UCLAN FIRE University of Central Lancashire School of Engineering FV3004 Assignment Brief 2016 Assignment Details Critically discuss the following, using sketches or correctly referenced images where appropriate to illustrate your answers: 1. With reference to fire investigation text books critically explain the distinction (if any) between a smoke horizon and a heat horizon, and how the horizons would/could be evaluated. What could interfere with the horizon, and would that be a help or a hindrance to an investigation? [30 marks, approx. 450 words] 2. What is a chain of evidence, and why is it important in a fire investigation? [20 marks, approx. 300 words] 3. How could it be possible that a room with two apparent areas of ignition (i.e. points of origin) , could possibly NOT be the work of an arsonist? [20 marks, approx. 300 words] 4. The fire investigation text book “Scientific Protocols for Fire Investigation 2 nd Edition” by John Lentini contains many case studies in which the author has given a second opinion about the origin and cause of fire. Pick any one of those cases and write a critique, giving emphasis to examples of errors and poor decision making by the original fire investigators. [30 marks, approx. 450 words] In each of these three tasks you are asked to show your understanding of the issue(s) and are advised to avoid minimalistic answers. Evaluative and critical answers will score higher; for example – how useful is it? how accurate? 1 UCLAN FIRE The word limit is 1,500 words (+/-10%). This excludes footnotes but includes quotations. The word count must be printed on the top right hand corner of your work. Remember:    You must keep to the word limit of 1,500 words You must demonstrate that you have met the learning outcomes As you construct and present your work, consider the assessment criteria Presentation Instructions It is your responsibility to ensure that your work is neatly and accurately presented. The work must be:  Word-processed  1.5 or double line spaced  Times or Ariel 12 point font  Justified  Page numbered  On A4 paper  Margins left and right 3cm  Attached to a cover sheet. Marks may be deducted for failure to follow these instructions. Please look at the Student Guide to Assessment for more information. Referencing All academic writing must be referenced. If you use other people’s ideas without referencing them you are plagiarising their work. Either: Use the Numeric System of referencing within your text. At every point in the text where a reference is made, insert a number (in brackets or superscript) and then list the references numerically at the end of your work, Or: Use the Harvard system of referencing within your text. This will take the form: surname, year of publication, page number, and is enclosed within brackets, for example (Bradley 1998, 277). At the end of your work you should provide an alphabetical list of all the works you cite. Plagiarism The use of work produced for another purpose by you, working alone or with others, must be acknowledged. Copying from the works of another person (including Internet sources) constitutes plagiarism, which is an offence within the University’s regulations. Brief quotations from the published or unpublished works of another person, suitably attributed, are acceptable. You must always use your own words except when using properly referenced quotations. You are advised when taking notes from books or other sources to make notes in your own words, in a selective and critical way. 2 UCLAN FIRE Submission Your work must be submitted electronically with cover sheet via Turnitin (a guide to submitting work via Turnitin can be found on Blackboard). The deadline for submission is 12 noon on Friday 9th December 2016 Every attempt will be made to ensure that the work will be marked and available for collection by 13th January 2017 The assignment is worth 40% of the total module assessment. Learning outcomes This assessment will test your ability to meet the learning outcomes as described in your module booklet, specifically: 1. Demonstrate an understanding of the investigation methods for determining causes of fire and fire dynamics and the ability to apply these methods 4. Demonstrate an understanding of fire investigation processes including the important roles and evidence associated with different fire safety agencies and personnel participating in fire investigation 6. Analyse and critique a range of fire investigation reports from minor to major incidents 3 UCLAN FIRE Indicativemarkingscheme Classification Grade 96 89 1st 81 74 68 2.1 65 Relevance Knowledge Analysis 20% Directly relevant to title. Able to address the implications, assumptions and nuances of the title. Relevance to practice is thoroughly and explicitly addressed. 20% Makes effective use of a comprehensive range of theory and practice knowledge. Demonstrates ability in the manipulation and transfer of subject material to demonstrate a solid understanding of the issues in both theory and practice. Makes effective use of good theory and practice knowledge. Manipulates and transfers some material to demonstrate a clear grasp of the themes, questions and issues in theory and practice. Adequate knowledge of a fair range of relevant theoretical and practice related material with evidence of an appreciation of its significance. 15% A comprehensive analysis of the material resulting in clear and illuminating conclusions. Basic understanding of a limited range of relevant theoretical and practice related material. Largely descriptive or narrative in style with limited evidence of analytical capability. Conclusions are not always clear or logical Directly relevant to title. Is able to demonstrate effective practice relevance. 62 58 2.2 55 52 48 3 45 42 Generally addresses the title, sometimes addresses irrelevant issues. Relevance to practice effectively addressed, may be implicit in places. Some degree of irrelevance to the title is common. Only the most obvious issues are addressed at a superficial level and in unchallenging terms. Relevance to practice is superficially addressed and rarely made explicit Argument & Structure 20% Coherent and logically structured, making creative use of an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical model. Originality Presentation 15% Distinctive work showing independent thought and critical engagement with alternative views. 10% A very well written answer with standard spelling and syntax. Style is lucid and resourceful with an appropriate bibliographical apparatus. Good analysis of the material resulting in clear and logical conclusions. Generally coherent and logically constructed. Uses an appropriate mode of argument or theoretical model. Contains some distinctive or independent thinking. Beginning to formulate an independent position Well written with standard spelling and syntax. Style is lucid utilising an appropriate format and bibliographical apparatus. Adequate analytical treatment, with occasional descriptive or narrative passages which lack clear analytical purpose. Conclusions are clear. Adequate attempt to construct a coherent argument, but may suffer loss of focus and consistency. Issues at stake may lack clarity or theoretical models couched in simplistic terms. A basic argument is evident but tends to be supported by assertion and lacks proper development. Coherence and clarity are evident only intermittently Sound work which expresses a personal position, often in broad terms and tends towards uncritical conformity to one or more standard views of the topic. Competently written with only minor lapses from standard spelling and syntax. Largely derivative. No personal view is adequately formulated Wholly uncritical and conforming to one or more standard views. Style of presentation makes reading difficult. Deficiencies in spelling, syntax, format or bibliographical apparatus impact significantly upon clarity. 4 Style is readable with acceptable format and bibliographical status. UCLAN FIRE 35* 30* Fail 25 10 Relevance to the title is intermittent or missing. The topic is reduced to its vaguest and least challenging terms. Relevance to practice is barely considered or not at all. A limited understanding of a narrow range of relevant theoretical and practice related material or a lack of basic knowledge in either or both theory and practice necessary for an understanding of the topic Heavy dependence on description and/or narrative. Paraphrase is common. Evidence of analysis is lacking. Clear and logical conclusions are sparse * can be compensated 5 Little evidence of coherent argument. There is a lack of development and the work may be repetitive and/or thin. Almost wholly derivative. The writer’s contribution rarely goes beyond simplifying paraphrase. No evidence of personal thought. Poorly written with numerous deficiencies in syntax, spelling, expression and presentation. The writer may achieve clarity (if at all) only by using simplistic or repetitious style.
Purchase answer to see full attachment