EXAMINATION REGULATIONS (September 2013)
A.
Programme objectives

At the level of knowledge: o the students should have knowledge of the most important traditions in biomedical ethics, with major contemporary movements, as well as the conceptual, methodological and practical issues in different areas of biomedical ethics. The programme wants to pay specifically attention to European traditions in philosophy, theology and ethics.

At the level of skills: o the students should develop the competences needed to conduct research in bioethics independently. The students are encouraged to participate in the scientific debate and literature in the domain of bioethics. The master programme also intends to support students in critically analyzing the scientific literature, writing scientific articles and in submitting papers and articles to conferences and journals; o the Master of Bioethics intends to prepare the students to integrate their theoretical knowledge with requisite attitudes and skills, in order to be able to apply these in a clinical and/or research context. The students should be prepared to participate in clinical ethics committees or in research ethics committees; o the students should be able to deal autonomously with complex ethical problems in the field of Biomedicine and/or research. They should be able to analyze these problems and to reflect on them; o the students should be able to discuss ethical issues taking into account crosscultural factors.

At the level of attitudes: o the Master of Bioethics stimulates the students to develop a critical attitude towards ethical problems and the scientific bioethical literature; o life-long learning is essential when one is professionally active in health care. The
Master of Bioethics further encourages the students to develop a positive attitude towards life-long-learning and continuous training; o the Master of Bioethics urges the students to develop openness towards different positions and teach them to work in a multidisciplinary way; o the Master of Bioethics intends to increase moral sensibility and develop a continuous awareness for ethical issues in clinical and research practice.
Page 1 of 13

X
X
X
B.
List of examination requirements
Obligatory courses (51 ECTS)
Courses
E08U9A
E02E5A
E09B2A
Nursing Ethics 3 ECTS
Ethics of Reproductive Technologies 3 ECTS
Human Genetics and Medical
Technology
3 ECTS
C. Gastmans
K. Dierickx
E. Van Leeuwen
S. Van der Burg
N.
C. Viafora / E. Furlan
X E09B3A
X E09B5A
X E09B7A
Lecture series
X E08V6A
Palliative Care
Clinical Bioethics
Research Ethics
3 ECTS
3 ECTS
3 ECTS M. Piccinni
X E08V7 A
Lecture Series on Bioethics, Part 1
Lec ture Series on Bioethics, Part 2
3 ECTS
3 ECTS
P. Borry
P. Schotsmans
E. Van Leeuwen/
E. Furlan
Research component
X E02E8B Seminar Interdisciplinary Research in Bioethics
X E02E9B Research Manuscript
3 ECTS P. Borry
Bioethics training
X E00V7A
18 ECTS P.Borry/N. Steinkamp
C. Viafora
Bioethics Training 6 ECTS N. Steinkamp
E. Furlan
Specializing courses (9 ECTS) Min of 9 credits should be selected from this list:
О
О
W0EA2A
W0EC8A
Introduction
Media
to Ethics
Ethics
5
4
ECTS
ECTS
S. Rummens
B. Pattyn
О
О
E03Y3A
P0R94B
Academic Writing
Descriptive and Inferential Statistics
4 ECTS
4 ECTS
M. Verdeyen
D. Smedts
Page 2 of 13

Assessment
The programme is divided into three residential periods. In Leuven and Padova the examination on the courses will take place at the end of the residential period. In Nijmegen the examination will take place at the end of each course. The examination board will deliberate at the end of
June 2014 and in September 2014. The examination board will determine the final grade of each student on the basis of the complete examination dossier.
Please consult the following webpage for the specific procedures regarding examinations, deliberation and irregularities during the examination period: http://www.kuleuven.be/education/regulations/ . The three partner universities agreed to use the same examination regulations (examination regulations 2013-2014 KU Leuven).
Of particular importance are Article 141 (criteria for passing course units), Article 143
(weighting), Article 145 (criteria for succeeding in a programme of study) and Article 146
(criteria to obtain a degree or certificate and a level of achievement) of the examination regulations (here presented in shortened version).
Article 141. Criteria for passing course units
A student shall be deemed to have succeeded in a course unit if at least 10 out of 20 points or a
'pass' assessment have been awarded.
Article 143. Weighting
In order to establish the percentage obtained for a whole programme of study, a weighting should be applied to the results of each course unit in accordance with the number of credits involved.
The course units that are only assessed by means of the 'pass/no pass' system are excluded from the calculation of the percentage.
Article 145. Criteria for succeeding in a programme of study
§2. A student successfully completes a Master’s programme or subject-specific teacher training programme if he has passed (at least 10/20 or a pass grade) or been exempted from all course units under a degree contract or a degree-seeking examination contract.
Articles 84 and 85 refer to the appointment of an ombudsperson.The faculty shall appoint a member of the academic staff or another staff member with relevant expertise in education as education ombudsperson. The latter acts as a mediator with whom students can discuss during the academic year aspects of the provision of education which, in view of their personal nature, cannot be adequately addressed by the regular faculty authorities. The education ombudsperson mediates between the student(s) involved, the lecturers and the management bodies .
Page 3 of 13

During examination periods, the examination ombudsperson shall act as a confidant who mediates between examiners and students regarding examination matters. The examination regulations set forth the duties, appointment and mandate of the examination ombudsperson .
Article 146. Criteria to obtain a degree or certificate and a level of achievement
The student who has passed a programme of study according to the criteria stipulated in Article
145 obtains the degree or certificate of the programme of study.
A student obtaining the degree of Bachelor or Master or the specific teacher training programme shall be the awarded with the following levels of achievement:
- passed ( cum fructu ), if less than 68% of the weighted examination marks have been obtained;
- distinction ( cum laude ), on condition that at least 68% of the weighted examination marks have been obtained;
- great distinction ( magna cum laude ), on condition that at least 77% of the weighted examination marks have been obtained;
- greatest distinction ( summa cum laude ), on condition that at least 85% of the weighted examination marks have been obtained;
- greatest distinction ( summa cum laude ) with the congratulations of the examination committee, on condition that at least 90% of the weighted examination marks have been obtained.
A.
Deliberation and announcements of examination results
Following the deliberations of the meeting of examiners, the chairperson of the examination board (or its representative) shall publicly announce the decision taken on each student by the examination board. This proclamation of the results will be held in Padova on Wednesday 25
June 2014 at 17:00.
B.
What happens in case of failure?
The course coordinator of the failed course decides on the format of the replacing exam. The student will be informed about the replacing assignment or test.
Page 4 of 13

ANNEX 1:
Objective
Research in bioethics is an important component of the ‘Erasmus Mundus Master of Bioethics”.
In its objectives, the programme states “The Erasmus Mundus Master aims at supporting research in the bioethical field. It wants the students to participate in the scientific debate and literature in the domain of bioethics. It wants to support students in writing scientific articles and in submitting papers and articles to conferences and journals.” Hereby we present the different steps in the elaboration of your research work.
1. Finding a topic
The first step in your research track is to find an interesting and challenging topic. For many, finding and defining the exact research topic and question is probably the most difficult obstacle in research. To facilitate this process we developed a list of potential research fields and topics, together with the names of mentors that might supervise the research.
The following issues are important when choosing a topic.

Use the skills and knowledge that you have built up before coming to the Erasmus
Mundus Master of Bioethics. Starting from zero on a brand new research topic might be more difficult than if you benefit from the background that you have already acquired.
But don’t be afraid to study a new topic, if you are able to develop and study a specific research question within one year.

It is normal at the beginning of a research to be unclear how about how the research will develop. Therefore, in the first months it will be necessary to devote time to read the literature on the topic and to develop a very specific research question and a research plan.

You should really enjoy the subject and want to spend at least one year on it.

Read some key publications on the topics you are interested in to orient yourself.
Procedure A list with potential research fields and topics has been elaborated and is distributed to all students. The students should select one or two research topics / fields in which they are interested, possibly accompanied by a potential mentor.
On Friday 11 October 2013 before 16:00 a one-page document
(see format) should be submitted on Toledo.
2. Finding a mentor
After the selection of a potential topic (based on the list and personal suggestions), we try to assign (also on your suggestion) a potential mentor to every student. During an individual session the different suggestions will be discussed. Thereafter, the student can initiate the contacts with his/her mentor. The role of a mentor is to offer support and encouragement along the student’s research work. The mentor should draw on his/her own expertise to orient the personal research of the student, to provide constructive feedback on the research being
Page 5 of 13

undertaken and to read and comment on draft papers. The mentor should endorse the
Universities’ profile of good promotorship and undertake to comply with the accompanying obligations. However, the student takes the ultimate responsibility for the direction, timetable, progression and completion of the research. He/she should ensure that the final thesis is submitted within the designated period, taking due account of advice and recommendation of the mentor.
Procedure On Monday 14 October 2013 every student should discuss individually with Pascal
Borry his/her research topic suggestions. A potential mentor will be assigned.
3. Submission of final work plan
The next step in the research process is the submission of a final work plan. The workplan is part of the examination for the Seminar Interdisciplinary Research in Bioethics .
In this workplan the student should describe his/her main research question. The workplan should be limited to max. 2000 words (references excluded) . You should use the format provided and the workplan must contain the following elements: background (in which you provide a brief overview of the general and specific background of your research with reference to recent and relevant articles), objectives (in which you formulate the main research aims of your project), methodology (indicate whether you are using a literature review or a specific quantitative or qualitative research methodology), stages and steps in the projects (summarize the different phases of your research and indicate schematically the timing of these phases), conclusion (briefly describe the anticipated results and the implications of your project), references.
This workplan will be discussed by the professors in charge of the seminar (Pascal Borry and
Norbert Steinkamp). The following questions will guide the discussion:

Is the objective of the research relevant?

Is the objective clearly described?

Is the research question not too broad?

Is the objective of the research attainable in the context of a master programme?

Is the proposed approach properly thought about and of an appropriate scope for a master project?

Does the research project fit in within the broader research activities of the mentor and his/her research unit?

Are there any overlaps with other thesis projects?
The comments of the professors in charge of the seminar have to be discussed with the mentor, but are purely informative. The elaboration of the research work should entirely be lead by the choices of the student together with his/her mentor.
Page 6 of 13

Procedure Before Friday 10 January 2014 10:00 am every student should have submitted his/her workplan on Toledo. Please keep in mind that the mentioned date is the deadline for submitting the assignment to the programme and not the deadline for submitting your assignment to your mentor. You should ask your mentor for advice and comments in time (this means at the latest by the 20
December).
5. Submission of an introduction
During the Seminar Interdisciplinary Research in Bioethics, the students received instructions on how to write an introduction (cf. establish a territory, establish a research niche, occupy the niche and give a brief outlook on the structure of the paper. The students are requested to write the introduction of their manuscript (see below) according to the provided guidelines. If the students fail to submit an introduction within the provided deadline they might not be allowed to submit their manuscript at the end of May.
The submitted introduction will be discussed with the coordinators of the Seminar
Interdisciplinary Research in Bioethics (Pascal Borry and Norbert Steinkamp).
Procedure Before Wednesday 19 March 2014 every student should have submitted his/her introduction on Toledo. Please keep in mind that the mentioned date is the deadline for submitting the assignment to the programme and not the deadline for submitting your assignment to your mentor. You should ask your mentor for advice and comments in time (this means at least 10 days in advance).
This introduction will be discussed by the professors in charge of the seminar
(Pascal Borry and Norbert Steinkamp) on Friday 28 March 2014 .
6. Submission of manuscript
The student is encouraged to produce a thesis in a way that makes the publication of the results of the thesis possible. In general, the research results should be able to be published as articles in scientific journals or monographs. The submission and evaluation of the thesis manuscript within the Erasmus Mundus Master of Bioethics is considered as an important step which should prepare the manuscript towards submission of a manuscript into a real academic journal.
Therefore as a final result of the programme, we expect that the students should be able to publish (parts of) their research in a national or international academic journal once the programme has been concluded.
The student’s thesis can be submitted for the Erasmus Master of Bioethics in two different ways.
The choice for one type or another should be motivated in the final work plan and should be agreed upon with the mentor.
Page 7 of 13

Formula Nr. 1: An original, continuous text.
In this formula the thesis should be based on original investigation and must demonstrate scholarship and critical judgement, as well as familiarity with methods of research and relevant literature in the field studied. The thesis should be of a high level of originality and should examine a problem in depth (and thus not discussing various issues superficially!). It must be written in English. A thesis presented in this way should contain maximum 10.000 words. The text can be divided in chapters.
Formula Nr. 2: A research article
In this formula the thesis consists of an original research article intended to be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The paper should be presented as a paper that will be submitted to a journal for publication. The choice of the journal should be motivated. The paper should as well be presented according to the requirements of the journal to which the paper will be submitted. A thesis presented in this way should contain a main text of maximum 5.000 words (references excluded). Presenting a thesis in this way seems more easy, but it is in reality much more difficult. You need to write much more concisely and show that you know the background literature very well. The paper should be written in English.
On Sunday 25 May 2014 at 10.00 pm. every student should have submitted his/her thesis by e-mail to Chantal.DeKeersmaecker@med.kuleuven.be
using therefore the developed formats. Please keep in mind that the mentioned date is the deadline for submitting the assignment to the programme and not the deadline for submitting your assignment to your mentor. It is the responsibility of the students to ask their mentor for advice and comments in time, i.e. at the latest by 11 May 2014.
After that date it may not be possible for mentors to comment on the manuscript.
8. Assessment of manuscript
Every thesis is evaluated by a thesis commission composed by the mentor and two reviewers. In addition, the jury members present at the oral defense will also evaluate the manuscript. The final score for the research work is composed by the following evaluations:

0/40 assessment by the mentor

0/40 assessment by the 2 reviewers (0/20 each)

0/40 assessment on the end product by the jury members present at the defense

0/40 assessment on the oral defense by the jury members present at the defense
The purpose of the thesis (in the one form or the other) is to give evidence of a student's abilities in collecting and evaluating information, critically analyzing theories in the chosen area of inquiry, and constructing, testing and defending a coherent argument. The thesis should also demonstrate a student's ability to present research results concisely and in a scholarly form. The master thesis should demonstrate that the candidate is capable of carrying out original and independent work.
Page 8 of 13

Procedure The thesis commission has been appointed by the Steering Committee of the
Erasmus Mundus Master of Bioethics. No later than 3 weeks after receiving the manuscript, the mentor and the two reviewers will send their written comments to the responsible of the seminar, who will compile a synthesis of the comments received.
9. Oral defense
In the oral defense the student may be questioned on any aspect of the thesis and will be asked to elaborate upon or defend issues arising from the research presented in the thesis. During the oral defense the students will be confronted with the observations of the mentor and the two reviewers. After a very short presentation of its main research results (max. 10 minutes), various additional and explanatory questions will be asked. The purpose of the oral examination is to have the student demonstrate to the Jury that he/she has a solid understanding of those areas relevant to the research, can expand upon and defend those ideas verbally, and has attained a breadth and depth of intellectual understanding of the subject matter. The Jury is composed of minimum three members (one of every participating university) and will be appointed by the
Steering Committee. For the academic year 2013-2014 it will consist of Paul Schotsmans, Pascal
Borry, Norbert Steinkamp and Corrado Viafora.
The abstract of the research work of every student will be sent around to everyone (students and staff).
Procedure On 23 and 24 June 2014 every student will discuss individually his/her thesis before a jury composed of staff members of the three universities. The student will prepare a powerpoint presentation in which he/she presents very shortly the main research conclusions (max. 10 minutes!). The other 20 minutes are for questions and discussion.
In the week before the oral defense, the students will be invited to organize a try-out of their oral defense in which the students will received the opportunity to present their work, review other people’s work and have a discussion. It is also a way of learning from each others’ work.
10. Publication
We hope that after the programme a high number of participants will be able to publish their research work (or parts of it).
11. Best Master’s Thesis Award Erasmus Mundus Master of Bioethics 2013-2014
Purpose: To recognize and encourage graduate study and scholarship in bioethics through an annual award for an outstanding master’s thesis.
Award: No financial remuneration is foreseen for the winner, but a honorary recognition.
Page 9 of 13

Criteria:
Only students participating in the Erasmus Mundus Master of Bioethics can participate in the contest. All manuscripts submitted for the master’s degree requirements of the Erasmus Mundus
Master of Bioethics will automatically be assessed within this contest. The thesis must by authored by one student. Group papers or projects are not allowed for this contest. The attribution of the award will done by the steering committee of the Erasmus Mundus Master of
Bioethics after assessment of all master dissertations through the written reports of the reviewers and the oral defences. The Steering Committee makes this decision autonomously and might come to the decision not to provide the award.
Announcement: The award will be given during the proclamation ceremony.
Page 10 of 13

ANNEX 2: Evaluation Form Manuscript
NAME:
Grade (0 – 20, half grades may not be given)
TITLE:
EVALUATED BY:
In your evaluation, please consider following issues:
With regard to the form, structure, organization and language of the paper:

The title of the manuscript adequately represents the study

The abstract concisely summarizes the main objectives, methods, most important findings, conclusions and implications of the manuscript

Introduction, corpus and conclusion are adequately written and contain all necessary elements

The subheadings that are used adequately represent the content of the paragraph

The structure of the manuscript is consistent, clear and relevant to the manuscript objectives

The manuscript is written in a correct formal academic writing style.

The paragraphs are logically organized and sequenced, by using appropriate topic sentences, linking words etc.

Plagiarism is avoided and quoting/ paraphrasing are done correctly in accordance with the applicable academic standards

The manuscript contains sufficient, relevant and up-to-date references

Literature references are complete, consistent and in accordance with the style of the selected journal
With regard to content of the paper:

The objectives of the study are relevant, feasible and clearly defined

The introduction contains sufficient background information, is well documented and demonstrates a clear gap of knowledge

The description of the research methods is clear and complete


The research methods are suitable to tackle the research objectives
Data analysis is accurate and comprehensive and the results are clearly described

The ethical argumentation is well elaborated, clear, coherent and convincing

The manuscript contains a sufficiently balanced and nuanced presentation of an ethical issue

Potential limitations of the study are adequately addressed

Relevant avenues for further research are identified

The manuscript makes a relevant contribution to the state-of-the art knowledge concerning the ethical issue at stake

Individual vision, originality and creativity are clearly displayed
Page 11 of 13

1.
Based on these criteria, which positive critiques, remarks, and observations do you have towards the paper?
2.
Based on these criteria, Which negative critiques, remarks, and observations do you have towards the paper? Which additions, amendments or suggestions do you have that will increase the value of this manuscript for the reader?
3.
Do you think this article is publishable within the journal the student suggests or in another journal (at least national peer reviewed journal)? (in case of research article)
4.
Please add here at least two questions that should be asked during the oral defense of the student. a.
b.
5.
Specifically for the mentor – student relation.
Please consider following issues:

The student made good overall scientific process over the year.


The student maintained a sufficiently (self)critical and (self)reflective attitude
The student was able to work sufficiently independent.

The student was able to work in an organized and planned way.

The student sufficiently complied with deadlines and agreements. a.
How do you evaluate the collaboration between mentor and student? b.
How was the frequency of the contact with the student (weekly, monthly, …..)?
Page 12 of 13

ANNEX 3: Evaluation Form for Oral Defense
NAME:
TITLE:
Grade (0 – 20, half grades may not be given)
EVALUATED BY:
Presentation (0/10)
Relevant items:
1.
Ideas and substance of the presentation were easy to comprehend.
2.
The student is able to present the main ideas of his research in concise way.
3.
The student used clear examples, evidence, and/or visuals to enhance the presentation.
4.
The powerpoint presentation was well elaborated.
5.
Appropriate eye contact was maintained.
6.
The student articulated clearly.
7.
The student used suitable volume and voice variation.
8.
The student is able to limit his presentation to maximum 10 minutes.
Discussion (0/10)
Relevant items:
1.
Reaction to the comments of the reviewers
2.
Accuracy of answers to questions
3.
Clear demonstration of knowledge of research topic
4.
The student is able to articulate his reactions clearly.
5.
The student is able to provide immediate suggesti ons for adaptation.
Page 13 of 13