DPGE1002 Communication & Academic Literacy

How DPGE1002 is assessed

The Term 3 2026 course outline lists A7 at 6%, A8 at 47% and A9 at 47%, totalling 100%. The 2026 UNSW Handbook page separately lists Emergency Summit at 100%. Use Moodle to confirm the operational assessment record for your class. The course outline marks the component hurdle field N/A for all three rows; overall CAL progression rules are separate.

What DPGE1002 covers

DPGE1002 CAL 2 develops one connected academic-literacy workflow: reflect on performance, map a wicked problem, analyse stakeholders, build and negotiate positions, evaluate feedback, then transform several sources into a coherent argument under supervised conditions.

The Term 3 2026 materials organise learning around a connected set of performances: structured reflection, investigation of a wicked problem, stakeholder analysis, evidence-based position building, negotiation, consensus, feedback and supervised academic writing. The course does not treat speaking and writing as separate collections of phrases.

Students first learn to identify relationships and alternative perspectives, then use those relationships to make decisions in discussion and prose. The three detailed course-outline components are the A7 Reflection Journal at 6%, the A8 Emergency Summit at 47% and the A9 Stakeholder Argument at 47%.

The A8 task is a thirty-minute face-to-face group discussion held in Weeks 9 and 10. The A9 task is an individual supervised exam during the exam period: students read three input texts, plan and write a 400 to 450 word argument with synthesis, paraphrase and Harvard-style citation. The official records contain a conflict that students should notice.

The detailed Term 3 outline gives the 6%, 47%, 47% structure, while the 2026 UNSW Handbook page lists Emergency Summit as 100%. This guide follows the detailed current course outline for preparation, preserves the Handbook reading in the assessment note and directs students to Moodle for the operational record used by their class. Every worked scenario in the guide is original.

It teaches the published reasoning moves and rubric priorities without copying an assessment prompt or course example.

Worked example · free

Plan a qualified position from three campus sources

Key terms

Abstract conceptualisation

The reflection stage that explains an experience through a broader idea or learning principle.

Active experimentation

A specific action designed to test learning in a future situation.

Wicked problem

A complex and changing issue with connected causes, competing interests and no single final solution.

Stakeholder

A person or group that affects an issue, is affected by it, or holds an interest in its outcome.

Stakeholder analysis

A comparison of concerns, priorities, expectations, influence, impact and possible actions.

Counterargument

A relevant alternative position or objection that tests the strength of a proposal.

Rebuttal

A reasoned response that answers a counterargument through evidence, qualification or design change.

Consensus

A general agreement the group can support even when the result is not every member's first choice.

Synthesis

A purposeful connection between ideas from different sources that advances the writer's claim.

Transformation

Accurate re-expression of source meaning through changed structure and vocabulary.

Controlling idea

The writer's main point that determines which evidence belongs in a paragraph.

Cohesive device

Language that signals a genuine relationship such as cause, contrast, sequence or consequence between ideas.

DPGE1002 FAQ

Questions students ask in each DPGE1002 chapter

Why is description alone not enough?

Description records what happened but does not explain why it matters or how future performance will change. A complete reflection uses the event as evidence, identifies a pattern, applies a useful concept and finishes with a specific experiment. Add the explanation and experiment so the entry demonstrates what was learned and how that learning will be tested. Chapter 01 · Reflection as a Learning Cycle

What makes a problem wicked?

Its causes and effects interact, stakeholders define the issue differently and interventions can create new consequences. The goal is not a perfect final answer but a transparent comparison of evidence, interests and feasible actions. A strong map therefore records uncertainty and trade-offs instead of presenting one stakeholder's definition as the complete problem. Chapter 02 · Wicked Problems and Source Checking

Is the most powerful stakeholder always the most important?

No. High power may determine implementation, while a low-power group may experience the greatest harm. Keep influence and impact separate, then design engagement that protects both decision quality and affected voices. Engagement must therefore reflect both formal authority and lived consequence, especially when the affected group cannot control implementation. Chapter 03 · Stakeholder Analysis

How do I make a concern specific?

Name the condition, mechanism and consequence for the stakeholder. A specific concern indicates which evidence matters, identifies the affected interest and narrows the range of suitable actions. That chain helps the reader see why the stakeholder should act rather than merely accepting that the issue sounds important. Chapter 04 · Stakeholder Positions and Evidence

Why paraphrase before disagreeing?

Paraphrase checks that you understood the proposal and identifies the exact point of conflict. It reduces false disagreement and gives the other speaker a fair chance to correct your reading. The confirmed paraphrase then gives both speakers a shared statement to evaluate, narrow or convert into a conditional trade. Chapter 05 · Negotiation Language and Common Ground

Should I memorise a summit speech?

No. Prepare evidence, a preferred action, a minimum acceptable outcome and tradeable conditions. The live incident and other contributions should change how you explain and refine the proposal. Prepare short contribution shapes instead: connect to the last point, add relevant stakeholder information and ask for the next decision. Chapter 06 · Emergency Summit Workflow

Is speaking more often evidence of good interaction?

Not necessarily. Strong interaction follows up, reformulates or extends another contribution and helps the group progress. Count connected moves and their effects rather than total speaking turns. A brief contribution can therefore demonstrate stronger interaction than several disconnected turns when it changes the shared analysis or proposed action. Chapter 07 · Consensus and Feedback

Why should I choose a position before detailed notes?

A provisional position creates a relevance filter and reveals which objections need evidence. You can qualify or change it after reading, but source collection should not become a summary of everything. Without that filter, detailed notes can anchor the response to a source sequence before the writer has decided what must be proved. Chapter 08 · Deconstructing the Argument Task

Is putting two citations together synthesis?

No. The sentence must state how the sources agree, differ, qualify one another or create a combined implication, and the writer must explain why that relationship matters. A connector alone is not enough; the explanation must show what follows for the paragraph claim when the ideas are read together. Chapter 09 · Synthesis and Citation

How should I use the reading period?

Deconstruct the prompt, scan all texts, choose a position, assign source roles and build two distinct paragraph claims. Do not begin polished prose before the evidence relationships are clear. Reserve the final minutes of planning to test whether each paragraph has a distinct job and a source relationship worth explaining. Chapter 10 · Timed Stakeholder Argument

How to study for the exam

Study DPGE1002 as a sequence of decisions. Begin with one concrete speaking experience and complete all four reflection stages, ending with a behaviour you can test. Next, practise mapping a wicked problem and checking claims against suitable evidence.

Build stakeholder matrices that separate interest, influence and impact, then convert them into position statements with a concern, evidence, proposal, counterargument and rebuttal. Rehearse negotiations aloud using clarification, comparison and conditional trade-offs, and always close by assigning actions and review triggers. For A9, use fresh prompts.

Spend the reading period deconstructing the question, assigning source roles and building two distinct paragraph claims. Draft from claim to connected evidence to explanation, keeping citations beside source meaning. Finish with a value-ordered check: relevance, synthesis, transformation, organisation, grammar and vocabulary. Do not memorise one response.

The exam issue and texts will change, while the method must remain reliable. Follow Moodle for the operational assessment record because the course outline and Handbook publish conflicting weight structures.