NIE352 GROUP-BASED ASSIGNMENT (GBA)

This assignment is worth 30% of the final mark for NIE352 Interdisciplinary ProblemSolving for Impact.

The cut-off date for this assignment is 13 Feb 2026, Week 5, Friday, 23:55 hours.

This is a group-based assignment. You should form a group of 5-6 members from your seminar group. Groups will be formed in class in Week 1. Any changes to group members must be finalised by Week 2. You will complete both GBA1 and GBA2 in the same group.

Each group is required to upload a single report via your respective seminar group site in Canvas. Please elect a group leader. The responsibility of the group leader is to upload the report on behalf of the group.

Note to Students:

You are to include the following particulars in your submission: Course Code, Title of the GBA, SUSS PI No., Your Name, and Submission Date.

ASSIGNMENT OBJECTIVES

This course breaks down interdisciplinary problem-solving into four stages of assessment: (1) formulating a problem; (2) gathering evidence; (3) analysing evidence; and (4) construct and evaluate an interdisciplinary solution to the problem.

GBA01 assesses Stages (1) and (2) of the problem-solving process. The final product of this assignment is an investigation of a problem which entails formulating a problem and designing an approach to gather evidence to address the problem.

This assignment allows students to use and assess different sources of knowledge (primary vs secondary, quantitative vs qualitative) to formulate a complex problem and design an approach that addresses the problem. Students will collaborate to examine the assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines or professional expertise and use various disciplinary bases to address complex problem. In the process, they will develop interpersonal, interdisciplinary, and problem-solving skills.

ASSIGNMENT BRIEF

The investigation plan entails scoping, formulating, and framing a problem and gathering evidence to address the problem.

For this assignment, your group will submit an investigation plan with the following parts:

Background
- Based on secondary sources from your desktop search, what are the main key terms of your investigation?
- What fields do your topic span?
- What has been discussed about your topic across these fields?
- What kind of evidence have you gathered for formulating your problem: qualitative or quantitative, longitudinal or cross-sectional, theoretical or empirical?
- How do existing knowledge on the topic contribute to your own understanding of the problem?
- Which investigations support your understanding of the problem?
- Which investigations contradict your understanding of the problem?
- Are there existing gaps or unresolved issues in existing knowledge about your topic?
Problem Statement
- What is the main problem?
- What are the objectives of your investigation?
- What is the rationale behind your objectives?
- How will your investigation be relevant to the field/society/stakeholders?
Approach

– Evidence-gathering o What kind of evidence do you need?

o What data collection method will you use to procure the evidence you need?

(e.g. qualitative vs quantitative) o Who is your target audience? o How many participants will you need?

How will you ensure your data is meaningful? (e.g. Designing of survey or interview questions; ensuring participants are relevant to topic)
What questions will you ask your participants? Will these questions elicit answers aligned with your objective(s)?

– Analysis of evidence o What method of analysis will you use to interpret your data?

o How will your analysis contribute to the construction of interdisciplinary solutions?

– What is your estimated timeline for evidence gathering and analysis?

Note: You will be expected to submit the evidence gathered during fieldwork. Please ensure you keep a record of the questions and data collected (e.g. survey results, transcripts) to be submitted for GBA2.

The above pointers are non-exhaustive and are simply suggested questions to guide your thinking process for the completion of GBA1. You are not expected to answer them one by one in the investigation plan.

Your investigation plan will be graded based on the rubrics attached. Please look at this before starting work on your assignment.

* Please note that your group will be expected to complete GBA1 and GBA2 focusing on the same selected topic. This is meant to enable groups to build their content knowledge on particular issues across the group assignments. If you would like to change your topic, please consult your TG instructor for approval prior to doing so.

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

This assignment will constitute 30% of your final grade.
An investigation template shall be provided to students (Appendix)
Your submission must be no more than the word/line limit for each part. Please include your word count in the submission.
Use the “NIE Assignment Cover Page Template” as part of your submission.
Each group is required to submit a declaration of original work via Canvas by 13 Feb 2026, Week 5, Friday, 23:55 hours.
Each group is required to upload your Investigation Plan on the Canvas course site by 13 Feb 2026, Week 5, Friday, 23:55 hours.
You may submit using APA or Chicago referencing styles. A list of cited material must be appended.
Diagrams/illustrations/photos/charts (optional but encouraged) must be properly captioned/credited
You may submit multiple versions over the period before the close of the folder – Instructors will only take into consideration the last version submitted before the deadline.
Late submissions will be penalised.

CONSULTATIONS

Instructors are available for group consultations (up to 15 mins per group).Group consultations are optional and not compulsory. Please email your instructors to arrange for a mutually agreeable date and time for consultations. This can be conducted in person or over zoom meetings.

NIE352 GBA Rubrics

Criterion

Needs Work (F)

Borderline Pass (D/D+)

Fair (C/C+)

Good (B-/B/B+)

Exceptional (A/A/A+)

Score

Understanding of the Problem

20 marks

(0-7.5)

The background lacks examination of disciplinary bases. Assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines were not explored.

(8-9.5)

The background examines disciplinary bases in a disjointed or inconsistent manner. Assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines are explored superficially.

(10-11.5)

The background examines disciplinary bases in a mostly consistent manner. Assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines are acknowledged, though exploration is limited or uneven.

(12-14.5)

The background examines disciplinary bases in a consistent manner. Assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines are explored with depth.

(15-20)

The background examines disciplinary bases in a consistent, convincing, and selfreflexive manner. Assumptions and perspectives of different disciplines are explored with depth and original insight.

Formulation of

Problem

Statement

20 marks

(0-7.5)

The problem statement is vague, unfocused, or missing key elements. It lacks clarity and relevance and shows minimal understanding of the problem context or disciplinary foundations.

(8-9.5)

The problem statement

is present but underdeveloped. It demonstrates basic understanding of the problem context but lacks precision or clear relevance. Interdisciplinary connections are weak or superficial

(10-11.5)

The problem statement is adequately framed with some clarity and

relevance. It reflects a reasonable understanding of the problem context and includes emerging interdisciplinary considerations, though inconsistently applied.

(12-14.5)

The problem statement is well-defined and clearly articulated. It shows thoughtful engagement with the problem context and integrates disciplinary perspectives with growing coherence and relevance.

(15-20)

The problem statement is critically scoped and convincingly framed. It demonstrates deep understanding of the problem context, and the synthesis of disciplines towards interdisciplinarity is consistent and compelling.

Approach Used to Address the Problem

30 marks

(0-11.5)

The approach is unclear, poorly defined, or inappropriate for the problem. It lacks coherence and does not demonstrate an understanding of how to effectively address the issue

(12-14.5)

The approach shows some relevance to the problem but is underdeveloped or inconsistently applied. There may be gaps in logic or execution, and the rationale is weak or superficial.

(15-17.5)

The approach is generally appropriate and demonstrates a basic understanding of the problem. It is applied with some consistency, though it may lack depth or refinement.

(18-22.5)

The approach is well thought out and suitably addresses the problem. It is logically structured, mostly consistent, and shows a clear rationale with some depth.

(23-30)

The approach is clear and sound and addresses the problem in a consistent and compelling manner. It demonstrates strategic insight, deep understanding of the problem context, and a high level of coherence

Use of

Appropriate

Evidence and Materials

20 marks

(0-7.5)

Sources lack relevance to the investigation and are derived from one discipline. Sources are used in an ineffective manner.

(8-9.5)

Some sources are relevant, but the selection is limited in scope or depth.

Disciplinary diversity is minimal or absent.

(10-11.5)

Sources are generally relevant and demonstrate some effort to support the investigation. There is moderate use of materials from more than one discipline.

(12-14.5)

Sources are mostly relevant and well-chosen to the investigation and are derived from multiple disciplines. Sources are used effectively.

(15-20)

Sources are highly and consistently relevant to the investigation and are derived from multiple disciplines. Sources are used in a highly effective and convincing manner.

Grammar

5 marks

(0-1.9)

Full of errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling.

(2-2.4)

Contains many errors in grammar, punctuation,

or spelling

(2.5-2.9)

Contains some errors in grammar, punctuation, or spelling.

(3-3.9)

Almost no errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling

(4-5)

Completely free of errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling

References

(0-1.9)

Full of errors

(2-2.4)

Contains many errors

(2.5-2.9)

Contains some errors

(3-3.9)

Almost no errors and/or

(4-5)

Completely free of

5 marks	and/or missing references	and/or missing references.	and/or missing references	missing references	errors and/or missing references
				Final Grade

SINGAPORE UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES (SUSS)

Group-based Assignment – Page 7 of 11

—- END OF ASSIGNMENT GUIDE —-

University	Singapore University of Social Science (SUSS)
Subject	NIE352 Interdisciplinary Problem-Solving for Impact

NIE352 Interdisciplinary Problem-Solving for Impact Group-based Assignment 1 2026 | SUSS, Singapore

Ask Your Homework Today!