To E-LEAP Students

From Dr. S. Veeraghanta

Date Oct 31, 2017
Subject Team Memo - 3: Evaluate technology and explain sustainability connection
Attachments 1
Now that teams have articulated the science behind technology under review, the next step
in terms of investigation is an assessment of the technology identified - is the technology
that the team chose to research, sustainable?

The purpose of this memo is to provide teams with instructions to complete the third team
assignment, Team Memo-3: Evaluate technology and explain sustainability connection.
This memo will include a:
1. Description of assignment Critical evaluation of technology using sustainability
criteria
a. Team definition of sustainability
b. Team assessment of technology: Sustainable or Unsustainable?
c. Reflection on research process
2. Explication of team progress report
a. Team roles
b. Progress report
3. Presentation of guidelines for completing the assignment

1. Description of assignment: Critical evaluation of technology using sustainability

criteria
By answering the questions laid out in this assignment, teams will begin to critically assess
and provide articulations worthy of an engineering conference. Articulations must have
depth and detail for the following questions:

a. Team definition of sustainability

The first step towards a critical assessment of sustainability is generating a definition of the
term - sustainability. As a team answer the following questions in no less than 150 words
each:
1. Provide a definition of sustainability offered by the United Nations.
2. Provide a definition of sustainability offered by an engineering professional
society. Discuss if that definition includes engineering and ethical perspectives.
3. Now generate a team definition of sustainability that moves beyond just a
discussion of present and future generations. Your team definition should
reflect an engineering perspective. Support your definition with specific
evidence from the assigned readings [refer to the readings provided for the
sustainability module on Canvas.]
4. Include in your memo a critique of the definition of sustainability. Incorporate a
discussion as to why someone might challenge your definition of sustainability.
Provide at least one specific evidence from one of the assigned readings above to
substantiate your position.

b. Team assessment of technology: Sustainable or Unsustainable?

Central to the teams research is the assessment of the technology - Is your technology
sustainable or unsustainable? Teams are required to answer the following questions in
detail:
1. Begin your sustainability assessment of your technology based on Munasinghes
sustainability triangle presented in class. Use the three sustainability objectives
ecological, economic and social system goals to evaluate your technologys
sustainability.
2. Adopting S. Beders scale of sustainable technologies as, clean, cleaning or cleaner
technologies, how does your technology fare? Is your technology a clean, cleaning or
cleaner technology? Explain your answer in detail.
3. Employing Young and Vanderburgs concept of product life cycle/materials life
cycle, provide an explanation of how your technology can be evaluated. Is there a
clearly articulated life cycle analysis of your technology? In this context, use the
information you provided in Team Memo-2 wherein you discussed the
manufacturing and/or production process and identified problems relating to these
processes.
4. What have the experts articulated about your team's technology? Is your technology
sustainable according these experts? Use a minimum of two sources from your
library visit 3 to help find answers to this question.
5. Applying your teams definition of sustainability [Refer to 1.a.3 above] to your
technology, provide a sustainability appraisal of your research technology.
6. Does your technology contribute to the idea of sustainable engineering? Is your
technology a disruptive technology? Does it have potential to become on? Provide a
lucid explanation of your argument.

Note: Sources for these questions should be academically credible and scholarly.
1. Popular encyclopedias and how to websites will not be accepted.
2. For this assignment, teams are restricted to newspapers, academic journals, and
corporate (and other legitimate scholarly) websites ONLY. The best way to assess if
a website is legitimate or not is to use assessment tools laid out during library visit
one.
3. Each team member must be able to identify at least two sources for himself/herself.

c. Reflections on research process

In no more than 150-200 words, provide a summary of teams knowledge thus far about the
topic. Include a few sentences on the following questions as a team.
1. What did the team learn in terms of technology that is being researched?
2. What about this assignment/project was most useful to the team?
3. What problems, in terms of the teams topic and research method did the team
encounter?
4. What experience in this assignment demonstrated the teams strengths and talents and
why?

2. Explication of team progress report

a. Team roles and progress report
For every team meeting and/or team assignment team members are required to assume
team roles and report on team memo the roles team members assumed. Also note that
teams MUST rotate team roles. No one should assume the same role twice consecutively.
Teams are strongly recommended to use the vocabulary provided when reporting on team
roles.

Include in this memo, a progress report on:

Team task how was the task accomplished? Were there challenges in completing
this task? How did you resolve the challenges?
Team dynamics/process how did your team function? Report on member
participation, preparation and cooperation. Are there any problems that the team is
facing? What are they? Did you resolve them? If not, how do you plan to resolve
them?
Include the names of the team members and the TEAM ROLES [leader,
encourager, recorder, devils advocate, and timer].

3. Presentation of guidelines for completing the assignment

This team assignment should be posted in a memo format and as a pdf attachment
to your team discussion thread on Canvas and ONLY ONE COPY ON TURNITIN.
This memo is worth 25 points. Criteria for grading this memo is available as an
attachment [Attachment-1.] Members who do not contribute to this team
assignment or are absent when the team is working on the assignment may not
receive credit.
This assignment post is due by midnight, November 12, 2017 on Canvas as a pdf
attachment
Team members are required to complete peer evaluations by November 15, 2017.
 Attachment-1
LEAP 1501, Sections 2-4/Fall 2017
Criteria for Evaluating Team Memo-3

1. Organization
o Header [To, From, CC, Date, Subject, Attachments (if any)]
o Introduction
Background statement
Purpose
Preview [main points/sections to be found in memo]
o Internal section [see Preview]
o Conclusion
o Reference page
o Appropriate information in attachments, if necessary
o Headings: action headings with parallel construction
o Bullets for important lists
o Transitions
Connections between sentences and paragraphs
Internal previews: introduce next topic
Internal summaries: summary statement[s] before moving to next topic

2. Content - Critical evaluation of technology using sustainability criteria

o Answers assignment question[s]
Team definition of sustainability
Team assessment of technology Sustainable or unsustainable?
Sustainability triangle
Beders scale
Young and Vanderburg
Experts
Teams definition
Use of sources
Detail team work
o Appropriate and accurate information
o Repetition of important information when necessary
o Evidence
o Development of ideas
Quotes interpreted and related to thesis
Facts/data interpreted and related to thesis
Citations for direct quotations and paraphrases
o Visual aids titled, numbered, and referred to in memo

3. Presentation
o Professional appearance
o Editing: correct spelling, grammar, clear sentence structure

4. Language
o Conciseness and clarity
o Accessible to audience
o Formal tone [do not use colloquial terms or casual language]
o Consistency in tone, sentence style. The memo should not read like several people wrote it.