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. |
Writing shows good clarity and cohesion. Points have been paraphrased well. There are few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. |
Writing shows excellent clarity and cohesion. Points have been skilfully paraphrased. There are no or very few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. |
| Content (40 marks) |
The article’s main topic(s), aim/ purpose, key points and conclusions are missing, unclear, inaccurate and/or irrelevant. |
The article’s main topic(s), aim/ purpose, key points and conclusions are generally evident, but may be vague, incomplete, or have some inaccuracies. |
The article’s main topic(s), aim/ purpose, key points and conclusions are identified and summarised accurately in most parts. Some information may be irrelevant or inaccurate. |
The article’s main topic(s), aim/ purpose, key points and conclusions are identified and summarised clearly and accurately, providing a good overview of the article with minimal irrelevant or inaccurate information. |
The article’s main topic(s), aim/ purpose, key points and conclusions are identified and summarised clearly, accurately and precisely, providing an excellent overview of the original article. |
| Summary (20 marks) |
The summary is not well organised, does not flow logically and is difficult to follow. |
The summary shows some organisation, but some parts may not flow logically and are difficult to follow. |
The summary shows organisation and is easy to follow, but occasionally still lacks flow. |
The summary shows coherent and logical organisation and most points are easy to follow. |
The summary shows coherent and logical organisation and has clear, well-structured points. |
Page | 4
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
| Reference and Formatting (10 marks) |
Assignment is not presented as per APIC assessment presentation guidelines and includes insufficient application of APIC Harvard style of referencing. |
Assignment show some adherence to APIC assessment presentation guidelines and APIC Harvard style of referencing. |
Assignment mostly adheres to APIC assessment presentation guidelines and APIC Harvard style of referencing. |
Assignment completely adheres to APIC assessment presentation guidelines with few inconsistencies with APIC Harvard style of referencing. |
Assignment completely adheres to APIC assessment presentation guidelines and APIC Harvard style of referencing. |
Assessment 3: Project Report
| Due date: | Week 10 |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count / Time provided: | 1500 words |
| Weighting: | 30% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1,2, 3 and 4 |
Assessment Details:
In this assessment, the student would be provided a scenario in decision-making situations.
In this assessment a decision-making situation about a project will be provided. The student needs
to study the literature and find the best practice to analyses the situation with rationale. The team
is required to focus on cost consideration, project delivery and execution from the perspective of
sustainability, estimate cash-flow items both inflows and outflow for each alternative. The bases of
estimations for estimates should be given. The team needs to decide about interest rate, project
life, and other parameters that can affect economic analysis in this activity and apply one of the
techniques to evaluate each alternative and select the best one.
The student should finalize results of their last part of this assessment and conduct a sensitivity
analysis for the case project. For sensitivity analyses, parameters should be selected, and scenarios
of sensitivity analyses should be defined accordingly. For each scenario, the economic analysis
should be done, and results should be compared and explained. The student should also provide
parameters for due diligence processes and the information needs of stakeholders and supporters
of the project.
Page | 5
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
Marking Rubric
| Marking Criteria | Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) |
Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark |
Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark |
Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark |
Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark |
| Demonstrate an understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used (15 marks) |
Poor understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used are justified |
Satisfactory understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used are justified |
Good understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used are justified |
Very good understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used are justified |
Excellent understanding of sensitivity analysis and parameters used are justified |
| Justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis (15 marks) |
Poor justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis |
Satisfactory justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis |
Good justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis |
Very good justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis |
Excellent justifications of parameters used in the sensitivity analysis |
| Analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis (15 marks) |
Poor analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis |
Satisfactory analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis |
Good analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis |
Very good analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis |
Excellent analysis of different scenario based on economic analysis |
| Provide comparison and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario (15 marks) |
Poor comparative analysis and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario. |
Satisfactory comparative analysis and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario. |
Good comparative analysis and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario. |
Very good comparative analysis and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario. |
Excellent comparative analysis and explanation on economic analysis for each scenario. |
| Demonstrate understanding on the importance of due diligence process and its scope. (15 marks) |
No evidence of understanding of due diligence processes and its scope |
Fair understanding of due diligence process and its scope |
Good understanding of due diligence process and its scope |
Very good understanding of due diligence process and its scope |
Exceptional understanding of due diligence process and its scope |
| Identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters. (15 marks) |
No identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters |
Satisfactory identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters |
Good identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters |
Very good identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters |
Excellent identification and discussion on information needs of stakeholders, project sponsors and supporters |
| Overall presentation and integration of the discussion: presentation of the report with title page, the body of the report and conclusion. Referencing and citation comply with the Harvard style (5 marks) |
Incorrect use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or some citations in the body are not included in the reference list |
Exhibit satisfactory use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or some citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Exhibit good use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Exhibit very good use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Exhibit exceptional use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
| Good grammar and good English expression. (5 marks) |
Poorly written in grammar and English expression |
Satisfactorily written – grammar and English expression |
Written in good grammar and English expression |
Very well written in good grammar and English expression |
Excellently written in good grammar and English expression |
Page | 6
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
Assessment 4: Essay
| Due date: | Week 12 |
| Group/individual: | Individual |
| Word count / Time provided: | 2000 words |
| Weighting: | 40% |
| Unit Learning Outcomes: | ULO1,2,3,4 and 5 |
Assessment Details:
In this assessment, the student selects a project where principles of decision-making process in project
management is applied. The student needs to do research on the literature of project management and
understandthe best practices in project management. Cost is an important aspect in decision-making. However,
other than cost factor in delivering a project factor such as the sustainability factor in project management need
to be considered too.
| Marking Criteria |
Not satisfactory (0-49%)ofthe criterion mark) |
Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark |
Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark |
Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark |
Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark |
| Describe and discuss the principles and concepts of project management and optimisation with focus on sustainability (80%) |
Inadequate understanding of the principles of project management economics and project optimisation |
Basic knowledge only of the principles of project management economics and project optimization and limited depth of basic concepts |
Exhibits good breadth and depth of understanding of the principles of project management economics, project optimisation and project sustainability |
Exhibits very good breadth and depth of understanding of the principles of project management economics, project optimisation and project sustainability |
Exhibits excellent breadth and depth of understanding of the principles of project management economics, project optimisation and project sustainability |
| Overall presentation and integrationofthe discussion: neat presentation of essaywithtitle page, font size and structure of the report. The report is written in standard English. (10%) |
Very badly presented essay; lacks proper format and issues are not integrated into discussion. Written in poor English expression. |
Satisfactory presentation of essay but lacks proper format and issues are fairly integrated into discussion. Written in satisfactory English expression |
Good presentation of essay but lacks proper format and issues are integrated into discussion. Written in good English expression |
Very good presentation of essay but lacks proper format and issues are well integrated into discussion. Written in very good English expression |
Exceptional presentation of essay but lacks proper format and issues are well integrated into discussion. Written in excellent English expression |
Page | 7
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved: DATE & Version
| Demonstrates the correct use referencing for the sources and other materials used in the report. Harvard citation rules are applied in the report. (10%) |
Incorrect use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or some citations in the body are not included in the reference list |
Satisfactory use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or some citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Good use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Very good use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
Exceptional use of Harvard citation rules in the body and reference list, and/or citations in the body are included in the reference list |
The post SBM3307 Project Development and Optimisation appeared first on My Assignment Online.