Engineering for Quality Assignment 3
Engineering for Quality Assignment 3
Assignment 3 Brief
Assignment 3 is a reflective report and is weighted at 30% of the module assessment. Please use the Assignments tab for details of the deadline.
The guided learning presented in this module gives a relatively generic view of quality from academic and industrial backgrounds. However, the implementation of quality systems often differs depending on the organisation and industry sectors.
For this assignment you are required to write a reflective report, summarising your experience of quality based on your professional practice. You should include a reflective account comparing and contrasting the practices you have experienced with the module guided learning and associated reading.
The report should make reference to the topics covered in the module. As a guide it should include the following topics as a minimum:
An introduction to the role, area or department being discussed.
Your experiences of quality implementations including:
Definition of quality in the context of your role, department and/or company.
How quality is measured and associated costs evaluated.
How well embedded the culture of quality is in the organisation or department.
Are there management system(s) in place to support philosophies such as lean and Six Sigma?
Is there a process of continuous improvement or a reactive approach to quality?
Alignment with best practice.
A reflective discussion of how your experience of industry practice aligns with the theory / teaching.
Discussion of potential further improvements that could be implemented.
Your report must be no more than 2,000 words long.
Engineering for Quality Assignment 3
Engineering for Quality Assignment 3
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeOverview of the organisation, role or department being discussed, covering the function and quality requirements / measures
20 to >16.0 Pts
16 to >12.0 Pts
12 to >8.0 Pts
8 to >4.0 Pts
4 to >0.0 Pts
0 Pts
20 pts
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Low Pass
Fail
No marks
The Organisation, role or department, covering the function and quality reuirements / measures have been fully described in detail and is insightful
The Organisation, role or department, covering the function and quality reuirements / measures have been fully described and covers the key areas. A little more detail would help
Overall a good description of the Organisation, role or department, covering the function and quality reuirements / measures. More detail would help the reader understand it fully.
"Details have been provided of the organization role or department but much of the detail is still missing. The analysis/information regarding function and quality requirements / measures require more details "
A brief description of the of the organization role or department has been included and the analysis/information reagarding function and quality requirements / measures give a broad view
No useful information has been given to allow the reader to understand
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDiscussion of quality in practice
30 to >24.0 Pts
24 to >18.0 Pts
18 to >12.0 Pts
12 to >6.0 Pts
6 to >0.0 Pts
0 Pts
30 pts
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Low Pass
Fail
No marks
Excellent discussion of the quality in practice
Very good discussion of the quality in practice
Good discussion of the quality in practice but more details are required for the reader to follow
Discussion of the quality in practice is adequate but not to the standard requried
Limited discussion of the quality in practice
Little to no discussion of the quality in practice
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReflection on alignment of professional practice and theory
30 to >24.0 Pts
24 to >18.0 Pts
18 to >12.0 Pts
12 to >6.0 Pts
6 to >0.0 Pts
0 Pts
30 pts
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Low Pass
Fail
No marks
Appropriate reflection on aligment of professional practice and theory
Reflection on alignments of professional practice and theory have been identified
Overall a good reflection on alignments of professional practice and theory. A more justified correlation would improve the assignment
Some knowledge on theory but not enough to link to professional practice. A more detailed understanding is needed.
Limited knowledge on theory but not enough to link to professional practice.
No evidence of knowledge on theory not linked to professional practice.
This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeDiscussion of potential further improvements
20 to >16.0 Pts
16 to >12.0 Pts
12 to >8.0 Pts
8 to >4.0 Pts
4 to >0.0 Pts
0 Pts
20 pts
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Low Pass
Fail
No marks
The discussions of potential improvement are realistic and practical. Well supported by the assessment of the process.
The discussions are realistic and practical but need to be further supported by the assessment of the process and more could be included
Overall good suggestion of improvements. However, some may require more detail to be fully considered or have the possibility of being unrealistic such as requiring large investment or may not be fully aligned to the analysis in the report.
The solutions need to be made more clear highlighting how they are linked to the problems identified and a better discussion of how they will address the root cause of the problems and expected improvements
Solutions identified aren’t based on the review of the process of aligned to lean principles. Or The solutions have not been linked with the root causes identified.
No evidence of solutions
Total points: 100
Get Fresh Answer: £129 100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
