You are required to produce an individual academic poster with an accompanying 1,500-word analytical and reflective commentary, based on a selected or simulated project case scenario. The poster should visually present key project
BIT2027 Applied Project Management Assessment Brief 2026-27 | HUD
BIT2027 Applied Project Management Assessment Brief
Module Learning Outcomes
- Demonstrate understanding of key principles and business applications of project management through a structured visual presentation.
- Apply appropriate project risk management tools and techniques to identify, assess, and propose responses to project risks.
- Analyse human and organisational factors influencing project success and team performance.
- Interpret and apply project data (time, cost, quality, or performance metrics) to support project decisions.
- Organise and present financial and non-financial project data visually and coherently to address stakeholder needs.
- Evaluate project team and stakeholder dynamics and propose creative approaches to address identified challenges.
- Reflect on personal learning in managing a simulated or selected project scenario.
Assignment Specific Resources
Software
Students will use the following software to complete the assessment. All required tools are free and accessible through a web browser:
- Google Gemini and Google AI Studio (Build Function): used to create a small AI-powered tool that supports a project management task (e.g., risk analysis generator, stakeholder mapping engine, scheduling assistant). Students can access Google AI Studio for free using their personal Google accounts.
- Microsoft Office 365 (Word, Excel, PowerPoint): provided free via the University’s Office 365 licence and available on all University computers.
- Canva (free version): an optional online tool for designing the academic poster.
Assessment Task
You are required to produce an individual academic poster with an accompanying 1,500-word analytical and reflective commentary, based on a selected or simulated project case scenario. The poster should visually present key project management components, including: scope definition, stakeholder and team analysis, risk assessment, data interpretation (e.g., time, cost, quality, or performance metrics), and lessons learned.
As part of the assessment, you must use Google Gemini and Google AI Studio (Build Function) to create a small AI-powered tool that supports one or more project management tasks (e.g., a risk analysis generator, stakeholder mapping engine, scheduling calculator, EVM interpreter, or scope assessment tool). You will integrate the outputs of this AI tool into your poster and critically evaluate its usefulness in the accompanying text.
Task Specific Guidance
This assessment requires the application of project management principles, tools, and techniques to analyse a project scenario and communicate findings through both visual and written formats. The following expectations apply:
1. Core Knowledge Requirements (Level 5)
To achieve a pass, you must demonstrate understanding of:
- Key project management concepts such as scope, risk, scheduling, stakeholders, team dynamics, communication, and project data interpretation.
- The use of project management tools and techniques appropriate for Level 5, such as risk registers, stakeholder mapping, Gantt-style scheduling, and basic performance metrics (e.g., CPI, SPI).
- How AI tools (Google Gemini + Google AI Studio) can support decision-making and analysis within a project context.
2. Supporting Evidence and Sources
Your work should draw upon:
- Core and recommended project management textbooks
- Peer-reviewed academic literature
- Industry guidance, such as APM or PMI resources
- Your own earlier analytical work (risk analysis, data interpretation, stakeholder assessment, etc.)
- Outputs generated by your AI tool, clearly referenced and critically evaluated
You are encouraged to integrate appropriate tables, visuals, and data summaries where relevant.
3. Core Intellectual and Cognitive Skills (Level 5)
Your assessment must demonstrate:
- Analysis: breaking down project problems and interpreting evidence
- Application: applying project management theory to a case scenario
- Evaluation: assessing risks, stakeholder dynamics, and project data
- Critical reflection: recognising what you learned and how the AI tool influenced your decisions
- Synthesis: combining different elements into a coherent poster and commentary
4. Writing Style, Structure, and Presentation
Poster:
- Clear, visual layout suitable for a professional audience
- Appropriate use of tables, diagrams, charts, and structured content
- Concise, well-organised, and visually coherent
Accompanying Text (1,500 words):
- Written in an academic style
- Structured with headings and subheadings
- Includes analysis, justification of methods, evaluation of AI outputs, and personal reflection
- Correct citations and reference list (APA 7)
5. Other Assessed Skills
This assessment also evaluates:
- Visual communication and data presentation
- Ethical and transparent use of AI tools
- Interpretation of structured AI output
- Ability to translate complex project concepts into accessible visuals
- Individual initiative in building a functional AI-assisted mini-tool
6. Word Count Guidance
Included in the word count (1,500 words):
- All written content in the accompanying text
- Any discussion, analysis, explanation, and interpretation
- Headings and subheadings
Not included in the word count:
- Poster content
- Tables, charts, diagrams, models, figures
- AI tool screenshots
- References and bibliography
- Appendices (if used)
- Titles and labels
You will be penalised for exceeding the word limit by ±10%.
UGT Marking Criteria Grid Template
This is a template only. Schools are required to add to the criteria with subject-specific language in accordance with the assessment and assessment type. Schools must ensure that they include the full criteria they will use to provide clear indications of how achievement of module learning outcomes may be demonstrated, thereby promoting the reliability of assessment. The marking criteria should be kept in the Module Handbook.
Once completed, this guidance (in red text) should be deleted.
| General / Knowledge | Grade Range | Description | 1. Presentation and Structure 2. Understanding / Skills 3. Selection of cited material |
|---|---|---|---|
| General / Knowledge | 80 and above | Outstanding work, demonstrating comprehensive mastery of knowledge, understanding and extensive critical appreciation of the subject area. | 1. Work is well structured and academically presented with clear attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style. Some degree of originality. 2. Evidence of highly significant and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Very significant evidence of reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Sources used selectively and skilfully to support the argument. Referencing is extensive, accurate and relevant |
| General / Knowledge | 70-79 | Excellent work, demonstrating mastery of knowledge, understanding and critical appreciation of the subject area | 1. Work is well structured and academically presented with clear attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style. 2. Evidence of highly significant and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Significant evidence of reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Sources used selectively and skilfully to support the argument. Referencing is extensive, accurate and relevant |
| General / Knowledge | 60-69 | Very good work, demonstrating very good knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the subject area | 1. Work is well structured and academically presented with clear attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style. 2. Evidence of very good and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Evidence of reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Referencing is appropriate, accurate and relevant. |
| General / Knowledge | 50-59 | Good work, demonstrating good knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the subject area | 1. Work is well structured and academically presented with clear attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style. 2. Evidence of good and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Evidence of some reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Referencing is adequate, accurate and relevant. |
| General / Knowledge | 40-49 | Satisfactory work, demonstrating sufficient knowledge, understanding and appreciation of the subject area. | 1. Work is structured and academically presented with clear attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style 2. Some evidence of good and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Evidence of some limited reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Referencing is limited. |
| General / Knowledge | 30-39 | Unsatisfactory work: Demonstrating very limited knowledge or understanding of the subject area | 1. Work is not structured well or academically presented with a lack of attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style 2. Minimal evidence of good and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. Some evidence of some limited reading outside the material presented in academic sessions and the directed texts. Referencing is minimal. |
| General / Knowledge | 0-29 | Poor / very poor work Demonstrating inadequate, limited knowledge and fragmentary understanding of the subject area. | 1. Work is not structured well or academically presented with a lack of attention to grammar and to the use of language, expression and style 2. No or very limited evidence of good and relevant evaluation skills and conclusions 3. No or very limited evidence of further reading and referencing |
