DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGY MASTERS HANDBOOK 2014-2015
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
DEPARTMENT OF
BIOLOGY
MASTERS HANDBOOK
2014-2015
1TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ............................................................................................... 3
Access to the Departments........................................................................... 3
The Biology Graduate Office ......................................................................... 3
Biology Masters Board ................................................................................. 4
Postgraduate Teaching Committee ................................................................ 4
Student Forums .......................................................................................... 4
Pastoral Supervision .................................................................................... 4
Biology Masters Suite – B102a...................................................................... 5
B102 ......................................................................................................... 5
The Academic Year ...................................................................................... 5
Transferable Skills....................................................................................... 5
Forms of Assessment................................................................................... 6
Internal Projects ......................................................................................... 6
External Placements .................................................................................... 6
Modules and Credits .................................................................................... 6
Marking Schemes........................................................................................ 7
Compensation............................................................................................. 7
Reassessment............................................................................................8
Passes, Merits and distinctions...................................................................... 9
Collecting and Handing-in Assessments ......................................................... 9
Module assessments and project reports ................................................... 10
Posters ................................................................................................. 10
External placement................................................................................. 11
Lateness Penalties..................................................................................... 11
Written work.......................................................................................... 11
Seminars and presentations..................................................................... 12
Size Restrictions ....................................................................................... 12
Marking and Feedback ............................................................................... 12
Marking guidelines.................................................................................. 12
Modules delivered by Biology (BIO) and Chemistry (CHE) ........................... 12
Modules delivered by Environment (ENV) .................................................. 13
The Role of the External Examiner............................................................... 13
Illness and other special circumstances........................................................ 13
Special Arrangements in Closed Examinations .............................................. 13
Appeals Procedure..................................................................................... 13
Academic Misconduct................................................................................. 14
Collusion ............................................................................................... 14
Group Project Work ................................................................................ 15
Feedback to us ......................................................................................... 16
Open Essays .......................................................................................... 17
Seminars............................................................................................... 18
Posters ................................................................................................. 19
Laboratory Book Quality .......................................................................... 20
Projects................................................................................................. 19
Project reports ....................................................................................... 19
Report presentation ................................................................................ 21
Supervisor’s Assessment of Attitude and Approach ..................................... 22
Business and Leadership Skills (MSc BT) ................................................... 25
Business plan seminar ............................................................................ 26
Business plan......................................................................................... 27
2Introduction
Welcome to your Masters programme in the Biology Department of the
University of York. This handbook is intended to be a guide to studying for a
Masters of Science degree in Computational Biology & Bioinformatics, Ecology &
Environmental Management, Post-Genomic Biology or Bioscience Technology.
These courses are administered by the Biology Department but some are
interdisciplinary and run jointly with other departments.
Degree Organising Departments
Computational Biology & Biology, Chemistry (YSBL)
Bioinformatics (CBB)
Bioscience Technology (BT) Biology
Ecology & Environmental Biology, Environment
Management (EEM)
Post-Genomic Biology (PGB) Biology
All the participating departments are large communities engaged in both
teaching and research, and during your time here you will meet academic staff,
research staff and other postgraduate students. Any member of staff can be
looked up using the Online Directory from the Contacts page.
We very much hope that your time here will be enjoyable and fulfilling. Much of
this handbook is concerned with rules and procedures and serves as a reference
throughout the year. Information on the modules comprising each Masters can
be found in the individual module synopses. In addition, the Programme
Outlines give the schedule of assessments, their credits and weights and all
the important dates for your programme. There are links for these on the
Information for current master students pages.
Access to the Departments
The Biology department consists of several connected blocks (A to Q) including
those that house the Technology Facility and the York Structural Biology
Laboratory (YSBL). Plans of the department are posted on the walls at various
points. The Biology Reception desk is in the Atrium. The Concourse is in the
older building, where Cookies snack bar is located.
Access to most areas in the Biology department and the Structural Biology
Laboratory is governed by a swipe card. Your swipe card is also your main
student card and can be collected during the first weekend you are in York,
details are available here:
https://www.york.ac.uk/students/studying/unicard/#tab-1. You will then need
to present your card to Biology Reception for appropriate access to be added to
your card.
Should you lose your swipe card later in the term, details are available on the
webpage above about what steps to take, and also potential costs involved. If
you have forgotten your card please contact Biology Reception (biol-
reception@york.ac.uk) in the Atrium. A deposit charge of £5 is made for the
loan of a ‘Visitor’ card. MSc EEM students have access to the Environment
department.
The Biology Graduate Office
The administration of the Masters programmes is carried out by the Biology
Graduate Office which also administers Research programmes. Mrs Julie Knox is
the Officer Manager and Mr Darren Spillett has special responsibility for the
3Masters programmes. If you have any general queries then the Office will be
able to help, or direct you to someone that can.
Email: biol-masters@york.ac.uk
Telephone: 8544
Location: C011, just off the Biology Concourse
Opening Hours: Monday to Friday, 9am - 5pm
Biology Masters Board
The Biology Masters Board (BMB) is responsible for the design, delivery and
administration of taught Masters programmes run by the Department of
Biology, either solely or jointly with other Departments. The BMB receives the
minutes from the course fora. The BMB reports directly to the Biology Board of
Studies.
The members of BMB have specific roles and responsibilities and will be able to
help you with any queries you may have in their area of responsibility. More
detailed information and contact details of the BMB members can be found by
visiting the Masters webpages at:
http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/intranet/current-masters/the.bmb/
Very early in the Autumn term you will be asked to nominate a representative
to serve on the Biology Masters Board (BMB). The student representative takes
part in all discussions except those involving individual students or
examinations. We hope that you will make your views known to the Committee
through your representative, although you may also approach the Committee
members directly with any concerns. If you are interested in being the
representative please email Darren Spillett (biol-masters@york.ac.uk) by the
end of week 2. If more than one person expresses an interest then we will hold
a ballot.
Student Course Fora
These occur towards the end of the Autumn and Spring terms. These are
attended by the Programme Organiser, the Assessment Officer, the Placement
Officer and the Masters Administrator. All students are expected to attend to
share their views about the term’s modules.
Pastoral Supervision
During your time at York you will be allocated a pastoral supervisor who has
several roles:
to take an interest in your general academic progress and provide advice,
encouragement and support
to keep an eye on your progress in the programme and advise you
honestly on how you are getting on
to provide advice on project selection, CV-writing and career decisions
to write references for you (project supervisors may be more appropriate
later in the programme)
to monitor your progress while on placement
We ask that you see your pastoral supervisor at least four times during the
programme: at the beginning and end of the Autumn term, the end of the
Spring term and before departure for the External Placement. Please make
sure you email your supervisor in plenty of time to set up an appointment. You
will also file reports during your placement that your pastoral supervisor will
receive. We hope that you will feel able to turn to your supervisor with
difficulties of any kind but you may also talk to other staff about academic or
personal problems.
4When you are doing projects based in York, you will develop a close working
relationship with your project directors, who will also be able to advise you
about your progress.
Biology Masters Suite – B102a
The Masters programmes have a computer room which is B102a. This is on the
first floor just above Cookies. Access is via a swipe card and only biology
masters students and a few members of teaching and cleaning staff have
access to this room. There are sometimes classes carried out in this room but
many lecturers do not mind you using a spare computer if you do so without
disrupting the class.
B102
This room is adjacent to the computer room and is available to you to carry out
work away from the computer such as reading or group project work. You are
able to use the room whenever it is not booked out. The bookings can be seen
here: http://www.york.ac.uk/univ/mis/cfm/planroom/rbook_search.cfm and
you need to search for B/B/102 Wolsfon Bio-Informatics Suite
Other Social Areas
The Wentworth (the Graduate College) Common Room (W135), the Biology
Concourse (near Cookies) and the Biology Atrium are also available as
social/group-work areas.
The Academic Year
The York University undergraduate calendar is divided into three terms,
Autumn, Spring and Summer, each 10 weeks long, with weeks numbered 1-10.
The postgraduate year is 51 weeks with 4 weeks holiday. Weeks 11-13 follow
immediately after the end of the undergraduate term. The dates for the 2014-
2015 Academic year can be viewed by visiting here:
http://www.york.ac.uk/about/term-dates/
The full timetables are available online from the Examinations and Timetable
information section of the Biology Masters site. Please note that you can access
your personal timetable from your e:vision accounts. Occasionally it is
necessary to make changes to the timetables so it is important that you
check these regularly. The Biology Graduate School Office will also notify you
of timetable updates.
Professional Skills
The development of transferable skills is an important part of all Masters
Programmes and essential for a successful career in any field. The Professional
Skills for Masters Module includes sessions on writing skills, poster and oral
presentations, personal effectiveness and team working. The sessions are
usually ‘hands-on’ or interactive and can be fun. In most cases the transferable
skills module is not directly assessed but the skills you learn and develop
through it are required throughout the course in the assessment of other
modules. In addition, attendance and participation is essential to obtain the
credits for the module.
Forms of Assessment
Modules are assessed in a variety of ways and occasionally in more than one
way. You may need to write an essay or report, carry out a data analysis or
interpretation exercise, write and document a computer program or give a
5poster or an oral presentation. The nature and timing of assessments should be
made clear to you by the module organiser and a summary can be found in the
individual Programme Outlines, available from the Biology Masters webpage. If
you have queries about the timing or nature of assessment please contact the
organiser of the relevant module.
Internal Projects
For courses requiring an internal project these are offered by members of the
departments participating in your programme. In general, you will be given a
list of project descriptions from which to make a choice. Every effort is made to
allow as many students as possible their first choice, or find a favourable
alternative. One or more members of staff supervise your project and often the
work is carried out within a lab group.
You should always keep a laboratory book for your project work including for
projects which do not consist of traditional laboratory or field work. This can be
either hand written or as a text (or similar) file. Your lab book is usually in the
format of a diary and simply records the work you have carried out and the
results. You can add photos, machine readouts or other output as appropriate.
External Placements
The process of choosing your external placement is more involved. Some
institutions produce project outlines which they advertise nationally and for
which you apply as you would a job. Others have less formal procedures. The
Placements Officer contacts possible placement supervisors in the autumn term
and relays the information to you over the next few months. Some students
have the placement arranged early in the Spring term, others quite close to the
end. We are happy for you to use any contacts of your own but ask that you
please involve the Placements Officer in the process. In all cases you should
keep the placements officer closely involved in applying for your project. We
want to avoid multiple independent approaches to supervisors. If you have
particular ideas about your external placement then please contact the
Placements Officer connected with your programme to discuss them. In general,
you should not expect to get paid for work you carry out on external placement
although a few organisations may help with costs. You should also be aware
that the organisation of your travel (including visa applications) and
accommodation is your responsibility, although again, some placement
organisations will assist you. It can take a long time to organise visas,
particularly for non-EU students so you should allow plenty of time.
We require students to be in good academic standing in order to participate in
an external project. If you are required to resit one or more assessments you
may instead undertake your final project at York or be moved to the Diploma
route.
Before leaving on placement you must update your contact details in e:vision.
If you need to vacate University accommodation to go on placement you will
need a waiver of residence form.
While you are away on placement you are required to provide a project update
each month by email. This is to keep us informed and allow us to help out
where necessary. In addition, you should feel free to contact the Placements
6Officer, Course Organiser, your Pastoral Supervisor, or Darren Spillett in the
Biology Graduate Schools Office if you encounter any problems.
Modules and Credits
Each Masters programme is composed of 180 credits. These represent units of
work, 1 credit being 10 hours of work. Most modules are 10 credits (100 hours
of work) but projects (Independent Study Modules (ISM)) are more. The work
comprises contact hours, private study and the time required for assessment.
The Professional Skills module is unweighted (or unassessed) but still carries a
credit load to indicate the amount of work required. You must collect 180
credits to qualify for a masters which means that you must attend all modules.
Marking Schemes
All modules are assessed in at least one form. Most modules are marked on a
scale of 0-100 as follows:
Distinguished performance at postgraduate level: 70-100
Good performance at postgraduate level: 60-69
Satisfactory performance at postgraduate level: 50-59
Fail: 0-49 *
* Note that a fail mark of 40-49 is potentially compensatable (may not
require a resit, see later), and marks of 0-39 are outright fails (require a
resit).
The Professional Skills module is marked on a pass/fail basis and cannot be
compensated (i.e., you must pass).
Modules may be assessed by more than one assessment and it is the combined
mark for all the assessments that determines the module mark. Thus, it is
possible to do poorly on one of the assessments but still pass the module
overall.
Compensation
In defined circumstances credit may be awarded where a failed module has
been compensated for by achievement in other module(s); provided that it can
be demonstrated that the programme’s learning outcomes can still be
achieved.
Compensation in Masters (180 credit award)
If a student fails one or more non-ISM modules (i.e., achieves a mark below
50) s/he may still receive credit for the failed module(s) provided that:
i. s/he has failed no more than 40 credits and
ii. no marks are lower than 40, and
iii. the rounded credit-weighted mean over all non-ISM modules (including
the failed module(s)) is at least 50. (This will be calculated based on first
attempt marks in the first instance, but will be calculated based on the
lesser of the resit mark and the pass mark should the student be
successful at resit.)
Independent study modules (projects) cannot be compensated.
Compensation in Diplomas (120 credit award)
If a student fails one or more non-ISM modules (i.e., achieves a mark below
50) s/he may still receive credit for the failed module(s) provided that:
i. s/he has failed no more than 40 credits and
ii. no marks are lower than 40, and
iii. the rounded credit-weighted mean over all non-ISM modules (including
the failed module(s)) is at least 50.
Independent study modules (projects) cannot be compensated.
7Compensation in certificates (60 credit award)
If a student fails one or more non-ISM modules (i.e., achieves a mark below
50) s/he may still receive credit for the failed module(s) provided that:
i. s/he has failed no more than 20 credits and
ii. no marks are lower than 40, and
iii. the rounded credit-weighted mean over all modules (including the failed
module(s)) is at least 50.
For all awards, modules marked on a pass/fail basis cannot be compensated.
Reassessment
Reassessment is an opportunity for students to redeem failure for the award of
credit to meet award requirements. A student may only be reassessed in a
particular module on one occasion. Reassessment may be in the same or
different form as the original assessment.
Masters and Diplomas, non- ISM modules:
Where a student has failed modules and the award requirements cannot be
met by application of the compensation criteria, s/he is entitled to
reassessment in a maximum of 40 credits-worth of failed modules provided
that they have failed not more than 60 credits with no more than 40 credits
worth of outright fails (marks less than 40).
Masters and Diploma, independent study module (ISM):
Where a student has failed an ISM with a mark below 40 there will be no
opportunity for reassessment. However, where a student has been awarded a
‘marginal fail’ mark of between 40 and 49 they will have an opportunity to
make amendments which would enable a passing threshold to be reached. This
involves re-writing the report without carrying out additional practical work.
The mark after resubmission will be capped at 50.
Certificate:
Where a student has failed modules and the award requirements cannot be
met by application of the compensation criteria, s/he is entitled to
reassessment in a maximum of 20 credits-worth of failed modules provided
that they have failed no more than 30 credits with no more than 20 credits
worth of outright fails (marks less than 40).
If it is not possible for a student to achieve the credit required for her/his
intended award by reassessment, s/he is entitled to be reassessed for a lower
credit volume award, as appropriate. The number of credits in which s/he is
entitled to be reassessed will be capped at the number permitted for the lower
credit volume award.
For non-ISM modules, marks obtained following reassessment will not be
capped. The reassessment mark will appear on the transcript but it will clearly
indicate where marks have been achieved at first attempt and at
reassessment. Also please note that you are eligible for awards with merit or
distinction only if you pass all modules at the first attempt.
If you miss or fail the initial assessment but have acceptable mitigating
circumstances then you may be able to sit the ‘resit’ as ‘sit for the first time’.
This means the assessment would be considered your first attempt.
You may only be reassessed in a particular module on one occasion.
8Award requirements
Most students initially enrol on a Masters programme. Diploma and certificate
routes are available to students whose performance on the course indicates
they would not be able to complete the MSc satisfactorily.
Award Credits Notes
Masters 180
Diploma 120 As the masters but excluding the External Placement
Certificate 60 CBB, EEM – Autumn term modules + a 10 credit Literature
Review
BT – Autumn term modules
PGB –60credits of Autumn modules
Passes, Merits and distinctions
In order to be awarded a Masters, Diploma or Certificate you need to obtain an
average mark of at least 50% (following resits where applicable). A merit is
awarded for good performance and a distinction is awarded for excellent
performance.
Merits
To be recommended to Senate for the award of a Masters degree with merit a
student must achieve the following at the first attempt:
i. a rounded credit-weighted mean of at least 60 over all modules, and
ii. at least 60 in the Placement (ISM), and
iii. no failed modules.
Diplomas
To be recommended to Senate for the award of a Diploma with merit a
student must achieve the following at the first attempt:
i. a rounded credit-weighted mean of at least 60 over all modules, and
ii. at least 60 in the Placement (ISM), and
iii. no failed modules.
Distinctions
To be recommended to Senate for the award of a Masters degree with
distinction a student must achieve the following at the first attempt:
i. a rounded credit-weighted mean of at least 70 over all modules, and
ii. at least 70 in the Placement (ISM), and
iii. no failed modules.
Diplomas
To be recommended to Senate for the award of a Diploma with distinction a
student must achieve the following at the first attempt:
i. a rounded credit-weighted mean of at least 70 over all modules, and
ii. at least 70 in the Placement (ISM), and
iii. no failed modules.
Collecting and Handing-in Assessments
Unless otherwise stated, all assessments should be emailed or handed-in to the
Biology Graduate Office, biol-masters@york.ac.uk. Work must arrive by 1630
on the day of the deadline. Deadlines are on Mondays wherever possible. In the
case of Bank holidays, the deadline will fall on a Tuesday. When handing in, you
will sign to confirm the date and time.
9Work submitted late will be subject to a lateness penalty.
Module assessments and project reports
In most cases, your work should be in Word format and emailed to biol-
masters@york.ac.uk. In some cases, you hand in a single hard copy, for
example, where the assessed work is a laboratory book or a completed problem
sheet and the module organiser should make this clear to you. You should also
include any required supporting material, such as programs or data. Please
ensure the program runs from any computer as you expect. Please write the
title of the assessment and your examination number on the submitted work.
You can remove your name from the ‘properties’ of word documents before
saving them. In the case of assessed work where your identity is obvious (for
example project reports) please label your work with your name only, and not
your examinations number. If you are in any doubt about what you should
hand in please contact either the Assessments Officer or Darren
Spillett.
We advise students to write their project reports in a form suitable for
publication in a reputable journal in their field. This means you should include a
title and abstract and sections for introduction, materials and methods, results,
discussion, references and acknowledgements. It may help to read the ‘guide
for authors’ sections in a journal but you do not have to follow these very
detailed instructions. Choose a font which is easy to read, preferably size 12
and line spacing of at least 1.5 lines. Figures and tables should normally be
within the report, not at the end or in an appendix. Figures should be numbered
and have informative legends underneath. Tables should be numbered and have
titles above them. Figures and tables should be referred to in the text. The
appendix is for supplementary information not that which is essential to
understand the results you present. You may find the guidance we give to
undergraduates writing up final year projects helpful:
http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/intranet/currentundergraduatestudents/common
-pages/projects/project-writeup/. Please note that some of the information
(about abstract length, for example) pertains to undergraduate projects only.
Very occasionally the format of a project report may differ from that specified
above. However, even where the sections may have different headings, it
should still be possible to identify elements that indicate why the work was done
(introduction) how the work was done (methods) what the output was (results)
and what the output means and if the aims were met (discussion). Please
contact the Masters Assessments Officer for approval if you intend to submit a
report in a format which differs from that specified.
The Office holds copies of your work for two years after which they will be
destroyed, or in the case of project reports, they may be retained by the project
supervisor.
Posters
Some modules are assessed by a poster presentation. These are enjoyable
events with drinks and nibbles. You stand by your displayed poster for an
afternoon during which members of the department, including two markers, can
come and chat to you about the poster. It is good idea to prepare a 5 minute
talk to guide your markers around your poster.
10External placement
For the external project, you should email a copy to biol-masters@york.ac.uk. A
copy should also be given to your external supervisor in a format agreed
mutually with them.
Lateness Penalties
Written work
Work submitted after the deadline will normally be penalised by the deduction
of marks after the work has been marked out of 100. The penalty is 10 marks
for each day or part day including weekends and work will not be accepted for
marking after 5pm on the fifth working day after the deadline. Penalties apply
only to marks for the components of assessment that are late, for example a
project report mark rather than the project mark as a whole. Most deadlines are
1630 on Monday with the following penalties being applied:
Work submitted Penalty Effect on original Effect on original
mark of 50 mark of 70
After 1630 Monday 10 40 60
After 1630 Tuesday 20 30 50
After 1630 Wednesday 30 20 40
After 1630 Thursday 40 10 30
After 1630 Friday 50 0 20
After 1700 Friday Not marked 0 0
Deadlines that fall on a Tuesday have the following penalties applied:
Work submitted Penalty Effect on original Effect on original
mark of 50 mark of 70
After 1630 Tuesday 10 40 60
After 1630 Wednesday 20 30 50
After 1630 Thursday 30 20 40
After 1630 Friday 40 10 30
Weekend (cannot hand 50 0 20
in)
After 0900 Monday Not marked 0 0
Special mitigating circumstances will be considered and you should contact the
Assessments Officer as soon as possible and before the deadline if your
work is affected by possible mitigating circumstances. You must
complete a Mitigating Circumstances form. Information on submitting a
Mitigating circumstances claim form and acceptable circumstances are available
from https://www.york.ac.uk/students/support/academic/mitigation/.
Please note that computer failures or problems with printing will not normally
count as special mitigating circumstances. Always back-up work carried out on
your own computer.
You should always do your utmost to meet the deadlines. In most cases, you
will lose more marks in penalties than you gain by working for another day. The
timing of assessments is given in the Outline document for each course and you
should keep this handy to help your plan your work.
11Oral presentations
We require that you email your powerpoint presentations to biol-
masters@york.ac.uk at least one hour before the start of the session. Should
you have any queries or problems please contact the Biology Graduate School
Office.
If you are late for an assessed oral presentation the following applies
Up to 5 minutes: you will be able to carry out presentation as planned
5-10 minutes: you are able to present for up to the remainder of your
slot, fitting in questions if possible.
More than 15 minutes: you will not be able to present
The person hosting the presentation is asked to note the exact time that you
arrive and any reasons for lateness you offer. You should submit a mitigating
circumstances form in the normal way if you wish your circumstances to be
considered by the Mitigating Circumstances Committee.
Size Restrictions
Word counts should be given on all reports, essays or other assessed
work that specifies a word limit. Misrepresentation of the word count will be
treated as Academic Misconduct. The word count should include the main text
but not the abstract, tables, figures, reference list or appendices. You should
also bear in mind that essays that exceed the word limit may also contain
irrelevant information, repetition and/or other features that could affect your
mark. Work that exceeds the specified word length will be penalised. The work
will be marked as normal (out of 100) then one mark will be deducted for every
200 words above word limits between 4000 and 8000 or every 100 words above
word limits of 4000 or fewer. The penalty applies only to that component of
assessment, for example, a project report that exceeds the word limit, not the
project mark as a whole.
Project reports require an abstract of 300 words.
Marking and Feedback
Marking guidelines
Many assessments are marked against a set of clear criteria which are provided
in the Appendix.
Modules delivered by Biology (Biol) and Chemistry (CHE)
In most cases assessed work is double marked. The nature of the feedback
depends on the type of assessment. Closed examinations that are marked
against an ideal answer are single marked and you receive the mark only. In
general, open assessments such as data handling/analysis, programming or
other exercises for which range of answers is limited are either double marked
or single marked against an ideal answer. Markers are asked to mark your work
independently then to agree a mark. You receive the agreed mark. The
feedback for such modules is often en masse – the module organiser produces
the ideal answer or notes on those features that led to high marks, common
errors etc which everyone receives. Open assessments such as essays, project
reports, posters, seminars or other exercises that results in a unique answer are
double marked. Markers are asked to mark your work independently then to
agree both a mark and comments about your work. You receive the agreed
mark and agreed comments.
12Some modules have more than one component to the assessment and you will
receive the agreed mark and comments for each component along with a
module performance sheet which gives your overall mark for the module.
We do our utmost to return marks and feedback to you as quickly as possible.
We aim to return the marks to you within six weeks. We operate a very
rigorous double marking system which sometimes delays marking because it
can be difficult for staff to meet up. In addition, we do not send your work out
to markers until everybody has handed in to preserve anonymity and this can
also delay marking on occasion. All marks are provisional until the Progression
Meeting and Final Board of Examiners’ meeting.
Modules delivered by Environment (ENV)
There are some small differences in the marking and feedback processes of the
Environment Department. Marks and feedback are passed from the
Environment departmental office to the Biology Graduate Office for your
collection. Assessment hand-ins for Environment delivered modules are due at
12:00 noon on the stated hand-in date.
The Role of the External Examiner
Each Masters programme has an External Examiner whose role is to provide
impartial and objective advice on the assessment process. The External
Examiner is a member of staff from another university department appointed
explicitly because of his/her expertise in the subject being examined. The
External Examiner normally meets with everyone on a course together and
some students individually. You will be informed whether you need to attend
an interview with the external examiner during the final examinations period in
September and you should be in York at that time.
Illness and other special circumstances
If you become ill or experience life events likely to seriously interfere with your
work it is essential that you submit a Mitigating Circumstances claim
form as soon as possible. Do not wait until you have already missed
deadlines. In the case of illness you should immediately contact your doctor to
obtain a confirmation of illness note. Extensions to deadlines can be granted by
a Mitigating Circumstances committee on the assumption that supporting
evidence will arrive later. Please note that supporting evidence must be
contemporaneous with the assessment.
Special Arrangements in Closed Examinations
Special examination arrangements may be approved for students who are
unable to sit formal University examinations under normal examination
conditions as a result of a disability or other condition. Special arrangements
are designed to ensure that equitable examination conditions are provided, to
enable students to demonstrate their knowledge and competence
notwithstanding their disability. For more information see here:
https://www.york.ac.uk/students/studying/assessment-and-
examination/disability/
Appeals Procedure
This is only an outline of the procedure and is condensed from University
Ordinances and Regulations. These are available in full at
https://www.york.ac.uk/students/support/academic/appeals/
13Students may not appeal against the academic judgment of the examiners.
Students can appeal against a decision concerning assessment if it is believed
that procedural irregularity has occurred or that the assessment was conducted
unfairly or improperly, or if, for good reason, relevant mitigating circumstances
can be shown which could not reasonably have been brought to the attention of
the examiners before a decision on a student's academic performance was
reached.
Academic Misconduct
The University regards any form of academic misconduct, which includes all
kinds of dishonesty, as an extremely serious matter.
You are responsible for ensuring that your work does not contravene the
University's rules on academic misconduct, which are set out in University
regulation 5 (http://www.york.ac.uk/about/organisation/governance/corporate-
publications/ordinances-and-regulations/regulation-5/ ). Candidates must not,
in relation to assessed work at any stage of their course:
cheat i.e. fail to comply with the rules governing examinations e.g. by
making arrangements to have unauthorised access to information;
collude i.e. assist another candidate to gain an advantage by unfair
means, or receive such assistance;
fabricate i.e. mislead the examiners by presenting work for assessment
in a way which intentionally or recklessly suggests that factual
information has been collected which has not in fact been collected, or
falsifies factual information;
personate i.e. act, appear, or produce work on behalf of another
candidate in order to deceive the examiners, or solicit another individual
to act, appear or produce work on their own behalf;
plagiarise i.e. incorporate within their work without appropriate
acknowledgement material derived from the work (published or
unpublished) of another.
Your assessed work should be the result of your efforts alone. You should not
share ideas about how to do an assessed piece of work, work with others or
exchange files. If you are in any doubt at all about what constitutes academic
misconduct please discuss it with a member of staff. You should ensure that
your work is not accessible to others. This means locking your screen when you
leave your computer and not making your work publically available.
During your first week you will carry out an exercise to help you understand
academic misconduct and how to avoid it via the University’s VLE system. We
can, and do, detect academic misconduct and the penalties range from
very severe (being sent down) to having one or more marks reduced.
Students invariably find the process of being investigated for academic
misconduct very stressful.
Collusion
We actively encourage you to work together to understand material presented
to you in lectures and practicals. However, you should not work together in any
way for the assessment of the modules. This means you should not discuss with
others how to do the assessment or what you have done either at or away from
a computer. You should not exchange hard or soft copies of any material
relating to the assessment. Treat open assessments in the same way you would
treat a closed exam – it just takes place over a longer period. You should seek
help or guidance on the assessment only from the module organiser.
14Group Assessment Work
Group assessment work is designed to build teamwork skills. It will be
necessary to collaborate with other members of your group to develop
methodology, collect results and formulate conclusions. Where an oral
presentation forms part of the assessment, it will also be necessary for you to
collaborate on this with other group members. However, your written
assessment MUST be produced by you alone, and not in collaboration with any
other member of your own or other groups.
The examiners will take full account of any acts of academic misconduct in
determining a mark for the work affected. In serious cases this may result in a
mark of zero for the paper or papers concerned with consequent effects on the
assessment of the candidates overall performance, even failure in the
examination as a whole. If the examiners believe that the case is of particular
gravity, they may also recommend that further disciplinary penalties be applied
to the candidate.
You are required to confirm that you have read and understood the University
Regulations on academic misconduct complete the exercise on the VLE and
return a copy of the certificate to the Biology Graduate Office. If any aspect of
the regulations is unclear to you, it is essential that you discuss your
uncertainty with your supervisor.
If you have any queries about what constitutes academic misconduct, and in
particular about the proper attribution of material derived from another's work,
you should seek advice from your supervisors or tutors.
Feedback to us
There are a number of ways for you to let us know how you find the
programme.
1. Course Forums – Each course holds a forum once a term where students
are invited to an informal meeting with the course organisers to discuss
the course and any issues arising from modules.
2. Masters Representative – you can talk to your rep about issues you would
like them to raise at BMB meetings. Alternatively contact another member
of the BMB.
3. Anonymous drop box which is available online for comments about
modules and teaching.
4. External Examiner – you will meet the EE as a group at the end of the
year.
15Appendix: Marking Guidelines
These give the general guidelines for marking Masters work. You should also
read the assessment details given in the module synopses of your course
outline.
Open Essays
80- An excellent essay. Clear, well argued account showing extensive knowledge of the
100 literature and critical understanding of the subject.
70-79 A very good essay. As below but with wider reading, greater insight and clarity and
no digression
60-69 Good essay. Well introduced, structured and presented. Reasonable selection of
references and evidence of wider reading. Thoughtful but not inspired discussion.
No errors of fact and little digression.
50-59 Reasonable but pedestrian essay. Some evidence of misunderstanding. Reasonable
interpretation of question. Reasonable selection of references but little evidence of
wider reading.
40-49 Weak essay. Subject not presented or interpreted properly. Some
misunderstanding of the subject. Some misinterpretation of the question. Few or
mainly irrelevant references.
30-39 Distinctly inadequate essay. Introduction unclear. Very weak interpretation.
Substantial misunderstandings. No attempt to address the question.
0-29 Chaotic, unstructured essay which misses the point. No understanding
demonstrated.
Seminars
85-100 Very appealing, well constructed and lucid presentation. Informative
background. Succinct and clear presentation. Highly intelligent and critical
discussion of wider context. Attractive slides. Excellent timing and balance
between sections. Questions answered clearly and well demonstrating
understanding, ability to think on feet when presented with an unexpected
question or alternative argument.
70-84 A well presented and well constructed talk. Informative background.
Understandable presentation. Convincing link to wider context. Appropriate
slides. Reasonable timing. Satisfactory ability to answer questions, coherent
answers but less convincing ability to think on feet when presented with an
unexpected question or alternative argument.
50-69 A reasonable talk. Somewhat limited background. Reasonable presentation
which may have been difficult to understand in places. Limited link to wider
context. Mainly appropriate slides. May have been somewhat too short or too
long. Limited ability to answer questions, with answers that did not really
address the question or were difficult to understand. No real ability to think on
feet when presented with an unexpected question or alternative argument.
40-49 Poor seminar. Disorganised or inadequate background. Unclear presentation.
Unconvincing link to wider context. Inadequate slides. Short or over long
presentation. Weak ability to answer questions which requires prompting.
0-39 Sloppy and/or chaotic presentation without effort in preparation. Inadequate or
no background. No, or incomprehensible presentation of results. No wider
context. No or poor slides. Very short presentation. Inability to answer
questions.
16Posters
Marked out of 100 as follows:
Abstract – 10 marks
9-10 Excellent. Appropriate length with a clear title of appropriate detail. Informative,
grammatical and concise
6-8 Reasonable to good. Appropriate length with a clear title of appropriate detail.
Mostly grammatical and concise.
3-5 Weak. May be over the word limit. Title may not be sufficiently detailed. Some
wordy, ungrammatical or imprecise sentences.
0-2 Very weak. Probably exceeds the word limit by 10 or more words. Title may be
absent. Material inappropriate, wordy with poor grammar.
Presentation – 20 marks
16-20 Attractive, well designed poster with legible text and clear good quality figures.
11-15 Reasonably attractive poster with reasonable lay out and mostly legible text and
figures.
6-10 Poor, not an attractive poster with somewhat disorganised layout, and mostly
illegible text and figures.
0-5 Very poor, unattractive poster with poor layout, illegible text and figures.
Scientific content – 50 marks
41-50 Very Good. Very well written background of appropriate depth. Aims stated
clearly and succinctly.
Good choice of methods. Excellent number of results of good quality. Very well
written conclusions/discussion. Considerable originality and/or innovation.
31-40 Good. Well-written background of appropriate depth. Aims stated clearly. Good
choice of methods. Good number of results of good quality. Well-written
conclusions/discussion. Some originality and/or innovation.
21-30 Satisfactory. Reasonable background. Aims stated. Reasonably appropriate
methods. Reasonable number of results. Reasonable conclusions/discussion.
Some originality and/or innovation.
11-20 Weak. Insufficient background. Aims not stated clearly. Possibly inappropriate
methods. Few, incomprehensible or poorly chosen results. Insufficient
conclusions/discussion. Little originality.
0-10 Very weak. No or insufficient background. No aims given. No or inappropriate
methods. No or incomprehensible results. No or insufficient
conclusions/discussion. No originality.
Answers to questions – 20 marks
16-20 Very Good. Good understanding of the problem and methods. Good ability to
justify choice of methods and/or explain results. Good ability to relate to wider
context.
11-15 Reasonable. Reasonable understanding of the problem and methods. Reasonable
ability to justify choice of methods and/or explain results. Reasonable ability to
relate to wider context.
6-10 Poor. Some understanding of the problem and methods. Weak ability to justify
choice of methods and/or explain results. Weak ability to relate to wider context.
0-5 Very poor. Little or no understanding of the problem and methods. Unable to
justify choice of methods and/or explain results.
17Laboratory Book Quality
Table of contents Data Analysis and
Introduction (25%) Methods (20%) Results (25%)
(5%) Conclusions (25%)
80– Comprehensive table Very clearly and concisely Very clear and precise descriptionExcellent presentation of Excellent and entirely
100 of contents for defines the experimental of experimental protocols. results. All relevant data appropriate analysis of data
notebook. aims and titles. Complete Complete tabulation of reagent presented and properly collected. All relevant
All pages numbered description of the purpose concentrations. All deviations fastened to page in calculations provided in
and dated. and principles of the from standard protocol noted and notebook. Figures labelled notebook. Excellent explanation
techniques. discussed. and easy to understand. of experimental anomalies.
70– Very good contents Defines the experimental Clear and precise description of Very good presentation of Good analysis and discussion of
79 table. All pages in aims and titles. A very experimental protocols. Clear results. All relevant data results. All relevant calculations
notebook numbered good summary of the tabulation of reagent presented and properly provided in notebook. Sound
and dated. techniques used. concentrations. All deviations fastened to page in explanation of experimental
from standard protocol noted and notebook. Figures labelled anomalies.
discussed. and easy to understand.
60- Good table of Defines the experimental Reasonable description of Good presentation of results. Reasonable analysis and
69 contents. Most pages aims and describes the experimental protocols. Reagent Most relevant data presented discussion of results. Most
numbered and dated. techniques, but with a lessconcentrations tabulated and and properly fastened to relevant calculations provided in
well-constructed storyline deviations from standard protocolpage in notebook. Most notebook. Partial explanation of
than for above. noted. figures labelled and easy to experimental anomalies.
understand.
50- Reasonable list of Adequately defines the Adequate description of Adequate presentation of Adequate analysis and
59 contents with a few experimental aims. experimental protocols. results. Some relevant data discussion of results. Some
omissions. Many Reasonable description of Incomplete tabulation of reagent not presented or not properlyrelevant calculations provided in
pages are not dated. techniques used. concentrations. Not all deviations fastened to page in notebook. Poor explanation of
were noted. notebook. Some figures are experimental anomalies.
poorly labelled.
40- Very poor list of Poorly defines the Unclear description of protocols Inadequate presentation of Inadequate analysis and
49 contents that could experimental aims. Very used. Reagent concentrations andresults. Most relevant data discussion of results. Most
not be used as a limited description of deviations from protocols were not presented and not relevant calculations not
reference. Most pages techniques. missing. properly fastened to page in provided in notebook. Very poor
do not have dates. notebook. Most figures are explanation of experimental
difficult to understand. anomalies.
0-39 Distinctly inadequate The purpose of each Very unclear or lacking Very weak presentation or Very weak analysis and
or absent table of experiment is very description of protocols. completely missing relevant discussion of results. Relevant
contents. unclear. No description of data. calculations missing from the
techniques used. notebook. No mention of
experimental anomalies.Projects
Project reports
Abstract (5%) Introduction Methods (20%) Results and Analysis Discussion (25%) Reference list (5%)
(20%) (25%)
80– Excellent. Logical Very clearly defines Very clear and precise Excellent and entirely Clever, complete and Appropriate number of
100 structure. Covers the question. Fully description of very well appropriate analysis wise discussion of references which are well
intro, methods, evaluates the current chosen and cleverly Excellent description that results in relation to formatted, and
results and knowledge through designed methods. goes beyond the obvious.those of others. consistently cited.
conclusion. appropriate An elegantly designed Programme works and Excellent link to aims Appropriate balance of
Includes all main references. Critical, programme with good goes beyond specification of the project and general and specific
findings. thoughtful and quality documentation. requirements. impressive further references and evidence
Appropriate incisive. ideas. of extensive literature
balance between searching.
aspects.
70–79 Very good. As Defines and evaluatesClear and precise Very good and Good discussion of Good number of
above but may the question well description of well-chosenappropriate analysis with results in relation to references which are well
cover one aspects through a good and well-designed sensible deductions. those of others. Goodformatted, and
less well, but selection of methods. Programme works and link to aims of the consistently cited.
adequately references. A good An elegantly designed specification requirementsproject and sound Appropriate balance of
summary of the programme with good clearly met. further ideas. general and specific
subject. quality documentation. references and evidence
of some literature
searching
60-69 Good. As above Defines and evaluatesReasonable description of Good analysis but may beReasonable Reasonable number of
but may cover two the question well withmethods but less well inappropriate in places. discussion of results references which are
aspects less well, a reasonable chosen or designed than Misses some evidence. in relation to those of mainly well formatted,
but adequately or selection of for above. Programme mainly others. Reasonable and consistently cited.
one aspect poorly. references but with a A well designed and worked. link to aims of the May not have the
less well-constructed documented programme project but some appropriate balance of
storyline than for impractical further general and specific
above. ideas. references. Limited
evidence of literature
searching.
50-59 Reasonable. As Adequately defines Adequate description of Adequate but somewhat Adequate discussion Reasonable number of
above but may the question through methods but unclear in inappropriate analysis. of results in relation references with format
cover several adequate references places. Adequate to those of others. and citation weaker than
aspects less well, with a poorly selection or design of Programme mainly Limited link to aims above. Does not have the
but partially or twostructured storyline. methods but some poor worked. of the project and appropriate balance of
aspects poorly. choices. impractical further general and specific
A reasonably well- ideas. references. Little evidence
designed programme. of literature searching40-49 Weak. Poorly defines the Unclear description of Inadequate or mainly Inadequate In appropriate number of
Most aspects question by not methods that were poorlyinappropriate analysis. discussion of results references with poor
covered only placing it in context chosen or poorly in relation to those of format and citation Does
partially or not at by the use of a poor designed. Programme doesn't meet others. Inadequate ornot have the appropriate
all selection of several of the no link to aims of the balance of general and
references. Weak Reasonable attempt at specification requirementsproject with specific references.
storyline and limited programme design. or only partial works. impractical or no
understanding. further ideas.
0-39 Distinctly The purpose of the Very unclear description Very weak or no real Very weak discussion Distinctly inadequate or
inadequate or research is very of methods. Very limited analysis which was not with little reference toabsent
absent unclear. Very poor selection of poorly chosenappropriate. the results of others
choice of references. methods. and no link to the
Lack of Programme doesn't meet aims of the project.
understanding. Poorly designed many of the
programme. specifications.Report presentation
80-100 Beautifully written. Very clear. Very few spelling or grammatical errors
which are minor. Very attractive layout which is clear and entirely
appropriate. Excellent use of figures and tables which are referenced in
the text. Figures easy to understand and with complete legends.
Consistence in style. Appropriate appendices.
70-79 Well written and fairly clear. A few spelling or grammatical errors.
Reasonably attractive. Possibly some inconsistency in style but generally
nice layout. Good figures and tables which are referenced in the text.
Most of the figures easy to understand. Appropriate appendices.
60-69 Adequately written but with some laboured or poorly written sections.
Adequate use of figures but which may be hard to understand and/or
untidy in places. Some spelling or grammatical errors. Inconsistency in
style. Possibly some unnecessary appendices which those that should be
in the main body of the work.
50-59 Poorly written and rather scruffy. Many spelling or grammatical errors.
Inconsistency in style. Little thought to layout. Inadequate use of figures
which are hard to understand, untidy and may not be referred to in the
text. Inappropriate use of appendices.
40-49 Poorly written and seriously flawed use of English. Many spelling and
grammatical errors which make the work hard to understand. Poor
layout. Figures inappropriate or absent, difficult to understand, very
untidy and not referred to in text. Inappropriate use of appendices.
0-39 Very poorly written and seriously flawed use of English which makes the
work nearly impossible to understand. Many spelling and grammatical
errors. Very poor layout. Figures inappropriate or absent, difficult to
understand, very untidy and not referred to in text. Inappropriate use of
appendices.You can also read
