5 ECTS Technical Writing in the Life Sciences Assignment Report | University Of Galway (UOG)
| University | University Of Galway (UOG) |
| Subject | 5 ECTS Technical Writing in the Life Sciences |
Assignment Brief
Course: BSc in Process Technologies
Module Title: Technical Writing in the Life Sciences (5 ECTS)
Lecturer Name:
Submission Date: See Innoskills calendar
Weighting: 100% Continuous Assessment
Struggling with Your UOG Technical Writing in Life Sciences Assignment?
Assignment Overview
This assignment will satisfy the criteria for the completion of 100% of the module outcomes (see point 3). You will find a podcast on a topic of your choosing within the life sciences industry (science, biotechnology, any supporting topic, AI, digitalisation etc), you will then choose another piece of media (article, other podcast, book, regulations, CSO etc) and compile a technical report which communicates on the topic, the report having an objective of your choosing but will have at least 1 graphical element. You will choose your podcast and evaluate it using the CRAAP methodology and submit a reflection on PowerPoint. Use the marking scheme as a guideline for your assignment content. This is very important.
Assignment Instructions
There are 3 elements (A, B and C). Marks are allocated for element B and C. Please pay particular attention to the instruction on usage of Generative AI. Where AI is used to support the assignment in Part B – should be declared in your reflection.
A) Choosing your topic (no marks allocated)
1. Choose a podcast episode
2. Choose a supporting media (article, other podcast, book, regulations, CSO etc)
3. One or both should have a data element that you can portray as a graphical piece of information
B) Writing your report (50% marks allocation)
4. Write a technical report with the below headings:
a) Title
b) Introduction
c) Body of Report (further broken down with titles appropriate to content)
d) Graphic
e) Conclusion
f) References
Submission:
Format
- Complete and submit the above in a Microsoft word document saved as a PDF
- Page limit: 3
AI usage
- Generative AI is permitted in the initial draft (formatting, refining, finding appropriate language) of the technical report, the content in the report coming from your initial information gathering from your podcast and supporting material.
- The final version of your report is to be reviewed by you as a technical writer to ensure all aspects covered in lectures are incorporated and meet the standard required for an effective communication by demonstrate the correct use of language, regulated environment demonstrate proficiency in technical writing by developing and presenting a technical report.
- AI usage should be declared in your reflection where used (Part C).
C) Critical Thinking (50%)
CRAAP Evaluation (40%) and Reflection (10%)
Task: Complete a CRAAP evaluation of your podcast (if you have chosen 2 podcasts, pick 1 only). For each criterion (Currency, Relevance, Authority, Accuracy, Purpose), rate from 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) and provide a brief justification. This should be a PDF and separate file to your report.
Suggested Template:
| Criterion | Score (1-5) | Justification (Why?) |
| Currency | ||
| Relevance | ||
| Authority | ||
| Accuracy | ||
| Purpose |
Submission:
Format
- Complete and submit the above in a Microsoft word document saved as a PDF
- Use the template or similar
- Refer to lecture notes closely to do this
AI usage
- Generative AI is NOT permitted in Part C and any use in generating your critical piece using Gen AI is considered academic misconduct.
Reflection (10%)
Task:
Make a presentation (3-5 slides depending on your AI declaration) on your learning experience while completing this assignment using the following titles, each slide should have a voice recording explaining the content.
- Discuss any challenges, insights, or skills developed for Part A, B and C.
- Discuss how you decided on your graphical element and how it was appropriate for the infographic, on this slide you should include this graphical element to provide context.
- If you used AI tools in the development in Part B (such as ChatGPT, Perplexity, or others), describe how and why you used them, and reflect on their impact on your work (ie, effectiveness, difficulty, how you feel it affected time spent on writing a report etc). If you have not, state any reflections on why you have not availed of these for Part B.
Submission:
Format
- Complete and submit the above in a PowerPoint presentation with voiceover each slide (60 seconds max per slide)
- Recording is a function in PowerPoint (see screenshot)
AI usage
- Generative AI is NOT permitted under any circumstances for this portion of the assignment.
NOTE: the reflection is where AI usage should be declared for part B as per brief.
Learning Outcomes
On successful completion of this module, learners will be able to:
- Describe the purpose and the key elements of a range of technical documents used in the Life Science Industry.
- Discuss the principles and techniques for effective technical writing.
- Demonstrate the correct use of language in a highly technical, regulated environment.
- Demonstrate proficiency in technical writing by developing and presenting a technical report.
Assessment Criteria
This module is 100% Continuous Assessment, there is no final exam. This assignment is worth 100% of your marks. The assignment is broken down into three parts which will be submitted together at the end of the module.
The breakdown is as follows:
- Technical Report (50%)
- CRAAP Evaluation Template (40%)
- Reflection (including AI use declaration) (10%)
Submission Guidelines
All submissions need to go through the submissions portal on the module page. Turnitin will be used.
Academic Integrity
Plagiarism is a serious offence. Please read and ensure you understand the college policy on plagiarism. Sources which have been used, referred to, or which have in any way influenced the preparation of this assignment, must be identified and properly attributed. Where this is not the case, or where work has been knowingly plagiarised, a zero mark may be awarded.
The assignment must not have been previously submitted for assessment, nor should it contain any portions that are copied, in whole or in part, from the work of others, including fellow students.
In addition, AI text generators or websites may not be used to prepare any parts of this assignment on the students behalf without being declared in the personal reflection portion of the assignment.
Specific guidelines on AI usage:
| Part of Assignment | AI usage |
| A | No |
| B | Yes* |
| C | No |
*Declaration of use should appear in your reflection (Part C) as per the brief
Additional Notes
There are many resources available in the Learner Hub or in the Library to support your academic journey. Please reach out to the lecturer or librarian for academic support.
Need Expert Help Your 5 ECTS Technical Report for University of Galway?
Marking Scheme and Rubric:
Report Total: 50%
Each Section is marked out of ten.
| Section | Description | Marks (out of 10) |
| Title | Clear, concise, and relevant title that reflects the report content | (0-3) Not correct or elements completely missing
(4-5) Achieves minimum expected standard (6-7) Very well done (7-10) Exceptional input |
| Introduction | Provides background, purpose, and objectives of the report with language appropriate to a lay audience, unambiguous and descriptive with precise meaning | (0-3) Not correct or elements completely missing
(4-5) Achieves minimum expected standard (6-7) Very well done (7-10) Exceptional input |
| Body of Report | Well-organized content divided into appropriate subsections where applicable with clear headings, with language appropriate to a lay audience, unambiguous and descriptive with precise meaning to support the data | (0-3) Not correct or elements completely missing
(4-5) Achieves minimum expected standard (6-7) Very well done (7-10) Exceptional input |
| Graphic | Inclusion of a relevant and well-explained graphic that supports the report content | (0-3) Not correct or elements completely missing
(4-5) Achieves minimum expected standard (6-7) Very well done (7-10) Exceptional input |
| Conclusion and References | Clear summary of key points and findings, along with correct and consistent referencing format | (0-3) Not correct or elements completely missing
(4-5) Achieves minimum expected standard (6-7) Very well done (7-10) Exceptional input |
CRAAP evaluation Total: 40%
Each criterion is marked out of ten.
| Criterion | Excellent (8–10) | Satisfactory (5–7) | Needs Improvement (0–4) |
| Currency | Learner clearly evaluates when published/updated and its relevance to current knowledge | Learner partially considers date and relevance | Learner does not evaluate publication date or relevance |
| Relevance | Learner clearly assesses fit to research topic with appropriate detail and depth | Learner acknowledges some relevance and detail | Learner does not assess relevance or detail |
| Authority | Learner critically identifies creator’s expertise and associated institution or credentials | Learner shows some recognition of expertise | Learner does not evaluate expertise or credentials |
| Accuracy | Learner evaluates if information is evidence-based and supported by citations | Learner identifies evidence or citations partially | Learner does not evaluate evidence or citation support |
| Purpose | Learner identifies why source was made and analyses bias, commercial interests, or intent (informative/persuasive) | Learner partially recognises source purpose or bias | Learner does not evaluate purpose or bias |
Reflection: 10%
This section is marked by Criterion but an overall score will combine all criterion as a presentation.
| Criterion | Excellent (8–10) | Satisfactory (5–7) | Needs Improvement (0–4) |
| Challenges, Insights, Skills Developed | Thoughtful discussion of challenges faced, insights gained, and skills developed in Parts A, B, and/or C with clear reflection | Some discussion of challenges or skills; reflection is general or partial | Little or no reflection on challenges, insights, or skills gained |
| Graphical Element Decision and Appropriateness | Clear, reasoned explanation of graphical choice; element is well integrated and clearly supports the infographic | Basic explanation provided; graphic included but limited integration or relevance | Graphical choice not explained or not included; lacks relevance or clarity |
| Use and Reflection on AI Tools*
(*Used in Part B for report, not Part C) |
Detailed description of AI tools used, rationale, and thoughtful reflection on impact (effectiveness, challenges, time) if relevant | Some description and reflection on AI tools; impact discussed superficially if relevant | No or minimal mention/reflection on AI tools and their impact, if relevant |
| Presentation Skills | Professional and clear presentation design; effective language; well-chosen, high-quality graphic; engaging delivery | Presentation mostly clear with some language or design issues; graphic used adequately | Poor presentation design; unclear language; graphic missing or low quality; unengaging delivery |
Can't Complete Your 5 ECTS Technical Writing in the Life Sciences Assignment Report?
A lot of UOG students find this 5 ECTS Technical Writing in the Life Sciences assignment tougher than expected—whether it’s choosing the right podcast, writing a clear technical report, or completing the CRAAP evaluation without using AI. If you’re running out of time or simply not confident about the structure, language, or reflection part, don’t worry. Ireland Assignments offers expert guidance that follows University of Galway standards. You can even check our science writing assignment sample first to see the quality and clarity of our work. Get our100% human-written and plagiarism-free custom report writing service today and boost your chances of scoring high.
