Assignment Guidance and Front Sheet
This front sheet for assignments is designed to contain the brief, the submission instructions, and the actual student submission for any assignment. As a result the sheet is completed by several people over time, and is therefore split up into sections explaining who completes what information and when. Yellow highlighted text indicates examples or further explanation of what is requested, and the highlight and instructions should be removed as you populate ‘your’ section.
To be completed by the student(s) prior to final submission:
Copyright By PowCoder代写 加微信 powcoder
Your actual submission should be written at the end of this cover sheet file, or attached with the cover sheet at the front if drafted in a separate file, program or application.
Student ID or IDs for group work
e.g. 1234567
To be completed (highlighted parts only) by the programme administration after approval and prior to issuing of the assessment; to be consulted by the student(s) so that you know how and when to submit:
16 October 2022
Submission date (excluding extensions)
BEFORE 12:00 noon UK time on Monday 28 November 2022
Submission guidance
To be submitted electronically in ONE file (instead of separate files) in supported types (e.g. MS Word, Acrobat PDF, and maximum file size is 40MB) via Tabula
Marks return date (excluding extensions)
28 December 2022
Late submission policy
If work is submitted late, penalties will be applied at the rate of 5 marks per University working day after the due date, up to a maximum of 10 working days late. After this period the mark for the work will be reduced to 0 (which is the maximum penalty). “Late” means after the submission deadline time as well as the date – work submitted after the given time even on the same day is counted as 1 day late.
Only for Postgraduate students who started their current course before 1 January 2020: the daily penalty is 3 marks rather than 5.
Resubmission policy
If you fail this assignment or module, please be aware that the University allows students to remedy such failure (within certain limits). Decisions to authorise such resubmissions are made by Exam Boards. Normally these will be issued at specific times of the year, depending on your programme of study. More information can be found from your programme office if you are concerned.
To be completed by the module owner/tutor prior to approval and issuing of the assessment; to be consulted by the student(s) so that you understand the assignment brief, its context within the module, and any specific criteria and advice from the tutor:
Module title & code
Industrial Engineering for Business Improvement – Weekend Mode ES9V9_A3HK)
Module owner
Module tutor
Module marker
Assessment type
essay/ group work
Weighting of mark
In module syndicate exercise 20 marks
Post Module Assignment 80 marks (
PMA is actually scored out of 100 pro rata to 80
Assessment brief
Both questions must be answered there is no choice
Question 1 ( 2 parts )
Subject Domain: Productivity, Efficiency/Effectiveness, the application of Work Measurement techniques, Method Study / Layout Design tools and procedures, MUDAS and their challenges
A) Explain the traditional view of Productivity.
Explain the difference between Efficiency and Effectiveness. Provide two examples that clearly show the differences between them.
B) At a local level interms of shop floor or office productivity, evaluate what the Work Measurement/Method Study/Layout Design tools and procedures can do in attacking the traditional MUDAS* ( wastes – Non Value Added ) which need to be constantly addressed by Industrial Engineers**
*Be careful to include the full set of MUDAS as highlighted/considered in the module.
** We are all Industrial Engineers ! The moment we start work, it does not matter what occupation we have, there is a duty to avoid waste and improve productivity.
2000 words
Question 2
Subject Domain: Ergonomic Risk Factor Analysis, Body Part Mapping, Health & Safety Regs, Ergonomics ( physical / cognitive ) Work Station Envelopes, Motion Economy Principles, Yerkes Dodson Performance model, Motivation /Ethics
Following on from the Flow Line Planning Case Study presented in the Module, discuss the Ergonomic Risk factors and the Workspace Envelope requirements that need to be considered. Interlace your discussion with Authentic / Related statistics where applicable* either from the Health and Safety Executive UK or the Health Authority.
*N.B. This does not preclude you from using data/illustrations/tables from other sources such as the International Labour Office or the Poly U Health and Safety Unit.
2000 words
Total word count for both questions is 4500, you are permitted a +10% overrun of 450 words = 4950 (absolute maximum ).
Your PMA should be an account of your thoughts and reasoning ( critique ) of the necessary actions/requirements embedded in each question.
Please make every effort not to plagiarise, be studious and curious about what each question represents.
Word count
The absolute word limit Is 4950, tabularised narratives/data sets/ frameworks/models/exhibits are not included in the above word limit
Module learning outcomes (numbered)
1 Critically Evaluate the range of Industrial Engineering tools and techniques in reducing non-value added work in all its contexts ( physical and cognitive ).
2 Demonstrate and where applicable synthesise, key elements of this specialised field of study with other relevant disciplines to promote better organisational efficiency and effectiveness.
3 Initiate, formulate and defend suitable plans for change within a variety of business contexts
Learning outcomes assessed in this assessment (numbered)
1 & 2 Fully
3 partially
Marking guidelines
Refer to Page 5 of this PMA for the qualification as to what a 70+, 69-60,59-50,49-40 represents and will be applied to this PMA
Academic guidance resources
Think Tank sessions to be conducted after the module. Reading materials, videos, government and institutional papers where applicable
The following is pre-populated for PGT assignments only:
As a postgraduate level student in WMG you may have some concerns about your ability to write at the high standard required. This short guide is intended to provide general guidance and advice. It is important that if you have any questions you discuss them with your module tutor. Remember, in writing your PMA you need to meet the expectations of the reader and university.
A good PMA generally requires you to answer the question and to include…
1. A title, with your student number, module, lecturer’s name and any other documentation required by the university.
2. A contents page and if appropriate, an abstract.
3. An introduction which acts as a ‘map’ to the rest of the document, describing the aim or purpose of the work and explaining how this aim is achieved. At this point it is usually helpful to paraphrase your conclusion.
4. Evidence of an appropriate level of background reading of relevant texts.
5. Evidence of systematic and clear thinking, indicative of good planning and organisation.
6. Writing which makes sense, is clearly and carefully presented (proof-read and grammar checked).
7. A critical style of writing which compares and contrasts the main theories, concepts and arguments with conclusions that are based in evidence presented.
8. High levels of accurate academic referencing.
9. A logical and well-defined structure with headings and subheadings.
10. Clearly labelled and well-presented diagrams and other graphics that are discussed in the text.
11. Adherence to usual academic standards including length and a timely submission.
12. A reference section in which every source that is cited in the text is listed.
Where to get help:
1. Talk to your module tutor if you don’t understand the question or are unsure as to exactly what is required.
2. Study, Professional and Analytical Skills (SPA) Moodle site – we have a lot of resources on this website with workbooks, links and other helpful tools. https://moodle.warwick.ac.uk/
3. The university Academic Writing centre provides workshops and useful tools to help you in all aspects of your work. https://warwick.ac.uk/services/skills/academicwriting/
4. Avoiding Plagiarism, the university’s site to help you to reference properly https://moodle.warwick.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=42224
5. Wellbeing support services https://warwick.ac.uk/services/wss
6. Numerous online courses provided by the University library to help in academic referencing, writing, avoiding plagiarism and a number of other useful resources. https://warwick.ac.uk/services/library/students/your-library-online/
OVERALL REQUIREMENT
Overall, good academic practice.should be
demonstrated clearly. The organisation of
materials, sources, data, information and
opinion is undertaken in a scholarly manner.
Objectivity, good analysis and argument is
particularly important where there is no right
answer. A critical approach is required at all
70+69-6059-5049-30
OVERALL GUIDIING ASSESSMENT
The responses have a fully explained narrative,
suitably and correctly sourced. Authoritative
stats/data used are relevant to the subject
under discussion, and seek to support, confirm
or even contradict ( where applicable ) the
subject under evaluation or debate.
A substantial response but not every issue or
consideration has been anticipated and laid
down in the narrative in a meaningful way. The
narrative may well discuss or evaluate the main
themes required but there maybe ommissions
in the form of sources/illustrations/ data ( or
simply what has been used is not as current as
it should be).
Base response which may superficially
introducesa subject theme or issue of concern.
The range/depth of discussion-or evaluation is
clearly limited.. The knowledge applied is either
limited or partially correct and the required
sources/data/stats are not provided or perhaps
not aligned properly. At first glance it may
appear to focus on the correct theme or subject
but on the whole the academic rigour is lacking,
very little insight is provided and the degree of
knowledge applied superficial.
Significant omissions in the narrative are clearly
visible. There is little range or depth of thought/
insight given. Sources/Data/illustrations to
compliment the narrative cannot be found.
Potentially the wrong interpretation may have
been provided either due to lack of knowledge
of the subject under discussion or lack of
research/learning. Incoherent/Disorganised
presentation, clearly not sufficient for a pass
There is a concerted effort to align current
thinking and there is a good deal of insight (
almost a journalistic curiosity ) into the subject
theme(s) under scrutiny. Assumptions or
assertions are qualified with valid
sourcing/illustrations/data where applicable.
There maybe a theme/assumption/assertion
that is not fully debated or its importance not
fully recognised which may also extend to
models or formulas used.
程序代写 CS代考 加微信: powcoder QQ: 1823890830 Email: powcoder@163.com