ENG490 Introduction to Petroleum Engineering Portfolio
University of Portsmouth
ENG490 Introduction to Petroleum Engineering Portfolio
Dr Mohamed Hassan
The Portfolio for this unit consists of two elements and carrys 50% of the total unit mark
à Element 1: HSE Case study executive summary 20% of the total unit mark
à Element 2:“Non-conventional resources” 20% for the essay and 10%for the poster of the total unit mark which consists of 500 word essay and a poster on your topic as listed in table 2.
Your final submission should be in to the ENG office 23/02/2018, consisting of a folder containing:
- Element 1
- Executive summary of your case study
- Element 2
- Individual essays
- A3 coloured paper copy of the Poster
Work that is wholly plagiarized will receive a mark of zero.
The course work is worth 50% of the final unit mark; All work should conform to the submission guidelines in the Student Handbook. In particular, your essay should be word-processed and printed on A4 paper, using a 12-point font and 1.5 spacing[1]. You should include a title page with your student number, the name of your instructor and of course name as well as the title of your Critical Review of Sources (CROS.
Marking and feedback for the portfolio
The unit team aim to achieve reliable, consistent and reproducible judgements on your work. In accordance with University regulations, each assessment is marked against a scheme that distinguishes between different levels of achievement.
You can expect the following feedback on assessments undertaken for this unit.
- A mark. Marks are normally expressed as a percentage.
- The major shortcomings of your work.
- Ways in which that mark can be improved.
You will also receive feedback during classes and through the Moodle site, and additional opportunities to receive feedback are available from the unit team.
Your assessments are evaluated relative to the criteria outlined below. These provide a consistent reference point to distinguish between different levels of achievement. You should always take these criteria into consideration when preparing for any assessment on this unit.
| Table 1:Grade criteria | |
| Grade | Criteria |
| 70+ | As below plus: Excellent work – able to express an original reasoned argument in a lucid manner by reviewing & critiquing a wide range of material. | Original, critical thinking based on outstanding insight, knowledge & understanding of material. | Wide reaching research showing breadth & depth of sources. |
| 60-69 | As below plus: Clear, balanced coherent critical & rigorous analysis of the subject matter. | Detailed understanding of knowledge & theory expressed with clarity. | Extensive use of relevant & current literature to view topic in perspective, analyse context & develop new explanations and theories. |
| 50-59 | As below plus: Detailed review and grasp of pertinent issues & a critical contextual overview of the literature. | Thorough knowledge of theory and methods & uses this to underpin arguments and conclusions. | Confidence in understanding and using literature. |
| 40-49 | Demonstrates grasp of key concepts & an ability to develop & support an argument in a predominately descriptive way with valid conclusions drawn from the research. | Familiarity with key literature which is cited and presented according to convention. | Logical & clear structure, well organised with good use of language and supporting material. |
| 30-39 | FAIL Some knowledge of relevant concepts & literature but significant gaps in understanding and/or knowledge. | Little attempt at evaluation, conclusions vague, ambiguous & not based on researched material. | Limited or inappropriate research. | Deficits in length, structure, presentation &/or prose |
| 0-29 | FAIL. No serious attempt to address the question or problem, and/or manifests a serious misunderstanding of the requirements of the assignment. Acutely deficient in all aspects. |
