Nuclear Technology

Academic Year 2019/20

P24603 – Nuclear Technology

Referral Examination or Coursework – Chernobyl Report

Submission Instructions

An electronic copy of the report is to be uploaded to Moodle via the unit website.

Instructions for completing the assessment:

The report must be the student’s own work, with any material taken from other sources properly referenced. Unreferenced material will not be marked.

The final submission must be written in English and must be able to be easily understood by the marker without significant deciphering. This rules out the use of automatic translation programmes to translate from another language, without proper scrutiny of the legibility of the final product.

Examiners:

Dr. S. Vincent and Mr. C. Smith

2019-20 Page 1 of 2

Aim

The aim of this second attempt exam - report is to produce a report which tests the student’s understanding of the Unit Learning Outcomes in the event of a failure in the first examination attempt.

Scope of the Report

The scope of the second attempt exam - report will cover the Unit Learning Outcomes as detailed below.

The second attempt exam - report will be a nominal 2000 words and will be based on the 1986 Chernobyl reactor accident.

The following aspects, aligned to the Unit Learning Outcomes, will be included in the report and each topic will be covered by a nominal 300 words (plus or minus 100 words):

- An appraisal of the design of the Chernobyl RBMK reactor, specifically the design and physics aspects that directly contributed to the reactor accident.

- Evaluate the scale of the radiation release and the radiological impact of the accident on workers, local populace and the environment.

- Review the national regulatory structure that enabled the reactor operations at the time of the accident and the local post-accident clean-up, highlighting and cultural and regulatory shortcomings that directly contributed to the reactor accident.

- Assess the effectiveness against the consequences of the local mitigation measures immediately following the accident.

- Critically assess the root causes of the accident and global impact on development of nuclear power.

Report Format

Description: The Coursework should be a nominal 2000 words. This word limit excludes the preliminary section, references and bibliography and appendices.

The following format is provided for guidance on suggested layout for the assessed Report:

A. Preliminary Section

1. Title Page

2. Abstract/Summary

3. Table of Contents

4. Acknowledgments (if any)

B. Main Body

1. Introduction, covering the link to the Unit Learning Outcomes as noted in the Report Scope above.

2. Discussion, including coverage of each Unit Learning Outcome with a nominal 300 words on each.

C. Conclusions and Recommendations

D. References and Bibliography

E. Annexes/Appendices (as required)

2019-20 Page 2 of 2

Fail

Low Pass

High Pass

Merit

Distinction

Mark

Knowledge

Has a largely given, possibly uneven and limited, factual and conceptual knowledge base. Limited or inappropriate research

Demonstrates a grasp of key concepts and familiarity with local/company literature in the wider context.

Has a comprehensive and detailed knowledge of a major discipline, supported by a critical contextual overview of the literature.

Has depth and systematic understanding of detailed knowledge in specialised or applied areas. Extensive use of relevant and current literature to view topic in perspective, analyse context and develop new explanations and theories.

And can work with theoretical or research-based knowledge at the forefront of their academic discipline

/35

Cognition

Little attempt at evaluation. Vague conclusions not based on researched material.

Demonstrates an ability to develop and support an argument in a predominately descriptive way with valid conclusions drawn from the research.

Analyses new data and situations without guidance, using a range of techniques appropriate to the subject.

Identifies and defines complex problems and can apply appropriate knowledge and skills to their solution.

Can critically evaluate research and scholarship.

Analyses incomplete, complex, or contradictory areas of knowledge.

Demonstrates initiative and originality in problem solving.

Shows ability to plan and implement proposals.

And acts autonomously and professionally in planning and implementing tasks.

Acts independently to make decisions in complex and unpredictable situations.

/35

Evidence (Reports, etc)

Evidence unorganized, incomplete and descriptive.

Evidence presented with logical and clear structure, well organised with good use of language; cited and presented according to convention.

Evidence fluent, detailed and coherent, soundly structured for the intended audience.

And well referenced with discrimination in content included

Evidence of professional quality, requiring only minor editing for publication.

/30 M/7 ……………...39 40………………49 50………………59 60……………….69 70…………………..