EGR9045 Research Methods and Engineering Innovation Assessment Brief 2026 | University of Lincoln

EGR9045 Assessment Brief

Module Code : EGR9045
Module Title: Research Methods and Engineering Innovation
Assessment Title: Research Proposal
Description Of Assessment Task: In this assessment, you are required to develop a comprehensive research proposal within a specific field of engineering of your choice.

My Area Of Interest (Working Title): ‘’Kinetic modelling and optimisation of pyrolysis process for converting plastic waste into fuel’’.

Format And Submission Requirements:

• Word limit: 2,000 words (excluding references).
• The report should be written in a formal academic style and clearly structured with appropriate headings and subheadings.

Required Structure of the Research Proposal ( i.e. what the lecturer want)

Your proposal must include the following sections:

1. Working Title
Provide a clear and engaging working title that reflects the focus of your proposed research. The title should:

• Indicate the research topic clearly,
• Be specific rather than overly broad,
• Encourage reader interest and convey academic relevance.

2. Introduction

The introduction should:

• Provide the background and context of your chosen research area,
• Clearly identify the engineering problem or research gap,
• Explain why the topic is important, relevant, and timely,
• Lead logically to the aim of the proposed research.

3. Literature Review

This section should provide a critical review of existing research related to your topic. You are expected to:

• Summarise key theories, studies, and findings,
• Compare and contrast different viewpoints,
• Identify gaps, limitations, or unresolved issues in the literature,
• Justify the need for your proposed research.

This is not a descriptive summary; critical evaluation and synthesis of sources are essential.

4. Research Aim and Objectives

You must clearly define:

• A single overarching research aim, and
• A set of specific, measurable research objectives that explain how the aim will be achieved.

The objectives should be:

• Logically structured,
• Clearly linked to the research problem,
• Achievable within the proposed timeframe.

5. Research Design and Methodology

In this section, explain how the research will be conducted. You should:

Describe the overall research design (e.g. experimental, modelling, simulation, survey-based, mixed methods),

• Explain the data collection methods,
• Describe the data analysis techniques you plan to use,
• Justify your methodological choices with reference to the literature.

Clarity and justification are essential so that the research could be replicated by another researcher.

6. Potential Research Outcomes

Describe the expected outcomes of your research, such as:

• New insights, models, or design recommendations,
• Improved understanding of an engineering problem,
• Practical or theoretical contributions to the field.

You should also explain the significance and potential impact of these outcomes on engineering practice, research, or society.

7. Work Plan

Provide a clear work plan covering a 16-week research period. This should include:

Key project stages,

• Specific tasks and milestones,
• Time allocation for each task.

You must present this visually using a Gantt chart, supported by a short explanation in the text.

8. Bibliography

• Include a working bibliography of relevant and up-to-date academic sources:
• Use a recognised academic referencing style, (IEEE REFERENCE STYLE)
• Sources should be mainly peer-reviewed journals, conference papers, and authoritative technical reports,
• Demonstrate breadth and relevance of reading.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in this assessment It is forbidden to use AI to undertake this assessment.

 Marking Criteria For Assessment

This assessment is marked out of 100 marks and contributes 50% of the total module mark.

1. Introduction (10 marks)

• Excellent: Clear, well-defined background and problem (>70%)
• Good: Clear but lacking some detail (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Adequate context provided (50–60%)
• Weak: Poorly defined or unclear (40–50%)
•  Very poor: Incoherent or irrelevant (<40%)

2. Literature Review (35 marks)

• Excellent: Critical, well-evidenced, original analysis (>70%)
• Very good: Strong literature links and sound evaluation (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Some relevant literature, limited critique (50–60%)
• Weak: Poor referencing, limited evidence (40–50%)
• Very poor: Minimal or no meaningful discussion (<40%)

3. Aim and Objectives (10 marks)

• Excellent: Clear, focused, and well-aligned (>70%)
• Very good: Clear but minor weaknesses (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Adequate but lacks precision (50–60%)
• Weak: Unclear or unfocused (40–50%)
• Very poor: Does not address core research issue (<40%)

4. Research Design and Methodology (20 marks)

• Excellent: Well-justified and clearly explained (>70%)
• Very good: Logical and appropriate methods (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Basic explanation, limited justification (50–60%) • Weak: Poor clarity or relevance (40–50%)
• Very poor: Inadequate or missing (<40%)

5. Potential Research Outcomes (10 marks)

• Excellent: Clear, realistic, and significant (>70%)
• Very good: Well-described outcomes (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Some relevance, limited depth (50–60%)
• Weak: Vague or poorly explained (40–50%)
• Very poor: Not addressed (<40%)

6. Work Plan (5 marks)

• Excellent: Realistic, logical, well-structured (>70%)
• Satisfactory: Adequate but limited detail (60–70%)
• Average: Basic plan (50–60%)
• Weak: Poorly organised (40–50%)
• Very poor: Unrealistic or missing (<40%)

7. Use of Figures, Tables, and Supporting Material (5 marks)

• Excellent: Clear, well-integrated, well-explained (>70%)
• Good: Relevant but limited explanation (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Some use, minimal explanation (50–60%)
• Weak: Few or unclear figures (40–50%)
• Very poor: None included (<40%)

8. References (5 marks)

• Excellent: Current, comprehensive, correctly formatted (>70%)
• Good: Mostly up to date (60–70%)
• Satisfactory: Adequate but limited (50–60%)
• Weak: Outdated sources (40–50%)
• Very poor: Minimal or inappropriate (<40%)

Important Information on Dishonesty, Plagiarism and AI Tools

University of Lincoln Regulations define plagiarism as ‘the passing off of another person’s thoughts, ideas, writings or images as one’s own…’.

Examples of plagiarism include the unacknowledged use of another person’s material whether in original or summary form. Plagiarism also includes the copying of another student’s work’. Plagiarism is a serious offence and is treated by the University as a form of academic dishonesty.

The use of AI tools: Permitted/Not Permitted (delete as appropriate) Please note, if you use AI tools in the production of assessment work where it is not permitted, then it will be classed as an academic offence and treated by the University as a form of academic dishonesty.

Students are directed to the University Regulations for details of the procedures and penalties involved.

Answer

Request Answer of this Assignment