Masters by Research 2015-2016

Project Placement Information for Supervisors and Students

Contents Important Dates for 2015-2016 Project Placements .............................................................................................................3 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Ethics Approval ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Safety....................................................................................................................................................... 4 NHS Honorary Contracts ......................................................................................................................... 4 Student Supervision ................................................................................................................................ 4 Policy on the practice of MRes students undertaking research project work during Semester 1 ........ 5 MRes Frequently asked Questions...........................................................................................................................................6 Guidelines for writing MRes project dissertations .................................................................................................................9 Length ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Format ..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Structure.................................................................................................................................................. 9 Good Academic Practice (See Appendix H)...........................................................................................................................12 Assessment of Project Placements ........................................................................................................................................13 Oral Presentations................................................................................................................................. 13 Poster Presentation............................................................................................................................... 14 Poster Guide .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Appendix A - LAY ABSTRACT Masters of Research 2015 - 2016 Abstract Submission Template ...................... 16 Appendix A1 -GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES LAY ABSTRACT .............................................................................17 Appendix B - SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT Masters of Research 2015 - 2016 Abstract Submission Template .......... 18 Appendix B1 - GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT ................................................... 18 Appendix C - GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES PLACEMENT DISSERTATION ........................................... 20 APPENDIX D - GUIDELINES FOR MARKING MRES PLACEMENT STUDENT APPLICATION/EFFORT ...............................22 APPENDIX E - MRes MARKING SHEET FOR PROJECT ORAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROJECT ABSTRACTS ....................24 APPENDIX F - GUIDANCE FOR ASSESSORS OF MRes ORAL PRESENTATIONS .................................................. 25 APPENDIX G – GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRes POSTER.............................................................................. 26 APPENDIX H - Good Academic Conduct............................................................................................................ 27 APPENDIX I - LIBRARY HELP .............................................................................................................................. 30

2

Important Dates for 2015-2016 Project Placements (inclusive of two week Easter holiday)1

Orientation week

8-12 February 2016

Project starts

15 February 2016

Project ends in lab

8 July 2016

Dissertation write-up

11-25 July 2016

Poster submission deadline

12 Noon 18 July 2016

Dissertation deadline

12 Noon 25 July 20162

Presentation & abstract submission

12 Noon 28 July 2016

Oral presentations

1-2 August 20163

Poster evening

2 August 2016

Introduction The project placement, which takes place during the second and third semesters, forms a major component of the MRes degree (100 out of a total of 180 credits). Though not exhaustive, the information provided in this handbook is intended as a practical guide for both current and potential MRes student supervisors and MRes students alike. If clarification is required on any point, please feel free to contact Professor David Young, Deputy Degree Programme Director (Projects) by e-mailing [email protected]. Supervisors will grant time off to international students who need to attend in-sessional English. Laboratory books will be provided by the Graduate School and these must be used throughout the placement. These books should remain with the supervisor after the project has ended but should be made available for the dissertation examiners should they request it.

1

In general the placement is full time, however students can request a holiday, preferably to be taken over Easter (Saturday 19th March – Sunday 3rd April 2016). This will be at the supervisor’s discretion and must have the prior agreement of the supervisor. Please note that exam resits will take place between 29th March – 1st April – students should not to make any plans to leave Newcastle until their exam results have been confirmed. 2

Students will submit an electronic copy of their dissertation via NESS by the given deadline. A penalty will be applied to students who submit late without an agreed extension. 3

Please note that supervisors are invited to attend the oral presentations and should therefore mark these dates in their diaries as soon as possible. Students will be presenting either on 1st or 2nd August 2016 and will be informed of their allocated time slot nearer the time.

3

Important information prior to the start of projects It has always been the intention that in the majority of cases, students will undertake their project in a laboratory as part of the ongoing programme of research in that particular University Research Group although we recognise that there may be exceptions, particularly in relation to some of the clinical projects offered to intercalating students. As a result, many of the ethics and governance issues should therefore be covered as follows when preparing or considering submitting proposals to supervise MRes project students.

Ethics Approval Research projects, if required, must have the appropriate ethical approval before they are advertised to potential students. Acquiring ethical approval is the responsibility of the supervisory team and not the responsibility of the student.

Safety Students are expected to understand School, Institute and University safety policies, to attend appropriate safety courses as directed and to adhere to all legal requirements governing experimental procedures. When submitting a project title, Supervisors are required to state the safety training, health and vaccination requirements. As with all students, it is the supervisor’s responsibility to ensure that their student has received the appropriate safety training. Students must read, understand and adhere to any safety information that is provided.

NHS Honorary Contracts In some circumstances, the student may be required to have direct access to patients, or access to identifiable patient data. If the student is an intercalating MBBS or BDS student, then this is covered by the normal mechanisms in place for clinical student options (the option in this case being intercalation). For non-intercalating students, we would recommend that the supervisor considers slight modifications to protocols such that the student does not require direct patient access, or that certain data (e.g. patient DNA samples) are completely anonymised. Again, if the project is part of an ongoing programme of research, then all governance related issues should be covered by the supervisor’s own application if he/she is working with identifiable patient data.

Student Supervision As a matter of protocol, we have insisted that all project pro-forma include a named academic as part of the supervisory team. This said, we are very keen that post- docs and research associates are given the opportunity to co-supervise projects as part of their own academic development, particularly as many academic supervisors are not always in the lab and available to students. In order to provide adequate support during these project placements, we are asking all supervisors to name a deputy whom students may approach when the supervisor is not available. The support provided for your MRes Project – The support you can expect will be agreed with your supervisory team when you sign your Learning Agreement. By signing the Learning Agreement, your supervisor is agreeing to provide the level of support you have discussed.

4

Policy on the practice of MRes students undertaking research project work during Semester 1 The following policy, applies to all MRes students: There are no restrictions on MRes students engaging actively with relevant research groups, e.g. the eventual PhD research group for 1+3 MRes/PhD students, or research groups in which students will undertake the MRes research project. These interactions could involve activities such as participation in laboratory meetings, seminars, etc. and/or observing or assisting with laboratory work that will not be a direct element of the MRes research project. MRes students must not undertake active MRes research project work until commencement of the MRes research project module in Semester 2. All students will be expected to attend their project placement on a FULL- TIME basis. Students should report any absences by email or telephone to the supervisor 4 (or their deputy) AND the Graduate School. Any problems reported to the Graduate School by the supervisor, with either attendance or behaviour concerns, will be investigated under University Regulations E14 for Unsatisfactory Progress and may lead to the recommendation of termination of studies.

4

Supervisors should inform the Graduate School if a student is absent without their prior consent. Supervisors of international students will be contacted by email regularly to confirm attendance.

5

MRes Frequently asked Questions How do I record a meeting using ePortfolio? Detailed instructions for using ePortfolio are available at https://portfolio.ncl.ac.uk/help/instructions/ .

What should I include in my poster presentation? There are three Poster Presentation sessions running in June 2016 and also a session specifically for MRes students. Places are limited and can be booked on line here: http://faculty-tools.ncl.ac.uk/training/book?instance_id=2975 MRes specific Poster Session: http://faculty-tools.ncl.ac.uk/training/book?instance_id=2981

Does my poster, oral presentation and dissertation titles need to be the same? No, they can have different titles for each aspect of the project.

Do I have to attend the MRes Poster Evening? Yes, it is expected that all students will be in attendance at the poster evening. However, if you have compelling reasons for missing it you will not be penalised for non-attendance. If you are unable to attend please let us know the reason for this.

Do I need to use references on my Poster? No, references are optional for the poster.

How do I convert my PowerPoint Poster to a PDF format? When saving your PowerPoint file, use the ‘Save as type’ drop down menu and select ‘PDF’. Please check the PDF thoroughly prior to submission, as formatting errors can occur when converting PowerPoint files to PDF. ‘Paste Special’ can be used to paste files as images into posters which will prevent many of these formatting errors from occurring.

I need to put a high quality Newcastle University logo on the poster, where can I get this from? Supervisors should easily be able to provide the logo. However, if you follow the link in the Project handbook to the poster template, this contains the University logo and can be copied. (http://fmsitskills.ncl.ac.uk/docs/A1template.ppt )

Do I have to attend all of the oral presentations on the day I present? Yes, attendance at all oral presentation sessions on your allocated day is compulsory. Non-attendance for any part of the sessions without prior permission will mean you be given a maximum mark of 50% for your presentation.

Can I get help with my Oral Presentation? There are two sessions which run in May 2016 covering general presentation skills - http://facultytools.ncl.ac.uk/training/book?instance_id=2964 and giving PowerPoint presentations - http://facultytools.ncl.ac.uk/training/book?instance_id=2969

Can I get help with writing my abstract? Yes, an abstract writing session will be arranged for MRes students during June 2016 and advertised to students.

Can I take a holiday during my project? 6

MRes students are entitled to request a holiday which should preferably be during the Easter Break. This will be at the Supervisor’s discretion and must be agreed with the Supervisor. Please note that exam resits will take place 29th March - 1st April – you are advised not to make any plans to leave Newcastle until your exam results have been confirmed.

Where do I get my lab book from? The Graduate School will supply you with a lab book ahead of your project start date.

Do we have to return our Lab books to the Graduate School? No, your laboratory books are retained by your supervisor/research laboratory.

How many abstracts should I submit? In total you will submit three abstracts, we recommend all of which are different. One abstract will be part of your dissertation. For your oral presentation you will submit two abstracts, a lay and scientific abstract. These are abstracts of your talk, not dissertation.

How many drafts of a dissertation should my Supervisor comment upon? Supervisors should only comment on one draft of an MRes dissertation

What is the recommended length of the dissertation? We recommend approximately 7,000 words to an absolute maximum of 8,500 words (text only). See page 9 of the Project handbook for further details.

What isn’t included in the Dissertation word count? The abstract, tables, tables of contents, acknowledgements, figure legends, illustrations, bibliography, appendices or list of abbreviations are not included in the word count

What referencing style should I use in my dissertation? There are no specific referencing styles required for the dissertation. The only requirement is that it is clear and consistent throughout, but Endnote is recommended.

How many references can I cite for the dissertation? We recommend 30-50 references, however there is no minimum or maximum as such.

Do I need to submit a hard copy of my dissertation? No, all project submissions should be submitted electronically via NESS as a PDF document. No hardcopies are required.

I would like to change the title of my dissertation. What should I do? During the first few weeks of your project, The MRes Project Team will provide you with a “Change of Title Form”. If you need to change your dissertation title, you must complete and return the change form to the Graduate School by 30th June 2016. Changes to your title will not be possible after this date.

What should I do if I’m having difficulties during my project? Professor David Young will be happy to discuss any concerns you may have during your project and can be contacted via telephone or email: • Tel: 0191 2083850 7

•

Email: [email protected]

If you are experiencing difficulties during your research you may wish to discuss any academic issues with your Supervisor, or your Personal Tutor if you prefer. The MRes admin team, based in the Graduate School, are also able to offer help and advice and can be contacted in person, by email or telephone: • Graduate School, Ridley Building 1, Third Floor • Tel: 0191 2083847 ; • Email: [email protected]

8

Guidelines for writing MRes project dissertations Length Recommend approximately 7,000 words to an absolute maximum of 8,500 (text ONLY – see 6 below) [i.e. not counting abstract, tables, tables of contents, figure legends, illustrations, bibliography, acknowledgements, appendices or list of abbreviations]. Please note that a word count is obligatory. Dissertations without a word count or dissertations exceeding the word limit will be returned to the student for amendment. Students will then need to re-submit the dissertation and the usual penalties for late submission may apply.

Format The dissertation must be word processed, double spaced with a minimum 1 inch (25mm) margin all round. Note that Microsoft Word is the preferred working format but submission should be as a Portable Document Format (PDF) document.

Structure 1.

Title Page [see example below] If the nature of the project has changed during the course of the placement, then an alternative title to that originally submitted can be used but the amended title must first be approved by the Graduate School. The Graduate School will email all students to request that any changes to titles are submitted for approval no later than 30th June 2016. It will not be possible to change your title after this date. The final title approved must be the one given on the title page of the dissertation. The title page must also include the name of the student, student number, the supervisor’s name and the Research Group/Institute in which the research placement was carried out. Please also indicate the year and a word count. Example

Studies on the role of mitochondrial DNA in skin David Smith (Student Number) Supervisor: Professor M.A. Birch-Machin Institute of Cellular Medicine Masters by Research: 2015-2016 [Word Count]

2. 3.

Abstract [should not exceed 250 words] Table of Contents

9

4. 5. 6.

List of Figures and Tables List of abbreviations [use standard recognised abbreviations & SI units] Text a. Introduction: This section should normally be no more than 2000 words but this maximum may be exceeded if extensive literature review is required. Students are reminded that they must not reproduce previously published text (please refer to the University’s Guidelines for Research Students and Plagiarism – see also below). b. Aims of Project State clearly the aims and objectives of the project, ideally with a hypothesis. c. Methods: Credit must be given in this section to those who have helped students through the provision of materials (e.g. if cell lines have been grown or donated etc…. (see also 7 below) or if other members of the host laboratory have provided experimental data that are presented in the final dissertation). d. Results: It is important that the results of all valid experiments carried out are recorded, even if they did not produce positive results, as the examiner will need to be able to conclude that adequate industry was displayed. Well-recorded negative data or thorough evaluation of a failed procedure is of equal value to positive data in these reports. Tables and figures must not be hand-written; instead they should be electronically produced using the appropriate software (e.g. Word, PowerPoint, Excel etc.). Students must also give credit here for any data included that has been provided by others (e.g. control data or quality control data etc… - see also 7 below). e. Discussion: This section is devoted to the interpretation of the results and their relation to previously published work. Students may consider combining the 'Results' and 'Discussion' together. This is permissible and indeed may be desirable depending upon the nature of the project; they are encouraged to speak to their supervisor for guidance on this. f.

Conclusions: This must be no more than a single side of A4 and include a summary of the major findings of the project and its implications.

g. Future work: Students are encouraged to describe and outline future experiments as the next step of this research programme. Again, no more than a single side of A4 is required.

7.

Acknowledgements and statement of originality. All contributions by persons other than the student must be acknowledged. For example: where work is part of a larger project continuing from earlier investigations, data from those investigations may be required for quality of statistical comparison etc., the relevant investigators must be credited in each case. The work that was carried out by the student must be clearly distinguished from any work performed by others.

10

Bibliography Students should normally cite between 30-50 references in the report. Use of Endnote will facilitate this task. The Bibliography should include all of the quoted works in a standard format. Works in press and abstracts should also be included. The ‘style’ of the bibliography is at your discretion but we recommend the Endnote style VANCOUVER.

Dissertation Submission Project dissertations are to be submitted electronically to NESS by the deadline. Unless the student has been granted an extension, late submission of the dissertation shall be treated in the normal way (ie. up to seven days late a cap of 50% will be applied, and after that 0% will be awarded). Should a student require an extension due to extenuating circumstances, this should be applied for well in advance of the deadline by submitting a Personal Extenuating Circumstances form via the Graduate School office. Further information about Personal Extenuating Circumstances can be found here: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/students/progress/student-resources/help/ All electronic submissions will be subject to electronic scanning for evidence of plagiarism. NOTE: Files submitted must be less than 25mb to upload to NESS. We strongly recommend that dissertations are submitted in Portable Document Format (PDF). Please check the PDF thoroughly before submission. Conversion of Word files to PDF can occasionally be problematic and incur formatting errors.

Assessment of dissertations Supervisors of MRes students are not required to mark the dissertation, although a mark for application and effort is still required. A copy of the marking criteria for both the dissertation and application and effort are attached as appendices (C and D) to this document, together with further guidelines. All dissertations are marked by two markers - an independent first marker from within the University and an external examiner. Please note: Supervisors are advised against discussing any project marks with students at any time and are reminded that this is contrary to University regulations.

11

Good Academic Practice (See Appendix H) Plagiarism is defined by the University for these purposes as "the unacknowledged use of another person's ideas, words or work either verbatim or in substance without specific acknowledgement”. For the avoidance of doubt, plagiarism may occur in an examination script as well as in assessed coursework, projects, other reports, and like work and may involve the use of material downloaded from electronic sources such as the Internet. Further, the inclusion of a source in a bibliography is not of itself a sufficient attribution of another's work. All work submitted for assessment must be the student’s own. If it is deemed necessary or desirable to include any results that were not obtained by the student personally, this must be stated clearly in the text. All sources within the work must be acknowledged and a bibliography supplied. Although students are encouraged to discuss their work with colleagues, they are required to develop ideas and work independently and should under no circumstances copy the work of others, or allow another student to copy their own work. This is particularly important if supervisors are supervising more than one MRes student. Submission of the dissertations via NESS will include a declaration to confirm that the work is the student’s own and that they have correctly referenced the work of others. Students and supervisors should note that all dissertations for this programme will be subject to electronic scanning for evidence of plagiarism. If plagiarism is suspected in any work (whether whole or in part), the matter will be referred to the Chair of the Examination Committee, who will investigate the matter and take action in accordance with the University's Procedure for Assessment Irregularities (http://www.ncl.ac.uk/students/progress/Regulations/SPS/assessment.htm). Please note that the University takes a very serious view of this offence and penalties for plagiarism and other irregularities include termination of studies. Please see also the University’s Guidelines for Research Students: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/students/progress/student-resources/PGR/handbook.htm , and the University’s Notice to Students on Academic Conduct: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/students/progress/student-resources/conduct.htm

12

Assessment of Project Placements Percentage weightings for project placements are: Oral Presentation Dissertation Application & Effort Scientific Abstract Lay Abstract Poster

15% 60% 10% 2% 3% 10%

Oral Presentations Students are required to present a short 20 minute talk on their research placement. Each presentation will last no longer than 15 minutes (a timer will be in operation) with 5 minutes for discussion and questions. Students will NOT receive any extra marks for talking longer than 15 minutes. All presentations will use PowerPoint (use of overheads etc. is prohibited). It is strongly recommended that the talk should be illustrated with no more than 15 slides (excluding the title slide and references + acknowledgement slides). Students will be required to submit their final presentations to NESS by 12 noon on Thursday 28th July 2016, several days prior to giving their presentations, and it is this version of their talk that will be loaded for projection – no modifications will be allowed after the submission deadline. In addition, students are asked to submit two short (max 250 words) abstracts outlining their research talk. As these are abstracts of the talk, they should be specific to this and not necessarily the same as that included in the dissertation. Proformas for both abstracts will be made available electronically but are also available at the end of this booklet (Appendices A & B). One Abstract should be for a scientific audience the other a lay audience – further guidance is given below. NOTE: Abstracts submitted in excess of 250 words will be given a mark of 0%. Late submission of the presentation (and abstracts) will be subject to the normal penalties. It is compulsory5 for all students to attend all oral presentations in their allocated lecture theatre on the day of their own presentation6. There are many reasons for this which include - supporting fellow students, providing an audience and asking questions (which students are encouraged to do), learning presentation skills from others and learning about areas and subjects to which you would not normally be exposed. Attending the presentations is a positive experience. Students are asked to bring their PowerPoint presentation file with them on a USB memory stick on the day in case of technical issues, the content must be identical to that submitted to NESS 5

The maximum mark achievable for non-attendance will be 50% unless the student has express permission not to attend part or all of the presentations. 6 Students will be presenting either on 1st or 2nd August 2016 and will be informed of their allocated time slot nearer the time. Please note that supervisors are invited to attend the oral presentations and should therefore mark these dates in their diaries as soon as possible.

13

Poster Presentation Students are encouraged to look at posters displayed in their Institute and to discuss them with their supervisors as most will have been involved in many posters and will be able to give excellent feedback on layout and content. Poster Style - General A template for posters can be found at: http://fms-itskills.ncl.ac.uk/docs/A1template.ppt http://www.ncl.ac.uk/library/services/print-bind-copy/print-services/large-print (We will arrange the printing of your poster) A tutorial on how to design a poster can be found at: http://fms-itskills.ncl.ac.uk/posters/ What Makes a Good Poster? Three “What Makes a Good Poster?” workshops and a practical advice session on giving a Poster Presentation are scheduled within the Research Student Development Programme and can be booked online at: http://faculty-tools.ncl.ac.uk/training/?mres=1 What Makes a Good Poster workshop dates: 07.06.16

15:00 – 17:00 Research Beehive 2.21/2.22

08.06.16

10:00 – 12:00 Research Beehive 2.21/2.22

08.06.16

12:00 – 14:00 Research Beehive 2.21/2.22

Poster Presentations – practical advice 04.07.16

10:00 – 12:00 POOL Cluster

Information on the reproduction of posters can be found at: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/library/services/print-bind-copy/print-services/large-print

Poster Guide This is a guide and can be modified (see below) but please keep your poster in portrait format. Documents should be created in PowerPoint and converted into Portable Document Format (PDF) for submission. Posters should be A1 in size and portrait. Set the page to A1 size - File/Page Setup - 59.4 cm x 84.1 cm. Please stick to standard Microsoft fonts. Suggestions for text size to be no smaller than: Title:

70 pt bold

Subheadings:

30 pt bold

Author & Address:

30 pt

Body text:

20 pt

Your name should be first in an author list and be in bold followed by your student number.

14

Colour, Effects and Images After submission, posters will be printed (in A2) for presentation at the poster evening (2nd August 2016, Sports Centre). For assessment, an electronic version will be provided to the external examiner who may choose to print posters, therefore certain constraints are worth bearing in mind to get an optimum print. For example, graduated and strong coloured fills will not print as well as flat, pale colours. Use a pale coloured background with dark text. Transparent fills may not print correctly. The resolution of images (photographs, graphics & logos) should be at least 300 dpi. It is unadvisable to download images (including logos) from websites, as they are usually of a very low resolution. Do not crop images by dragging from a corner, as this creates a large file when inserted into your poster. Please use the resize option on the toolbar. Using ‘paste special - picture (enhanced metafile)’ is a good way to fix an image in your document which can be scaled easily. The information below will hopefully clarify any queries you might have about the poster design and submission: • the poster is an interim poster, a summary of the work to date • some students may not have their work/results finished for the poster deadline - this is not a problem • the poster component of the MRes overall is small and is judged more on presentation, aims and understanding rather than actual results • the aim of the poster is about conveying your work (not necessarily great or lots of results) to an audience in a short period • a poster is a very limited, specialised format, used extensively at meetings often to present preliminary findings – include only limited text and figures • the poster you submit for the deadline WILL be final and will be the poster you present at the poster evening • at a poster event you should be present to convey information that could not be included on the poster because of space • you should also be prepared to answer questions about the poster • we will print your posters and bring them to the poster evening. Students will be required to submit their poster to the NESS system by 12 noon, 18th July 2016. Late submission of the poster will be subject to the normal penalties. Posters will be marked by external examiners. A copy of the guidelines of the marking of poster is attached to this document as Appendix (G). More information about the poster evening will be made available nearer the time.

15

Appendix A LAY ABSTRACT Masters of Research 2015 - 2016 Abstract Submission Template PROJECT TITLE STUDENT NAME & STUDENT NUMBER SUPERVISOR(S) INSTITUTE/ RESEARCH GROUP AFFILIATION

LAY SUMMARY DEFINITION “A lay summary is a brief summary of a research project or a research proposal that has been written for members of the public, rather than researchers or professionals. It should be written in plain English, avoid the use of jargon and explain any technical terms that have to be included” Reference: Mark Smith and Claire Ashmore, The Lay Summary in medical research proposals – is it becoming more important?

LAY ABSTRACT BODY IMPORTANT: Word limit is 250 words maximum. The text should be Arial 12pt – single line spacing. You may alter these values only to add symbols or superscripts etc. Use Symbol font for Greek and other special characters. Do NOT include tables, figures or references.

WORD COUNT: Assessor Feedback

16

Appendix A1 GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES LAY ABSTRACT When marking please base your judgement on the following guideline given to students and the guide below. “A lay summary is a brief summary of a research project or a research proposal that has been written for members of the public, rather than researchers or professionals. It should be written in plain English, avoid the use of jargon and explain any technical terms that have to be included” Ref: Mark Smith and Claire Ashmore, The Lay Summary in medical research proposals – is it becoming more important?

Distinction Level

100% - 70%

Outstanding/Excellent/Very good (use scaling). Perfectly worded, concise but easy to understand by the lay reader. No technical jargon or acronym’s or if there are they are clearly explained.

Merit Level

69% – 60%

Good/Quite good (use scaling) Abstract and lay content good but structure of text could be improved. Potentially some technical information included.

Pass Level

59% - 50%

Fairly Good (use scaling) Abstract fine. Lay content good but could be better written and/or easier to understand. Potentially some technical information/jargon included.

Fail Level

49% - 10%

Quite Poor/very poor (use scaling) Abstract not very well written. Difficult to read or understand by a lay reader. Important information missing, poor structure, no clear aims. Through to student having no idea how to précis work into digestible form suited to the lay reader.

0%

No abstract – or abstract over 250 word limit.

17

Appendix B SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT Masters of Research 2015 - 2016 Abstract Submission Template PROJECT TITLE STUDENT NAME & STUDENT NUMBER SUPERVISOR(S) INSTITUTE/ RESEARCH GROUP AFFILIATION

SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT BODY IMPORTANT: Word limit is 250 words maximum. The text should be Arial 12pt – single line spacing. You may alter these values only to add symbols or superscripts etc. Use Symbol font for Greek and other special characters. Do NOT include tables, figures or references.

WORD COUNT: Assessor Feedback

18

Appendix B1 GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES SCIENTIFIC ABSTRACT Distinction Level

Merit Level

Pass Level

Fail Level

100% - 80%

Outstanding/Excellent Abstract as good as can be expected at Masters level. Perfectly worded, concise but easy to understand. Scientific content excellent. Clear format which follows a logical progression through aims, results, conclusions; which are all easy to access/understand.

80% - 70%

Very Good Abstract and scientific content very good but the “flow” could be improved.

69% – 65%

Good Abstract and scientific content good but structure of text could be improved in terms of a progression through aims, results, conclusions.

64% - 60%

Quite Good Abstract and scientific content good but structure could be improved and text better written in terms of grammar, structure and clarity.

59% - 55%

Fairly Good Abstract fine. Scientific content good but could be better written and/or easier to understand.

54% - 50%

Adequate Abstract average in terms of clarity and content.

49% - 45%

Quite Poor Abstract not very well written. Difficult to read or understand. Important information missing, Poor structure, no clear aims.

44% - 40%

Poor Abstract generally badly written with little relevant information. As a result difficult to gauge scientific content.

39% - 35%

Poor Abstract poorly written (as above) and student shows little idea how to précis work, or structure the abstract.

34% - 10%

Very Poor Abstract Student has no idea how to précis work into digestible form. No clear flow, unorganised presentation with no clear message.

0%

No abstract – or abstract over 250 word limit.

19

Appendix C GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES PLACEMENT DISSERTATION Distinction Level 100% - 90%

90% - 80%

80% - 70%

Merit Level

Pass Level

Fail Level

Outstanding No, or virtually no better result conceivable at Masters level. Factually correct and complete, with extensive evidence of critical thinking. Evidence of extensive research of relevant literature. Very logical structure, very well written and presented. Clear evidence of original thought and cogent scientific argument. Excellent Clear evidence of achievement on a scale reserved for exceptionally high quality work at Masters level. Essentially correct and complete, with evidence of critical thinking and excellent use of relevant literature. Logical structure, well written and presented, displaying varying degrees of original thought and cogent scientific argument. Very Good Content essentially without any major flaws, very well explained, with clear evidence of a high level of scientific competence, and mature, critical scientific judgement in discussing the extent to which the objectives of the research have been achieved.

69% – 65%

Good Well explained, showing good evidence of critical scientific judgement.

64% - 60%

Quite Good Well explained, with good understanding and some evidence of critical scientific judgement.

59% - 55%

Fairly Good A generally sound project with a good or quite good level of understanding, evidence of sound scientific competence and judgement.

54% - 50%

Adequate Showing some progress but with some deficiencies in one or more aspects of theoretical and/or experimental approach, knowledge of the literature, scientific competence and judgement.

49% - 45%

A poor dissertation with an overall superficial approach. Essentially an incomplete report with major omissions in several areas and evidence of a poor understanding of the project’s aims, methods and outcomes.

44% - 40%

A poor project with a superficial approach and more errors and/or omissions and/or evidence of a deficiency of effort and/or poor understanding.

39% - 35%

A marked deficiency in content of understanding and application.

34% - 10%

Even more marked deficiencies in content (on a variable scale) of understanding and application on presentation.

0%

A complete absence of relevant content.

20

Notes on the overall guidelines 1. When marking, please bear in mind that this is a Masters Level Degree and not a MD/PhD or an undergraduate degree. 2. The content of the dissertation should reflect what can be achieved within a 24 week placement at Masters level. 3. Supervisors must only give advice on overall structure of the dissertation, potential content and scrutinize in detail ONE complete draft ONLY. Supervisors MUST NOT write or rewrite substantial sections of the text for the student. 4. Supervisors are asked to take note of the guidelines on plagiarism.

Marking Criteria for the Dissertation Presentation: 1. Are there an undue number of spelling/grammatical errors? 2. Does the Abstract give an accurate reflection of the content of the dissertation? 3. Are abbreviations, symbols and acronyms used appropriately and where these are not standard, are they defined? 4. Is the cited work clearly referred to in the text and listed at the end? Background and bibliography: 1. Is there evidence that the student is aware of the previous literature on the subject and has this been used to good effect? 2. Has the student explained the aims of the project clearly? Description of experimental work and results: 1. Is there proper identification of any equipment and chemicals used? 2. Has the student used appropriate experimental procedures and described these in sufficient detail? 3. Are the results presented clearly and has the student used appropriate statistical analysis? 4. Are any figures and tables labelled properly and do they have appropriate legends or footnotes? 5. Has the student explained how far the results go towards meeting the aims of the project? Discussion and conclusions: 1. Has the student presented a meaningful discussion of the work in relation to the work of others? 2. Has the student shown an appreciation of the limitations of his/her experimental work? 3. Has the student shown an ability to judge the relative significance of different factors? 4. Are the conclusions justified?

21

APPENDIX D GUIDELINES FOR MARKING MRES PLACEMENT STUDENT APPLICATION/EFFORT Distinction Level

Merit Level

Pass Level

100% - 80%

Outstanding/Excellent e.g. student highly motivated and capable of working independently on all aspects of project. As good as can be expected at Masters level. Willing to work as required. Student capable of devising experiments and/or modifying protocols accordingly if required. Student communicates well with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays good time management and record keeping and keen interest in other activities of the group/Institute. Student is considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities.

80% - 70%

Very Good e.g. student able to execute (and design) project work independently with minimal assistance. Willing to work as required. Student communicates well with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays good time management and record keeping and a keen interest in other activities of the group/Institute. Student is considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities.

69% – 65%

Good e.g. student able to execute (and design) project work independently. Plans experiments and time management but needs some assistance with project, showing good evidence of scientific judgement. Occasionally requiring additional assistance. Student communicates well with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays good time management and record keeping and a keen interest in other activities of the group/Institute.

64% - 60%

Fairly Good e.g. student able to execute (and design) project but requiring frequent assistance though still able to work independently on many occasions. Student communicates with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays moderate time management and record keeping though there is some room for improvement. Student may be less interested in the other activities of the group/Institute. Student may be less considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities (i.e. occasionally, though not with malice or intent – please use discretion).

59% - 55%

Quite Good e.g. student able to execute (and design) project work with appropriate amount of help. Student communicates well with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays good time management and record keeping. Student displays an interest in the other activities of the group/Institute. Student is considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities.

54% - 50%

Adequate e.g. student able to design project work only with regular help. Student communicates with supervisor and/or appropriate colleagues. Student displays moderate time management and record keeping though there is some room for improvement. Student may be less interested in the other activities of the group/Institute. Student may be less considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities (i.e. occasionally though not with malice or intent – please use discretion).

22

Fail Level

49-45%

Quite Poor student requiring significant help to execute (or design) project work. Student displays moderate time management, communication and record keeping though this was not to Masters level. Student may be less interested in the other activities of the group/Institute and/or less considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities (i.e. occasionally use discretion).

44-40%

Poor student requiring constant help to execute (or design) project work. Student displays moderate time management, communication and/or record keeping though this was not to Masters level. Student may be uninterested in the other activities of the group/Institute and/or less considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities (i.e. occasionally and not with malice or intent – please use discretion).

39-35%

Poor student requires considerable help to execute (or design) project work. Student displays poor time management, communication and/or record keeping (use scaling). Student may be uninterested in the other activities of the group/Institute and/or less considerate towards colleagues in use of facilities (i.e. occasionally and not with malice or intent – please use discretion).

34-10%

Very Poor student displays inability execute (or design) project work and low or no motivation (use scaling). Student displays poor time management or record keeping (use scaling) and communication. Student may be uninterested in the other activities of the group/Institute (use scaling) or generally inconsiderate towards colleagues in use of facilities.

0%

Complete inability or willingness to do project work and no motivation with inadequate communication, time keeping and record keeping. Student NOT interested in the other activities of the group/Institute or generally inconsiderate towards colleagues in use of facilities.

Notes 1. Scientific competence will relate to experimental results in a laboratory/clinical project. 2. When marking the student’s application and effort, please bear in mind that this is a Masters Level Degree and not a MD/PhD or an undergraduate degree. 3. Marks awarded by the supervisor (or DPD in the case of industrial placement) for the student's performance on the project are based on the student’s general approach and attitude, experimental design, execution of experiments and ability to organise time as well as the students reliability, accuracy in reporting and communication with their supervisor.

23

APPENDIX E MRes MARKING SHEET FOR PROJECT ORAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROJECT ABSTRACTS Project Title Candidate Name Name of Assessor (s) Signature of Assessor (s) Date

Scientific Abstract Mark

%

Lay Abstract Mark

% ORAL PRESENTATION MARKS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Σ

Please put a cross in one numbered box for each category. DO NOT fill in final marks (Σ) these will be calculated in NESS after sheets are handed in.

Presentation Style and Delivery (40%) Presentation Content (40%) Answers to Questions (20%)

Please write any feedback comments below:

24

APPENDIX F GUIDANCE FOR ASSESSORS OF MRes ORAL PRESENTATIONS Oral presentations are used to assess three of the learning outcomes for this course: Presentation skills, Knowledge and Understanding. Presentation style and delivery: This is where presentation skills are being assessed, including the use of visual aids. You should consider the overall quality of the presentation in terms of the student’s: timing; delivery; clarity of the vocal presentation and their overall presentation to the audience (do they take time to explain figures and diagrams, do they use notes etc.). You should also consider the number and quality of any visual aids used – are there too many slides. Have they developed their own slides or are they simply down-loaded from other sources? Have they used novel visual aids or is there presentation restricted to PowerPoint™ etc.? Presentation content: Here, knowledge and understanding are being assessed. You should assess how strong the student’s knowledge of the subject is, in terms of the material they present. Marks are to be given for inclusion of appropriate subject knowledge, clear evidence of an understanding of the subject, and integration of material into a coherent discussion. Have they included the appropriate introductory/background material? Do they provide evidence of having thought about the material/have they been critical, or have they simply presented data ‘as is’? Answers to questions: This provides opportunity for further assessment of knowledge and understanding through both specific and general questions. In the case where there are few questions, assessors are encouraged to engage with the student during the intersession to assess the student’s ability to answer questions. Marks are to be given for clear evidence of an understanding of the subject. Please provide legible feedback as bullets using the subject headings above. Please note that copying without acknowledgement constitutes plagiarism and should be reported.

25

APPENDIX G GUIDELINES FOR MARKING AN MRES POSTER Distinction Level

Merit Level

Pass Level

100% - 80%

Outstanding / Excellent Poster as good as can be expected at Masters level. Clear format which follows a logical progression through aims, results, conclusions; which are all easy to access/understand. Perfect content in terms of word use and figures/schematics, concise but easy to understand. Scientific content excellent.

80% - 70%

Very Good Poster and scientific content very good but the “flow” could be improved. Perhaps overuse of text.

69% – 65%

Good Poster and scientific content good but structure could be improved in terms of a progression through aims, results and conclusions. Clarity of schematics/figures good. Perhaps too much text.

64% - 60%

Quite Good Poster and scientific content good but structure could be improved and text better written in terms of grammar, structure and clarity.

59% - 55%

Fairly Good Poster fine. Scientific content good but could be better presented and/or easier to follow.

54% - 50%

Adequate Poster average in terms of presentation and content.

49% - 45%

Quite Poor Poster not very well written or presented. Difficult to read or understand. Figures and schematics could be better. Over reliance of text rather than images. Important information missing. Poor structure, no clear aims

44% - 40%

Poor Poster generally badly presented with little relevant information. As a result difficult to gauge scientific content.

39% - 35%

Poor Poster badly presented (layout poor) (as above) and student shows little idea how to précis work, or structure the poster.

34% - 10%

Very Poor Poster very poor. Student has no idea how to précis work into digestible form. No clear flow, unorganised presentation with no clear message.

0%

No poster.

Fail Level

26

APPENDIX H Good Academic Conduct Newcastle University expects students to be committed to academic honesty and will provide briefing and support materials to ensure that students know what is expected of them. The following paragraphs set out briefly what is expected of you and show where further support is available. Plagiarism Plagiarism is defined as the use of the work of others without acknowledgement. This covers not just using words, but also, for example, concepts, ideas, data, designs, images, computer programmes and music. Note in particular that it refers to ideas, not just to words, so even if you express someone else’s ideas in your own words, the source of the idea must still be acknowledged. Why do we have this requirement? Good academic work is expected to draw on other sources, but these must be acknowledged. This enables others to see where the ideas you use have come from, which actually lends added authority to your work. It also allows readers to follow up these sources directly, if they wish. It involves being honest about what is your work and what is the work of others. Think how you would feel if someone used your work without acknowledging it! Furthermore students who plagiarise are gaining an unfair advantage over their honest colleagues. How to avoid problems

•

ensure that you provide in-text references for all the ideas you have taken from elsewhere and reference them in accordance with the guidance provided by your School.

•

where you quote verbatim (word for word), you must show that this is a quotation (usually by using inverted commas “……”) and indicate the source document of the quote either immediately before or after it in the main text. Your School’s guidance materials will show you how to do this.

•

don’t paraphrase or slightly modify work from another source and pass it off as your own. It is generally better to either include a direct quotation or to put things into your own words, but even then you must reference the source of the idea. However, where you paraphrase or slightly modify others’ work, you must show an in-text reference at the beginning of, in the middle of (e.g. ……, as stated by Smith (2007)..…) or at the end of the paraphrased section. Don’t leave including your reference to the end of the paragraph. You should adopt a similar approach to that which you would use in quoting verbatim.

•

don’t cut and paste from other sources without acknowledging them, and only do this to the extent that a direct quotation is required. It is usually better to put things in your own words.

•

don’t submit other’s work as if it was your own e.g. borrowing an essay from another student; taking an essay from the web; paying someone else to write work for you.

• •

don’t submit work you have prepared for one assignment for another. remember that listing a source in a list of references at the end of the work is not sufficient acknowledgement; there must also be an in-text reference. On the other hand you don’t need to reference material which is common knowledge or facts widely available from a range of sources, although it is recommended that you always reference statistical data.

27

Collusion Collusion is defined as the submission by two or more students of the same or similar pieces of work (or parts of pieces of work) which are presented as the individual’s own solely authored work. This could arise from students working together to complete the work, or by one student allowing another to copy his/her work. Copying without the author’s permission is not collusion, but taking another student’s work without permission is theft and constitutes a disciplinary offence. Why do we have this requirement? Apart from formal group work, any work you submit is expected to be your own. It is your degree and it is clearly dishonest to submit work which is not your own. How to avoid problems Students can of course help and support each other and this is to be encouraged. It is a question of knowing where to draw the line. The following list provides examples of forms of co-operation with fellow students which are to be encouraged:

• • • • • •

notifying them of useful references directing someone to a source for an idea shared discussion and development of ideas jointly identifying ideas from a third party discussing what the assessment requirements involve discussing the techniques used in calculations sharing books and articles

To avoid collusion you should:

• • •

write the assignment on your own in your own words (except to the extent you cite references) not copy verbatim or in substance part or all of the work of other students take care to keep your work secure

Proof reading As the work you submit should be your own work, there are limits to the extent to which you should use a proof reader. Why do we have this requirement? The key issue here is to what extent the ideas within the work are truly your own work. If proof reading becomes rewriting, then the work is no longer completely your own. How to avoid problems The use of proof-reading to highlight deficiencies such as spelling and grammatical errors is normally legitimate, as the work is still demonstrably your own. The proof reading identifies deficiencies, but it is your job to correct these. Occasionally a specific assignment may rule out proof reading, as it seeks to test the student’s skill of proof reading their own work. The use of proof reading to rewrite the text, correct citation errors and alter the content is not acceptable. Some disabled/dyslexic students receive proof reading support where the Disability Support Service identifies this as necessary. The dyslexia tutor may guide them to clarify their arguments, but they will still 28

be identifying their own deficiencies and correcting these themselves. Why do we have these requirements? It is important that assessment is fair and that students are rewarded for their own achievement. Otherwise it is unfair on the overwhelming majority of honest students. Other aspects of good academic conduct You are also expected to be honest in submitting research results, which should not be falsified. This could happen through including fictitious or false data, or by suppressing results, perhaps because they don’t match prior expectations. Why do we have this requirement? In universities we rely on researchers being totally honest about their results, otherwise their conclusions and any action taken in consequence of their findings will be flawed. How would you feel if one of the sources you were using had been dishonest about research results, when you are relying on them? Support General support materials can be found on the web at: www.ncl.ac.uk/right-cite You are advised to work through the web-based tutorial package on plagiarism at www.ncl.ac.uk/right-cite

29

APPENDIX I LIBRARY HELP All students have been provided with Endnote reference materials to help them through this assignment An online tutorial on Endnote can be found at: http://endnote.com/training http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlnvmDnPzs0

Students requiring help with referencing can seek help from Linda Errington via the [email protected] email address

30