ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1

Week 1 Course Information

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking and Writing

Course Introduction

Description
The challenges of a global engineer increasingly call upon engineers to think critically and
communicate effectively to undertake developmental leadership. This course aims to develop
and practise students’ critical thinking and writing skills through analysing case studies in
engineering leadership, constructing complex engineering-related problems and solutions,
presenting arguments effectively and reflecting on personal leadership development. Relevance
to engineering practice is emphasized with references to grounded theories of engineering
leadership (Colcleugh, 2013; Rottman, Sacks & Reeve, 2015) and the seven missing basics of
engineering education (Goldberg, 2009). This module is taught using a flipped classroom model
over 1 semester with 1 two-hour tutorial (in addition to a two-hour online presence) per week.
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 is module that seeks to develop your critical thinking and
communication skills – both in terms of your mental capacity for analyzing ideas, information
and arguments, and in terms of your ability to express those thoughts in writing. With the aim of
fostering independent thought and critical enquiry, this course will inevitably prove challenging.
You will be required to reflect on cases, research on a topic and assess the sources that you read
critically. Your tutor will be there to guide you, but he or she will not be ‘spoon-feeding’ you
information. What you get out of the course depends very much on what you put in. Tutorials
only work well when students have properly prepared for them.
The instructional approach used in this course is the flipped classroom model. Prior to weekly
face-to-face tutorial sessions, you will be required to complete online or out-of-class activities as
preparation for the face-to-face sessions. These online activities are NOT optional, but
constitute partial fulfilment for the requirements of a 4MC module. Additionally, tutorial
classes will proceed on the assumption that you have completed the online activities before
class, and they will work to develop the understandings that you have gained from the online
activities to focus on application and higher-order thinking skills. During face-to-face tutorials,
you will work on discussion activities through small-group and whole-class interactions, and so
your active participation is essential. The teaching/learning environment in these classes will be
highly student-centred, and this means you will have the opportunity to:

 share your ideas with others, ask questions, provide peer feedback, debate issues and
orally present and defend ideas;
 practice critical thinking and problem-solving strategies, reflective learning and
discipline-related writing as you analyse content cases/themes and conduct research;
and
 collaborate actively with your classmates on classroom activities and course
assignments, via the IVLE and other internet-based platforms, meetings, peer reviews,
etc.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 1

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Course Objectives
On successful completion of this module, students will be able to:

 apply critical thinking skills as identified in the seven missing basics of engineering
education (Goldberg, 2009) and engineering leadership frameworks (Colcleugh, 2013;
Rottman, Sacks & Reeve, 2015) to analyse how developmental leadership operates in
engineering-related contexts;
 analyse a complex engineering-related problem;
 use relevant and reliable information to justify proposed solutions that include societal
implications to a complex engineering-related problem;
 evaluate engineering-related solutions using a suitable framework that includes
environmental and sustainability considerations;
 write comprehensive, clear, and well-organised discipline-related essays and reports
that respond to set tasks; and
 contribute positively to the project goal and decision making of the team.

IVLE and Internet-based communication

The IVLE contains all the information and tutorial worksheets that you will require for the
course. The course materials are organized by week. All assignments are to be uploaded into the
IVLE Workbins.

GoogleDrive will be used for most online collaborative activities, especially Assignment 2
discussion, writing and editing. Discussion forums, IVLE chats or any other internet-based
communication channels chosen by your tutor will also be used to discuss
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 matters with you.

Tutorial Worksheets and Readings

You are expected to download all the tutorial worksheets from the IVLE. You may bring hard
copies or soft copies in your laptop/tablet though not on your smartphones. This is because the
tutorial notes are not formatted for mobile viewing. You should make a point to annotate your
readings, write your answers before class and take notes during class.

There is no set textbook for this course, but you are required to read all required readings listed
in the weekly tutorial worksheets (under Online Activities section) and you are also encouraged
to pursue additional readings that may be suggested in the tutorial worksheets from time to
time. You are also required to complete all online activities as described in the tutorial
worksheets before meeting your tutor and class in the face-to-face tutorial sessions.

Here is a list of core and supplementary readings that will be of relevance to this course:

Core Reading
Rottmann, C.,Sacks, R., & Reeve, D. (2014). Engineering leadership: grounding leadership theory
in engineers’ professional identities. Leadership, 11(3), 351–373. [Of particular importance is
the 3-orientations model of engineering leadership on p.359]

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 2

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Supplementary Readings
Colcleugh, D. (2013). Everyone a leader: a guide to leading high-performance organizations for
engineers and scientists. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press. [Read the first
two chapters and pursue other chapters following your needs and interests]
Freedman, J. (2010, January 27). The six seconds EQ model. Retrieved from
https://www.6seconds.org/2010/01/27/the-six-seconds-eq-model/. [Focus reading on the
section Eight Competencies of Emotional Intelligence]
Goldberg, D. E. (2010). The missing basics and other philosophical reflections for the
transformation of engineering education. In D. Grasso, & M. B. Burkins (eds.), Holistic
engineering education (pp.145-158). NY: Springer.

Ruben, B. D., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2016). Leadership as social influence: An expanded view of
leadership communication theory and practice. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
23(4), 467-479. [Focus reading on the sections on agenda setting, management of meaning,
sense-making and sense-giving for a deeper understanding of influence dynamics]

Schell, W. J., & Kauffmann, P. J. (2016). Understanding engineering leadership: a critical review
of the literature. Proceedings of the International Annual Conference of the American Society for
Engineering Management; Huntsville: 1-11.

Sucher, S., & Preble, M. (2017). Case study: follow dubious orders or speak up? An intern
contemplates whether she should compromise her values for a job. Harvard Business Review,
95(4), 139-143.

Statements and E-Resources on Plagiarism

It is important to note that plagiarism is an academic offence that is taken very seriously by the
University, as stated in the NUS Code of Student Conduct (Clause 4) and the notice on plagiarism
on the NUS website:

NUS Code of Student Conduct (Clause 4)

The University takes a strict view of cheating in any form, deceptive fabrication, plagiarism
and violation of intellectual property and copyright laws. Any student who is found to have
engaged in such misconduct will be subject to disciplinary action by the University.
Source: NUS Office of Student Affairs website (www.nus.edu.sg/osa/coc)

NUS Notice on the NUS Code of Conduct

NUS students are expected to maintain and uphold the highest standards of integrity and
honesty at all times, as well as embrace community standards, diversity and mutual respect
for one another, both within the University and the wider Singapore community.

The Code of Student Conduct (published by the Office of Student Affairs) is intended to guide
students' conduct in both the academic and non-academic aspects of their University life by
providing an overview of the behavior generally expected of them as a member of the
University community.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 3

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

One of the fundamental principles on which this Code is based is that of "Academic,
Professional, and Personal Integrity".

In this respect, it is important to note that all students share the responsibility for upholding
the academic standards and reputation of the University. Academic honesty is a prerequisite
condition in the pursuit and acquisition of knowledge.

Academic dishonesty is any misrepresentation with the intent to deceive or failure to

acknowledge the source or falsification of information or inaccuracy of statements or
cheating at examinations/tests or inappropriate use of resources. There are many forms of
academic dishonesty and plagiarism is one of them. Plagiarism is generally defined as ‘the
practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own' (The New
Oxford Dictionary of English). The University does not condone plagiarism.

Students should adopt this rule - You have the obligation to make clear to the assessor which
is your own work, and which is the work of others. Otherwise, your assessor is entitled to
assume that everything being presented for assessment is being presented as entirely your
own work. This is a minimum standard. In addition, the following guidelines will provide
some assistance.

 When using the ideas, phrases, paragraphs and data of others in work presented for
assessment, such materials should be appropriately credited and acknowledged, so that it
is clear that the materials being presented is that of another person and not the student's
own.

 The amount of detail required when referencing and acknowledging a source will vary
according to the type of work and norms of the discipline. For instance,
 Supervised examinations will require less detail in referencing and
acknowledgement.
 Papers written other than under examination conditions will require a full
citation of all the sources utilised. While a particular style of citation is not
prescribed, the citation should provide enough information for the reader to
locate the sources cited.

 Research materials (including texts, graphics and data) obtained from the internet or
other electronic resources should be treated in the same way as research materials
obtained from traditional sources.

Any student found to have committed or aided and abetted the offence of plagiarism may be
subject to disciplinary action. In addition, the student may receive no grade for the relevant
academic assignment, project, or thesis; and he/she may fail or be denied a grade for the
relevant subject or module. Such a student caught plagiarizing would have to take that
module for grade and not be allowed to exercise the S/U option for that module.

A student may not knowingly intend to plagiarise, but that should not be used as an excuse
for plagiarism. Students should seek clarification from their instructors or supervisors if they
are unsure whether or not they are plagiarising the work of another person.
Source: NUS Registrar’s Office website
(http://www.nus.edu.sg/registrar/adminpolicy/acceptance.html)

You are required to view the e-module entitled NUS Academic Culture module and read the
articles listed below. You will then have to take a quiz on plagiarism by the end of Week 3.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 4

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Academic Culture Module

Click on the following link and view at least the two sections on “Plagiarism” and “Penalties”:
http://emodule.nus.edu.sg/ac/launch.htm

 Go to Academic Ethics > Plagiarism

This section answers the questions:
1. What is plagiarism?
2. How can plagiarism be avoided?

 Go to Academic Ethics > Penalties

This section answers the questions

1. What happens when someone is caught for plagiarism?
2. Does being found guilty of plagiarism mean expulsion from the University?

Articles on Plagiarism

Click on the links below and read the three articles on plagiarism.

1. “Plagiarism: What It Is and How to Recognize and Avoid It”

http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/plagiarism.shtml

2. “Avoiding Plagiarism”
http://sja.ucdavis.edu/files/plagiarism.pdf

3. “Plagiarism and How to Avoid It”

http://www.cdtl.nus.edu.sg/success/sl7.htm

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 5

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Assessment
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 is a 100% Continual Assessment module.

Assignment 1 Apply engineering leadership knowledge to analyse a leadership

(20%) case of your own. Your chosen case should be based on your past or
Individual present leadership experiences/incidents in engineering or
engineering-related settings.
Case study
development Your case study should contain the following elements:
 Case description of information pertinent to the experience or
incident (e.g., setting, participants, problems, etc.)
 Assessment question(s) that are open-ended and that allow you
to engage in quality reflections about the nature and quality of
engineering leadership (e.g., interpret what it means to be a
leader, examine the role of leadership, explore factors that
contribute to effective and ineffective leadership, etc. in
engineering or engineering-related settings)
 Case analysis and reflection: your answer to the assessment
question(s). You should write a well-articulated thesis in
response to your chosen assessment question(s) and support
your response with references to engineering leadership
frameworks and constructs encountered in this course.

Your case study development should be between 750 and 850*

words.

You should refer to Rottmann, Sacks and Reeve (2014) and at least
TWO other sources to support your case analysis and reflection.
Detail all your sources in a Reference List at the end of your paper.
Follow the IEEE citation style in preparing your Reference List.

You are required to upload a soft copy of your paper to the

Submissions Folder on IVLE by Friday, 21st September 2018, 5 p.m.

*You should not exceed the maximum word limit specified.

Assignment 2 Assignment 2 is designed to assess your ability to analyse your

(35%) chosen topic/issue based on the theme “Sustainable Development
Team Goals: transforming our world for the future”; to present a good
sustained argument exploring the importance of the problem you
Problem-Solution have identified (in relation to a country or a city you have chosen as
position paper the theme is broad) and the causes and context of the problem; to
use evidence from research; and to suggest 1-2 feasible solutions
(from an engineering perspective) bearing in mind the implications
and consequences should these solutions be implemented.

The proposed solutions can be your own original innovative idea, or

adapted/borrowed from another source, but they must be
engineering-based and supported by evidence that is acceptable,
relevant, and credible.

Your paper, written in 1,800-2,000 words, is for an academic

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 6

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

audience, and fully supported by relevant sources, and attached

with an IEEE Reference List and Annotated Bibliography (a
minimum of 6 sources; each member writes 2 sources for the
Annotated Bibliography).

The word count excludes the Reference List, Annotated

Bibliography and Appendices. You are required to upload a soft
copy of your paper to the Submissions Folder on the IVLE one week
after your team’s conferencing session with the tutor. Only one
member of the team needs to submit the soft copy in the folder.
Hard copy submissions are NOT required.

Each team comprises a minimum of two and a maximum of three

members. There should be 6 teams per tutorial group. You may
wish to form a team with students who may have diverse
perspectives due to their experiences, interests, gender or cultural
backgrounds.

Assignment 3 This assignment is a 1.5-hour written assignment that is attempted

(30%) in class (Tutorial 9). It is designed to assess your individual mastery
Individual of critical thinking and writing skills practised in this course.
Complete two tasks. The first task asks you to devise a critical
In-class assignment question to inquire into a given engineering leadership case
(summative and scenario and then develop a response to that question. The second
timed) task asks you to reflect on how you have grown as a leader in this
course. In both tasks you will be required to refer to engineering
leadership knowledge as well as specific course experiences to
support your views. There is no stipulated word count for the
answers to both questions but you may expect to write about 1000
words in total.

Assignment 4 A critical thinker is not cynical and does not criticize for the sake of
(15%) criticizing. A critical thinker displays some of the following
Individual characteristics:
 Alertness to opportunities to use critical thinking
Participation  Diligence in seeking relevant information
 Clarity in stating the questions or concerns
 Reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria for
analysis/evaluation
 Reflection/Self-regulation

You are encouraged to participate in the discussions on the online

platform chosen by your tutor to practise applying the principles
learned.

Assignments 1 and 2 will be submitted in soft copies to a plagiarism checking software called
Turnitin.com via the IVLE Workbin. (No hard copy submissions will be required.) This will
assist your tutor in determining that your work is indeed your own. Your tutor will explain to
you in greater detail how the software works in Tutorial 4.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 7

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Research Literacy

NUS Libraries will be conducting two workshops to help you with Assignment 1 and 2.
Librarians will be teaching you how to:
1. Find authoritative, relevant and timely information to support leadership case
reflection, analyze complex engineering-related problems and justify proposed solutions
as required in your assignments.
2. Evaluate engineering-related solutions using the PESTLE framework to consider
Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental influences and
impacts.
3. Apply a reference management software to use and share information responsibly and
ethically.

Week/Date/Venue Research Literacy Workshops

Week 4 1. Before class:
(3 – 7 Sept) a. Install Zotero on our laptop.
Central Library, Instructions are in:
Training Room http://libguides.nus.edu.sg/c.php?g=145733&p=955213
b. Watch the videos and read the PDFs uploaded in IVLE.

2. During class:
Learn how to:
a. Ask 5W 1H questions to analyse a case study
b. Search for the answers to your question using the Internet
and an academic database.
c. Evaluate the information you found using the ART
framework (Authoritative, Relevant and Timely).
d. Cite with IEEE citation style using Zotero.

Week 7 1. Before class:

(1 – 5 Oct) a. Ensure Zotero is still working on your laptop.
Central Library, b. Watch the videos and PDFs uploaded in IVLE.
Training Room
2. During class:
Learn how to:
a. Critique and consider a problem or solution by applying the
PESTLE framework.
b. Search for authoritative, relevant and timely information in
academic databases.
c. Cite with IEEE citation style using Zotero.

All workshops will provide you with an interactive, hands-on learning experience. Librarians
will be on hand to discuss any challenges you face. If you have any questions, email:
andyquek@nus.edu.sg

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 8

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Overview of Assignments
Assignment 1: Case Study Development (Individual; 20%)

Objectives

This assignment provides students with an opportunity to practice the seven missing basics of
engineering education (Goldberg, 2009):

1. Asking questions through devising a critical assessment question to inquire into a

leadership case incident/experience
2. Labelling through identifying theoretical (engineering leadership) concepts in practical
experience
3. Modelling through applying suitable theoretical concepts to interpret/evaluate experience
4. Decomposition through breaking down of a case incident/experience into components;
recognizing the nuances of the case; analysing (interpreting and evaluating) experience to
address the assessment question
5. Gathering data through integrating case details and sources from readings/research to
support interpretive claims
6. Visualisation through exemplifying and illustrating critical discussion points to form a
coherent argument; and
7. Communication in the written form through describing, analysing and reflecting on case;
citing sources; summarising and paraphrasing information; defending a position and
substantiating assertions.

The fundamental skills covered in this assignment will be reinforced in Assignment 2 and also
assessed summatively in Assignment 3.

Task Description

This assignment is designed to assess your ability to apply engineering leadership knowledge to
reflect critically on a leadership case incident/experience of your choice. Your chosen case
should be based on your past or present leadership experiences/incidents in engineering or
engineering-related settings.

Your case study should contain the following elements:

 Case description of information pertinent to the experience or incident (e.g., setting,
participants, problems, etc.)
 Assessment question(s) that are open-ended and that allow you to engage in quality
reflections about the nature and quality of engineering leadership (e.g., interpret what it
means to be a leader, examine the role of leadership, explore factors that contribute to
effective and ineffective leadership, etc. in engineering or engineering-related settings)
 Case analysis and reflection: your answer to the assessment question(s). You should
write a well-articulated thesis in response to your chosen assessment question(s) and
support your response with references to engineering leadership frameworks and
constructs encountered in this course.

Your case study development should be between 750 and 850 words.

You should refer to Rottmann, Sacks and Reeve (2014) and at least TWO other sources to
support your case analysis and reflection. Detail all your sources in a Reference List at the end of
your paper. Follow the IEEE citation style in preparing your Reference List.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 9

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Your tutor will not discuss the assignment with you or read your draft, but will provide
sufficient practice in Week 5 (Online Activities) to help prepare you for the requirements of the
assignment.

To complete Assignment 1, you should (re)read Rottmann, Sacks and Reeve (2014) to
familiarize yourself with the grounded theory of engineering leadership. You are also
encouraged to pursue additional readings through independent research on (engineering)
leadership concepts and tools to augment your case analysis and reflection.

Submission Requirements

You are required to upload a soft copy of your paper to the Submissions Folder in IVLE
Workbin. No further hard copy submission is required.

Style Requirements

 Times New Roman 12 pt. font, double spaced

 Header with student’s full name and ID
 Citation: IEEE style
 Pages numbered

Due Date for Assignment 1

Friday, 21 September 2018 by 5 PM

Policy for Late Submissions

1. A late submission (after 17:15) will be penalised with a deduction of 5 marks from the
final mark.
2. A late submission (after 48 hours) will not be accepted unless it is supported by a
legitimate reason that is accompanied by documentary evidence such as a medical
certificate, police report, etc.

Evaluation of Assignment 1

You are encouraged to go through and familiarise yourself with the grading criteria on the next
page to ensure that your work meets the quality standards set for this module.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 10

 ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Grade Descriptors for Assignment 1 (Case Study Development; 20%)

Skills/Criteria Needs Improvement Developing Proficient Very Good

1 2-3 4-5 6-7
Inquiry  Does not identify an  Identifies an issue for  Identifies a relevant  Identifies a salient
Labelling issue for reflection or reflection but the issue issue for reflection on issue for reflection on
makes no visible may be imprecise or the nature/quality of the nature/quality of
attempt to identify insufficiently relevant engineering leadership. engineering leadership.
theoretical concepts in to engineering  Identifies theoretical  Correctly identifies
personal experience leadership concepts in personal theoretical concepts in
 Makes a limited experience personal experience
attempt to identify
theoretical concepts in
personal experience
Modelling  Makes no visible  Misapplies conceptual  Makes a fair attempt to  Correctly and
attempt to apply criteria to apply conceptual effectively applies
(Application of concepts/criteria to interpret/evaluate criteria to conceptual criteria to
engineering interpret/evaluate experience or applies interpret/evaluate interpret/evaluate
leadership experience vague concepts/criteria experience; application experience.
concepts to may not be secure
interpret
experience)
Decomposition  Does not state a  Makes a limited  Justifies interpretive/  Effectively defends
Gathering data position on the attempt to justify evaluative claims but interpretive/evaluative
nature/quality of interpretive/ may not develop the claims and fully
(Integration of leadership or states a evaluative claims and discussion fully with develops the discussion
case details and position with no or develop the discussion credible sources and with credible sources
sources to strictly limited  Makes a limited specific details and specific details
develop justification attempt to analyse  Analyses experience  Insightfully analyses
interpretive  Makes no visible experience; a clear and states a clear experience and states a
claims to a logical attempt to analyse position on the position on the clear position on the
conclusion) experience nature/quality of nature/quality of nature/quality of
leadership may not be leadership leadership
forthcoming or evident

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 11

 ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Visualization  Poor language use:  Some problems with  Good language use (in  Excellent language
Communication writes incomplete language use: makes general): use: demonstrates
sentences, numerous many errors in demonstrates ability to fluency in writing but
errors in grammar grammar and these write reasonably well may make a few minor
which obscure obscure intended but may still make a grammatical errors;
intended meaning; meaning; number of grammatical  Uses an appropriate
 Uses an inappropriate  Uses an inconsistent errors which do not tone and many
tone and does not use tone and a few impede understanding; appropriate reporting
reporting verbs to reporting verbs but  Uses an appropriate verbs to integrate
integrate information these may not be tone and several sources effectively;
from other sources; appropriate; appropriate reporting  The voice of the
 The voice of the  The voice of the verbs to integrate student and that of
student and that of student and that of sources; other writers are
other writers are not other writers are not  The voice of the clearly distinguished;
distinguished; clearly distinguished; student and that of  Paraphrases
 Shows very little  Shows attempts at other writers are information from other
attempt to paraphrase. paraphrasing. mostly distinguished; sources well.
 Poor organisation of  Some problems with  Paraphrases  Excellent
ideas: the overall organization of ideas: information from other organization of ideas:
relational pattern some lapses in sources but may not ideas are coherent
between ideas is not coherence. The have been completely throughout with a clear
apparent; Many lapses presentation of ideas successful. relational pattern and
in coherence. The and arguments causes  Good organization of no logical gaps;
presentation of ideas confusion to the reader. ideas: clear relational  The presentation of
and arguments causes pattern between ideas, ideas and arguments
great confusion to the albeit with a few logical uses appropriate
reader. gaps. transition markers to
show clear
relationships between
ideas.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 12

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Assignment 2: Problem-Solution Position Paper (Team; 35%)

Objectives

This assignment provides students with an opportunity to practice the seven missing basics for
engineering education (Goldberg, 2009):

1. Asking questions through formulating questions on hypothesis, causes and solutions by

asking relevant questions;
2. Labelling through classifying problems, causes and solutions by identifying the main
parts of a writer’s argument;
3. Modelling through hypothesizing and finding solutions, establishing links from causes
to problems to solutions to criteria for evaluation;
4. Decomposition through breaking down of arguments into components/interpreting
and evaluating a writer’s argument; identifying subset of a given problem and
differentiating one solution from another;
5. Gathering data through assessing and reviewing arguments on problems and solutions
argument based on given information through data gathering;
6. Visualisation through exemplifying and illustrating critical discussion points to form a
coherent argument in a paper; and
7. Communication in the form of an academic paper through describing and expressing
ideas of others; summarising and paraphrasing information; defending a position and
substantiating assertions.

This assignment is designed to assess your ability to analyze your chosen topic/issue based on
the theme “Sustainable Development Goals: transforming our world for the future”; present
a good sustained argument exploring the importance of the problem you have identified (in
relation to a country or a city you have chosen as the theme is broad) and the causes and
context of the problem; use evidence from research; and suggest 1 or 2 feasible solutions (from
an engineering perspective) bearing in mind the implications and consequences should these
solutions be implemented. The proposed solutions can be your own original innovative ideas, or
adapted/borrowed from another source, but they must be supported by evidence that is
acceptable, relevant, and credible.

Your paper, written in 1,800-2,000 words, is for an academic audience, and fully supported by
relevant sources, and attached with an IEEE Reference List and Annotated Bibliography (a
minimum of 6 sources; each member writes 2 sources for the Annotated Bibliography).

The word count excludes the Reference List, Annotated Bibliography and Appendices. You are
required to upload a soft copy of your paper to the Submissions Folder on IVLE one week after
your conferencing session. Only one member of the team needs to submit the soft copy in the
folder.

Each team comprises a minimum of two and a maximum of three members. There should be 6
teams per tutorial group. You may wish to form a team with students who may have diverse
perspectives due to their experiences, interests, gender or cultural backgrounds.

You are to write your paper in response to this announcement:

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 13

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

The National University of Singapore

Faculty of Engineering
4th Symposium, 5-7 December 2018
Venue: Stephen Riady Centre, University Town
“Sustainable Development Goals: transforming our world for the future”

The world in the 21st century faces many social, environmental and economic challenges, and each
country is confronted by different problems that are unique to its nation. Recognising the
deterioration in the human and natural environment, the United Nations coined the term
‘sustainable development’ in 1997 and called for countries to be united in pursuing the goals of this
vision. Sustainable development has been defined by the UN as “development that meets the needs
of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
(World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987, p.16) with its main objective of
mobilising every nation, organisation and individual towards the concerted effort of building a
sustainable, resilient and inclusive future for all the inhabitants of the earth.

On 25 September 2015, countries who are members of the UN signed a memorandum of agreement
as part of a new Sustainable Development Agenda to adopt a set of goals that aim at poverty
eradication, environmental protection and shared prosperity, and pledged to meet their sustainable
development targets by 2030. These 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are listed as follows:

With these 17 SDGs in mind, the Faculty of Engineering of The National University of Singapore is
organising a Symposium in December 2018 on the theme “Sustainable Development Goals:
transforming our world for the future” which aims to facilitate the exchange of ideas and discussion
among engineering undergraduates in Asia regarding their research in any of these key areas.
Although this Symposium is for engineering undergraduates, it will also bring together other

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 14

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

stakeholders like policy makers, scientists, engineers, architects, planners and the general public. In
this way, the selected papers are able to engage these interested parties and may even influence
future policy decisions, garner interest in more research of selected issues of concern, and create
awareness among the public so that they can debate on this ever pressing issue of sustainable
development.

Call for Papers

Undergraduates from Faculty of Engineering are invited to submit their problem-solution position
papers on any engineering topic that is relevant to any of these SDGs.

The Symposium Committee is impressed by papers of high quality, not great quantity. The word
count must be adhered to, and appendices should be judiciously selected to support the main
document well as necessary/helpful additional information without adding unnecessary/unhelpful
thickness to the paper.

In view of the limited word count, authors are advised to focus on a fairly narrow topic for their
papers, and cover this narrow topic well. Indeed, this is part of the rationale for length guideline: to
receive papers that are well written on specific, narrow topics that deal with the theme.

Those submitting papers are reminded that though members of the Symposium Committee may
include some experts, they may not be experts in the particular field of the submitted paper.
Explanations and background information must be suitable and useful for the general educated
reader, and jargon must be avoided. Glossaries are welcomed, where necessary/helpful.

Papers must be based on thorough research that may have been conducted outside Asia, but your
papers must be presented in a way that is clearly relevant to the Asian context.

Plagiarism, whether accidental or intentional, is not acceptable. All papers must be in the submitting
teams’ own writing, except for instances of appropriately cited quotations, tables, etc.

Papers must be written in Standard English, in a tone appropriate for such a report. A poster
presentation will take place on the last day of the Symposium to allow participants to engage one
another in critical and constructive conversations about the ideas presented. Industry partners will
be invited to this session, and their input will be sought to shortlist papers for the Best Paper Award.
The Symposium Committee values creativity, clarity, coherence, and accuracy in writing and
presentation.

For further reading

World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford
University Press

More details on the Sustainable Development Goals can be found at:

http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

The UNDP Policy and Programme Brief for the implementation of the 2030 Sustainable Development
Agenda and the different key areas can be downloaded at:
http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/sustainable-development-goals/undp-
support-to-the-implementation-of-the-2030-agenda/

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 15

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Your paper should address the following requirements:

 to present your main claim and key arguments in the form of a graphic representation in
lieu of an abstract
 to offer a main claim that shows the position of the paper (problem clearly stated,
country or city identified, and possible solutions)
 to provide background information (e.g. how do you know the problem exists? how
serious is the problem?) leading to the identification of a problem which has to be stated
clearly;
 to identify causes of the problem (show analysis in the form of an argument)
 evaluate the current measures (if any) and why they are effective/ineffective using
clearly stated criteria
 to suggest 1-2 solutions (from an engineering perspective) focusing on the 'why'
(arguments) and not so much on the 'how' (description/narration) as well as examining
the implications and consequences of the solutions using the same criteria for evaluation
of current measures;
 to include an IEEE Reference List of primary (the team is not to conduct a
survey/questionnaire) and secondary sources to support your argument;
 to include 6 sources in your Annotated Bibliography section to show the reference,
summary, assessment or evaluation of the source and reflection; and
 to include appendices (if any).

You should start reading on the theme “Sustainable Development Goals: transforming our
world for the future” in Week 6 or earlier.

To choose and research for your topic, you will need to access academic/research articles on the
theme of sustainable development. Search the e-journals in the NUS Library website with the
keyword ‘sustainable’ and find journals that are relevant to your area(s) of interest. Here are
some examples of e-journals and publications that you may refer to:

 International Journal of of Urban Sustainable Development

This journal aims to provide a forum for cutting edge research and rigorous debate for
in-depth and holistic understanding of the complex inter-related environmental, social,
economic, political, spatial, institutional and physical challenges facing urban areas. Its
premise is that multi-disciplinary approaches provide the space for the range of
disciplines and perspectives related to the full breadth of issues that affect urban
sustainable development.

 Sustainable Cities and Society

Sustainable Cities and Society (SCS) is an international journal focusing on fundamental
and applied research aimed at reducing the environmental and societal impact of cities.
This journal features articles that present cross-cutting, multi-disciplinary research in
the areas of air quality, clean energy sources, energy efficiency, zero/low carbon
buildings/communities, urban design/ planning, social, health and environmental
impact related to sustainable and future cities, city transport, water harvesting and
management, and robust engineering.

 Resource: Engineering & Technology for a Sustainable World

This is a monthly publication for members of the American Society of Agricultural and
Biological Engineers (ASABE) that focuses on trends in sustainable technology for the
agriculture industry. It presents short, broad interest articles highlighting engineering
progress in agriculture, food, biotechnology, aquaculture, forestry, machinery, and soil
and water.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 16

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

 Sustainable Development in Practice: Case Studies for Engineers and Scientists,

Second Edition (2011) (e-book) explores the concept of sustainable development and
its implications for science and engineering. It looks at how sustainability criteria can be
combined with traditional scientific and engineering considerations to design and
operate industrial systems in a more sustainable manner. Taking a life cycle approach to
addressing economic, environmental and social issues, the book presents a series of new
practical case studies drawn from a range of sectors, including mining, energy, food,
buildings, transport, waste, and health.

Submission Requirements

You are required to upload a soft copy of your paper to the Submissions folder in IVLE Workbin.
No hard copy submission is required.

Style Requirements

 Times New Roman 12 pt. font for main text

 Double spaced (indent for new paragraphs)
 Cover page: title reflecting position and student particulars
 Citation: IEEE style
 Pages numbered and word count at the end of the paper

Due Date for Assignment 2

One week after conferencing with your tutor

Evaluation of Assignment 2

You are encouraged to go through and familiarise yourself with the grade descriptors for
Assignment 2 to ensure that your work meets the quality standards set for this module.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 17

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Grade Descriptors for Assignment 2 (Problem-Solution Position Paper; 35%)

Skills/Criteria Needs Improvement Developing Proficient Very Good

1 2-3 4-5 6-7
Inquiry  Does not identify and  The identified problem is  The identified problem is  The identified problem is
Labelling establish the problem somewhat unclear or clear and but may not be very significant and well
Modelling correctly. insignificant. significant. defined.
 Does not label the causes  Labels the causes but  Labels root and related  Labels most/all root and
of the problem correctly. these may not be the root causes correctly but may related causes correctly.
 Does not take into account causes of the problem. not be complete.  Identifies the current
the current measures.  Does not clearly establish  Identifies current measures and establishes
 Fails to show the the relationships between measures and establishes the relationship between
relationships between the the problem, the causes, relationship between problem and current
problem, the causes, the the current measures and problem, and current measures.
current measures and the the proposed solutions. measures but may not be  Clearly establishes the
proposed solutions. complete relationships between
 Establishes the solutions and
relationships between problem/causes/current
solutions and measures.
problem/causes/current
measures.
Decomposition  Does not demonstrate  Demonstrates some  Demonstrates ability to  Clearly breaks down the
understanding of the understanding of the show relationship problem and shows the
relationship between main relationship between main between main claim and relationship between main
claim and key arguments. claim and arguments. key arguments. claim and key arguments.
 Arguments are non-  Arguments are mainly  Has several strong  Has many strong
existent or weak. weak/not well developed. arguments. arguments.
 Makes many unjustified  Makes a number of  Makes a few unjustified  Many assumptions are
assumptions. unjustified assumptions. assumptions. justified.
 Has no criteria for  The criteria for evaluation  Has well-thought out  Has well-thought out
evaluation of current of current measures and criteria for evaluation of criteria for evaluation of
measures & proposed proposed solutions are not current measures and current measures and
solutions. stated clearly. proposed solutions, proposed solutions.
though some may not be
appropriate.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 18

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing
Week 1 Course Information
Gathering data  Lacks research to support
argument.
 Lacks evidence of thinking
about the sources selected
(a lack that is evident in
the References and
Annotated Bibliography).
Visualization  Shows very little
understanding of what a
main claim and topic
sentences are.
 Does not understand how
an academic paper and its
paragraphs are organized.
 Uses transition markers
wrongly most of the time.
 Shows no understanding
of IEEE in-text and end-of-
text referencing.
 Has not taken into account
the format requirements
for Assignment 2.
Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore
AY2018-19 Semester 1
 Has limited research to
support argument.
 Shows some thinking in
the selection of sources as
seen in the References and
Annotated Bibliography.
 Shows some
understanding of what a
main claim and topic
sentences are.
 Shows some
understanding of how an
academic paper and its
paragraphs are organized.
 Uses only some correct
transition markers to
show clear connections
between ideas.
 Shows some
understanding of IEEE in-
text and end-of-text
referencing.
 Has taken into account
some format requirements
for Assignment 2 but is
inconsistent.
 Demonstrates good use of
research to help support
argument but some
sources may be
questionable.
 Selects relevant and
reliable sources as evident
in the References but the
information in the
Annotated Bibliography
may be incomplete.
 Writes the main claim and
the topic sentence for each
paragraph clearly.
 Organises paragraphs
coherently with a clear
relational pattern, albeit
some lapses in coherence.
 Uses transition markers to
show clear connections
between ideas, although
some may not be
appropriate or are
missing.
 Accurately acknowledges
and documents the
sources used but may
make mistakes for the
complicated ones.
 Adheres to format
requirements for
Assignment 2.
 Demonstrates excellent
and sufficient use of
sources to support
argument.
 Selects relevant and
reliable sources as evident
in the References and
Annotated Bibliography is
complete.
 Writes the main claim and
the topic sentence for each
paragraph clearly.
 Organises paragraphs
coherently throughout
with a clear relational
pattern.
 Uses appropriate
transition markers to
show clear connection
between ideas
 Accurately documents the
sources used in the IEEE
style of referencing most
of the time
 Adheres to format
requirements for
Assignment 2.
Page 19
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing
Week 1 Course Information
Communication  Uses inappropriate
style/tone.
 Shows little understanding
of constructing sentence
structures
 Makes numerous errors in
grammar consistently
throughout the essay that
obscures intended
meaning.
 Makes numerous
punctuation and spelling
errors.
 Uses very limited
vocabulary and
inappropriate idiomatic
expressions, and meaning
is affected and cannot be
guessed from context.
 Does not incorporate
sources successfully as
there is no differentiation
in the various voices.
 Does not contribute to the
project goal and decision
making of the team
Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore
AY2018-19 Semester 1
 Uses inappropriate  Uses mainly objective
style/tone in several expressions, explanatory
instances. and evaluative language.
 Uses a variety of sentence  Uses hedges/concessions
types but makes errors in though not effectively at
compound and complex times.
sentences when used.  Demonstrates ability to
 Makes many errors in write reasonably well but
grammar consistently may make a number of
throughout the essay but grammatical errors which
these do not obscure do not impede
intended meaning. understanding
 Makes several punctuation  Paraphrases well but may
and spelling errors. not have been completely
 Uses limited vocabulary successful.
and idiomatic expressions  Uses an appropriate tone
accurately.  Incorporates sources
 Shows attempts to effectively in many parts
paraphrase but these were in the writing but may
not successful. have lapses and some
 Incorporates sources indistinguishable voices
clumsily and abruptly, and due to inappropriate
voices are unclear in reporting verbs and
several sections. sentence structures.
 Contributes to the project  Contributes positively to
goal and decision making the project goal and
of the team decision making of the
team
 Uses objective
expressions, explanatory
and evaluative language.
 Uses hedges/concessions
effectively.
 Demonstrates fluency in
writing but may make a
few minor grammatical
errors
 Paraphrases well
 Uses an appropriate tone
 Incorporates sources
successfully by
demonstrating ability to
differentiate the various
voices by using
appropriate reporting
verbs and sentence
structures.
 Contributes very positively
to the project goal and
decision making of the
team
Page 20
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Assignment 3: In-class assignment (Individual; 30%)

This assignment is a 1.5-hour written summative assessment that is attempted in class

(Tutorial 9). It is designed to assess your individual mastery of critical thinking and writing
skills practised in this course. Complete two tasks. The first task asks you to devise a critical
question to inquire into a given engineering leadership case scenario and then develop a
response to that question. The second task asks you to reflect on how you have grown as a
leader in this course. In both tasks you will be required to refer to engineering leadership
knowledge as well as specific course experiences to support your views. There is no stipulated
word count for the answers to both questions but you may expect to write about 1000 words in
total.

Assignment 4: Participation (Individual; 15%)

This assignment is based on your consistent participation in both online and class activities
throughout the course.

You will be assessed on:

 Preparation before class and engagement in online and class interactions as evidenced by
your contributing answers to tutorial activities, asking questions and giving feedback on
peers’ answers;
 Review of peers’ drafts for Assignment 2 and asking questions on their problem-solution
paper during poster interactions;
 Reflection on assignments.

This assignment is marked out of 100% (and weighted 15% in the overall course assessment).

Evaluation of Assignments 3 and 4

The following grade descriptors will be used to assess your achievement. It will be most useful
for you to go through and familiarise yourself with the criteria so that you may self-monitor
your work and participation to ensure that you meet the expectations of the assignments.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 21

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing
Week 1 Course Information
Grade Descriptors for Assignment 3: In-Class Assignment (Individual; 30%)
Question 1: Case Study Development (25 Marks)
Skills/Criteria Needs Improvement
0-1
Inquiry  Does not identify an issue for
Labelling reflection or makes no
(5 marks) visible attempt to identify
theoretical concepts in
personal experience
Modelling  Makes no visible attempt to
(5 marks) apply concepts/criteria to
interpret/evaluate
experience
Decomposition  Does not state a position on
Gathering data the nature/quality of
(5 marks) leadership or states a
position with no or strictly
limited justification
 Makes no visible attempt to
analyse experience
Visualization  Poor organisation of ideas:
(5 Marks) the overall relational pattern
between ideas is not
apparent;
 Many lapses in coherence.
The presentation of ideas
and arguments causes great
confusion to the reader.
Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore
AY2018-19 Semester 1
Developing
2 3
 Identifies an issue for
reflection but the issue may
be imprecise or insufficiently
relevant to engineering
leadership
 Makes a limited attempt to
identify theoretical concepts
in personal experience
 Misapplies conceptual
criteria to interpret/evaluate
experience or applies vague
concepts/criteria
 Makes a limited attempt to
justify interpretive/
evaluative claims and
develop the discussion
 Makes a limited attempt to
analyse experience; a clear
position on the
nature/quality of leadership
may not be forthcoming or
evident
 Some problems with
organization of ideas: the
overall relational pattern is
apparent;
 Some lapses in coherence.
The presentation of ideas
and arguments causes some
confusion to the reader.
Proficient
 Identifies a relevant issue for
reflection on the
nature/quality of
engineering leadership.
 Identifies theoretical
concepts in personal
experience
 Makes a fair attempt to apply
conceptual criteria to
interpret/evaluate
experience; application may
not be secure
 Justifies interpretive/
evaluative claims but may
not develop the discussion
fully with credible sources
and specific details
 Analyses experience and
states a clear position on the
nature/quality of leadership
 Good organization of ideas:
clear relational pattern
between ideas, albeit with a
few logical gaps.
 A few lapses in coherence.
Although some transition
markers are ineffective/
inappropriate, the overall
presentation of ideas and
arguments is clear to the
reader.
Very Good
4-5
 Identifies a salient issue for
reflection on the
nature/quality of
engineering leadership.
 Correctly identifies
theoretical concepts in
personal experience
 Correctly and effectively
applies conceptual criteria to
interpret/evaluate
experience.
 Effectively defends
interpretive/evaluative
claims and fully develops the
discussion with credible
sources and specific details
 Insightfully analyses
experience and states a clear
position on the
nature/quality of leadership
 Excellent organization of
ideas: ideas are coherent
throughout with a clear
relational pattern and no
logical gaps;
 The presentation of ideas
and arguments uses
appropriate transition
markers to show clear
relationships between ideas.
Page 22
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing
Week 1 Course Information
Communication  Poor language use: writes
(5 Marks) incomplete sentences,
numerous errors in grammar
which obscure intended
meaning.
 Uses an inappropriate tone
and does not use reporting
verbs to integrate
information from other
sources;
 The voice of the student and
that of other writers are not
distinguished;
 Shows very little attempt to
paraphrase.
Question 2: Personal Reflection (15 Marks)
Skills/Criteria Needs Improvement
0-4
Reflection Makes no attempt to self-
(Self- evaluate. Answers in this band
Assessment) are likely to be thick
descriptions that recount
events with strictly limited
analysis.
Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore
AY2018-19 Semester 1
 Some problems with
language use: makes many
errors in grammar and these
obscure intended meaning;
 Uses an inconsistent tone
and a few reporting verbs
but these may not be
appropriate;
 The voice of the student and
that of other writers are not
clearly distinguished;
 Shows attempts at
paraphrasing.
Developing
5-7
Makes a limited attempt to
self-evaluate. Answers in this
band may show some
awareness of personal
leadership development (e.g.
lessons learnt) at the level of
assertions
 Good language use (in
general): demonstrates
ability to write reasonably
well but may still make a
number of grammatical
errors which do not impede
understanding;
 Uses an appropriate tone
and several appropriate
reporting verbs to integrate
sources;
 The voice of the student and
that of other writers are
mostly distinguished;
 Paraphrases information
from other sources but may
not have been completely
successful.
Proficient
8-10
Develops a relevant self-
evaluation but account may be
short on specific details of
course experience and/or
makes a fair attempt to apply
engineering leadership
knowledge
 Excellent language use:
demonstrates fluency in
writing but may make a few
minor grammatical errors;
 Uses an appropriate tone
and many appropriate
reporting verbs to integrate
sources effectively;
 The voice of the student and
that of other writers are
clearly distinguished;
 Paraphrases information
from other sources well.
Very Good
11-15
Fully develops a balanced and
sensitive self-evaluation with
specific details of course
experience and engineering
leadership knowledge
Page 23
ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Grade Descriptors for Assignment 4: Participation (Individual; 15%)

Criteria based on Primary areas of Needs Improvement Developing Proficient Very Good
dispositions of a evidence
critical thinker
Alertness to  Attendance & Has to be called upon. Volunteers once in a Volunteers answers in Volunteers answers in
opportunities to use Punctuality while. many tutorials. every tutorial.
critical thinking  Online and class Participates in online
engagement discussions posted by
your tutor.
Diligence in seeking Preparation Provides answers that Provides answers that Provides answers that Provides answers that
relevant information reflect he/she has reflect minimum suggest preparedness reflect preparedness.
hardly read the interaction with but more reading
tutorial notes. tutorial notes. would have made the
answers better.
Clarity in stating the Poster interactions Asks irrelevant Asks mainly Asks critical questions Asks clearly expressed
questions or concern questions. questions of but may need help in critical questions.
clarification. phrasing them.
Reasonableness in Poster interactions Demonstrates very Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates clear
selecting and applying little understanding of understanding of only understanding of understanding of
criteria for criteria. some criteria and criteria though needs criteria through
analysis/evaluation lacks application. some help in correct application.
application.
Reflection/Self-  Attitude – Does not show ability Reflects only when Reflects and shows Reflects and shows
regulation willingness to take to self-regulate. asked to do so and willingness to make willingness and
ownership of and Hardly any evidence reflection is changes but steps for develops a plan (based
responsibility for of reflection. incomplete. application may not be on skills learned) to
own learning fully developed. make changes based
 Online reflection on the reflection.
on collaborative
optimisation

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 24

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Weekly Schedule

Online Activities and Preparation Class Activities

Week 1 Download course materials from IVLE. No class meeting this week.
13-17 Aug 2018 View the course trailer video to be
introduced to the course. Read the Course
Information and know the assessment
requirements.
Week 2 Read Niewoehner & Steidle (2009) and Tutorial 1
20-24 Aug participate in an online class forum. Consider the relevance and importance of
critical thinking and developmental
PH: 22 Aug leadership to the global engineer.
*If tutorial falls on
the PH, the tutor
will inform
students about
makeup class
Week 3  Write, read and comment on student Tutorial 2
27-31 Aug leadership autobiographies (small- Construct a grounded theory on
group collaboration on Googledocs) engineering leadership.
 Attend a leadership talk by JTC
directors
Week 4  Read Rottmann, Sacks, and Reeve Tutorial 3
3-7 Sep (2014) Inquire into and model engineering
 Inquire into and model engineering leadership in case studies
leadership (based on talk attended)
in the online class forum
Week 5 Practise writing a case reflection based Tutorial 4
10-14 Sep on Tutorial 3 (small-group collaboration Critiquing sample case reflections
on Googledocs)
Week 6  Read and analyse case studies of Tutorial 5
17-21 Sep complex engineering problems and Discuss the features of complex
sustainable engineering solutions engineering problems and sustainable
 Work independently on Assignment engineering solutions and apply this
1 knowledge to conceptualizing own
research; Assignment 1 is due this
Friday, 21 Sep, 5pm.
Recess Week No class meeting this week.
22-30 Sep  Draft an argument framework for Assignment 2 in Google Drive. All members
must contribute and show collaboration.
 Sign up for research literacy workshops offered by NUS librarians as well as JTC
site visits to support your preparation for Assignment 2
Week 7  Construct your team’s argument Tutorial 6
1-5 Oct framework for Assignment 2. Write to establish the problem and its
 Peer review other teams’ argument significance (workshop)
frameworks.
Week 8  Draft the background, problem and Tutorial 7
8-12 Oct causes sections of your paper Write to evaluate current measures and
 Peer review other teams’ sections solutions (workshop)
Week 9  Draft the current measures and Tutorial 8
15-19 Oct solutions sections of your paper  Critique sample papers (sections)
 Peer review other teams’ sections  Write the annotated bibliography
 Assignment 2 (full draft) is due
this Friday, 19 Oct, 5pm
Week 10 Conferencing with tutor
22-26 Oct  Team conferencing on Assignment 2 draft (full paper; about 30 min per team)
Week 11  Individual post-Assignment 1 consultation (about 5 min per student)
29 Oct – 2 Nov  Assignment 2 is due one week after the conference

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 25

ES1531/GEK1549/GET1021 Critical Thinking & Writing AY2018-19 Semester 1
Week 1 Course Information

Week 12 Reflect on collaborative optimisation in Tutorial 9

5-9 Nov an online group forum In-class assignment (Assignment 3);
Assignment 3 is due at the end of
PH: 6 Nov Tutorial 9.
*If tutorial falls on
the PH, the tutor
will inform
students about
makeup class
Week 13 Create a poster presentation Tutorial 10
12-16 Nov Gallery walk, poster presentations and
interactions

The University’s guideline on duration of lecture and tutorial classes is that for classes with duration of
two hours or more, students should be released 25 minutes before the end of the hour at the very latest.

Centre for English Language Communication, National University of Singapore Page 26