Hello, if you have any need, please feel free to consult us, this is my wechat: wx91due
BCPM0020: Global Challenges in Human-Infrastructure Environmental Interactions
1. Introduction:
This document includes important information regarding your summative assessment. Please read this document in full and refer to it while preparing your assignment.
This coursework has 1 part, with a weighting of 100%, marked on a scale of 100.
Please note that this is an INDIVIDUAL coursework.
2. Assessment Brief:
Instructions: In this summative assignment, you have the opportunity to demonstrate your understanding of fundamental environmental economics and socioeconomic challenges. In 3,000 words, please:
1) demonstrate the basic concepts of environmental economics and your understanding of the socioeconomic challenges.
2) find a topic and choose an analytical tool introduced in the module.
3) propose and discuss your solutions to tackle the challenge (descriptive or quantified).
To address these themes thoroughly, you should base your reflection on academic and industry references as well as content presented over the course of the module. Your writing should be thoughtfully presented, coherent and concise.
An academic English writing language/style is recommended. References can be in any style or format as long as the style is strictly consistent.
Where applicable, author(s) name(s), journal title/book title, chapter title/article title, year of publication, volume number/book chapter and the article number or pagination must be present.
Term papers are due by TBC, and should be submitted through the provided submission link on Moodle.
3. Use of AI:
The following category of AI can/cannot be used:
Category 1 – AI cannot be used.
X Category 2 – AI tools can be used in an assistive role.
Category 3 – AI has an integral role.
For examples of each category please go to Using AI tools in assessment
Category 2 - Students are permitted to use AI tools for specific defined processes to support the development of specific skills as required by the assessment, such as data analysis, transcription, and translation, generating insights, giving feedback on content, or proofreading content.
4. Assessment sequence and weighting:
|
Summative Assessment |
Weighting (%) |
Release date |
Submission date |
Corresponds to Learning Outcomes |
||||
|
L1 |
L2 |
L3 |
L4 |
L5 |
||||
|
Essay |
100% |
1/12/24 |
10/01/25 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. Format:
This assignment has a limit of 3,000 words (excluding tables, figures, references and appendices). All sources and references should be acknowledged using the Harvard referencing system.
There is a 10% leeway for the word limit: submissions that are within 10% over or under the word count won’t be penalised.
|
Type of content |
Counts towards the word limit |
|
Table of contents |
No |
|
Reference list or bibliography at the end |
No |
|
Cover page |
No |
|
Diagrams, annotated pictures, figures and any other visuals |
No |
|
Appendices |
No |
|
Abstract |
No |
|
Acknowledgements |
No |
|
Footnotes |
Yes |
|
Tables in the main text |
Yes |
|
In-text citations |
Yes |
6. Marking Criteria:
|
Criteria 1 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM |
30% |
|
Criteria 2 ANALYSIS |
40% |
|
Criteria 3 CONCLUSIONS |
20% |
|
Criteria 4 PRESENTATION |
10% |
|
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM (30%) |
|
|
Grade |
Criteria |
|
80%+ |
As for mark of 70-79%, but in addition showing critical power and/or ability to synthesise or insightful view of context |
|
70-79% |
A significant problem clearly identified and precise questions posed, by finding, reading and understanding relevant literature, probably including items not recommended by staff. |
|
60-69% |
Some of the more significant aspects of the problem not fully developed. Focus will be on relatively less important or simpler aspects of the problem or context To have found, read and understood relevant recommended literature. |
|
50-59% |
The brief correctly understood in broad terms, and paper addressing issues relevant to the brief. Problem/ context may be not well developed. A limited review of literature / sources, drawing largely on lectures and set texts. |
|
40-49% |
Some misunderstanding of the brief Some irrelevant or erroneous presentation of the problem. Very limited reference to relevant literature |
|
30-39% |
General misunderstanding of the brief Largely irrelevant or erroneous presentation of the problem Extremely limited reference to relevant literature |
|
Below |
Total misunderstanding of the brief Totally irrelevant or erroneous presentation of the problem No reference to relevant literature |
|
ANALYSIS (40%) |
|
|
Grade |
Criteria |
|
80%+ |
As for mark of 70-79%, but in addition showing ability to understand and solve problems of how best to connect theoretical and empirical parts of a term paper, in context of a particular brief |
|
70-79% |
Logical and appropriate analytical structure used to develop a coherent and to some degree original / independent argument. |
|
60-69% |
A thorough investigation, developing a coherent argument. |
|
50-59% |
To have attempted to apply a method of analysis appropriate to the problem. |
|
40-49% |
Attempt to apply a partly inappropriate method of analysis Showing a significant misapplication of basic concepts |
|
30-39% |
Attempt to apply a generally inappropriate method of analysis Showing general misapplication of basic concepts |
|
Below |
Attempt to apply a totally inappropriate method of analysis Showing complete misapplication of basic concepts |
|
CONCLUSIONS (20%) |
|
|
Grade |
Criteria |
|
80%+ |
Powerfully argued conclusions, with implications drawn for problemowners |
|
70-79% |
Well argued conclusions showing independent judgment applied to the evidence |
|
60-69% |
Several and sound conclusions but unsurprising and / or not carried through to implications for action. |
|
50-59% |
Some conclusions, drawn from preceding analysis, and not ‘wild’. Some reasonable implications for action. |
|
40-49% |
Few conclusions or a number of incorrect conclusions or conclusions not drawn from preceding analysis – few or no recommendations OR Introduction of new material or some misunderstanding function of conclusions section |
|
30-39% |
Very few or largely incorrect conclusions and/or not drawn from preceding analysis – no recommendations OR |
|
Below 30% |
Totally incorrect and/or illogical conclusions |
|
PRESENTATION (10%) |
|
|
Grade |
Criteria |
|
80%+ |
Including elements of imaginative presentation as well as meeting all check-list |
|
70-79% |
Meeting all requirements of our presentation check-list |
|
60-69% |
Meeting most requirements of our presentation check list. An ‘average standard’ of presentation. |
|
50-59% |
Minor weaknesses on many checklist items, or serious weaknesses on some checklist items. |
|
40-49% |
Serious weaknesses on a number of checklist items OR Some significant degree of unacceptable referencing |
|
30-39% |
Major weaknesses on most checklist items OR |
|
Below 30% |
Very poor overall presentation and referencing (short of an offence) |
7. Penalties:
|
Penalties (as per UCL Academic Manual) |
- Penalties due to over/under-length cannot be more than 10%
- Over/under-length penalty cannot take the student’s mark below ‘Pass Mark’
- In the case the coursework that is submitted is over/under-length and is also late, the greater of any penalties will apply. |
|
|
- any use of AI that exceeds the permitted use in this assessment brief will be subject to UCL Academic Misconduct policy and could lead to penalties. |
8. Assessment Support:
If you seek for advice about assignments:
-Book an office hour with Heran Zheng via email.
The Writing Lab is a free service offered through the UCL Academic Communication Centre which runs workshops, tutorials and support sessions to enhance academic writing and research skills. The Writing Lab's services are available for undergraduate and postgraduate students in the Joint Faculties of Arts & Humanities and Social & Historical Sciences, the Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, and Psychology & Language Sciences: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/writing-lab/
UCL Student Union English Language + Writing Support Programme supports non-native English speaking students with their academic writing and speaking. Peer Tutors run several different types of free activities to help you with your written and spoken English, including a regular programme of workshops, one-to-one sessions and 'Coffee and Conversation' which is a weekly opportunity to get together and practice your spoken English with other students: https://studentsunionucl.org/advice-and-support/support/language-writing-support-programme
9. Academic Integrity:
UCL requires high academic standards in order to maintain trust and confidence in our world-leading research and teaching, as well as the individuals who work and study here.
'Understanding Academic Integrity course for students' is UCL's online and self-paced course is designed to help students to develop good academic practice for completing assessments.
Through your UCL education you will become an independent learner and knowledge creator. To be successful you must develop good academic practice skills and avoid any type of Academic Misconduct.
See here for the most common types of Academic Misconduct with Case Studies provided for each definition: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/students/exams-and-assessments/academic-integrity/about-academic-misconduct
10. Submission Details:
Uploaded to Moodle by TBC
File to be uploaded via Moodle in PDF format.
11. Feedback:
Feedback is an extremely important part of your academic development at UCL, and the Department is committed to providing appropriate support. We aim to ensure that assessment mechanisms allow students to demonstrate the skills and knowledge they have gained and that assessments are carried out fairly and consistently. It is a priority of the Department to provide students with suitably instructive and timely feedback.
The Department aims to return assessed work within 1 calendar month of the submission deadline date. We expect students to have had the opportunity to reflect, and act, on their learning from the feedback in subsequent assessments.