Student Handbook
2013-2014
MSc in Environmental Science: Legislation and Management (LM)
MSc in Environmental Science: Pollution and Monitoring (PM)
MSc in Climate Change Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS)
MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (SuSED)
MSc in Toxicology and Risk Assessment (TARA)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building
Brunel University
UB8 3PH
UK
1
2
Table of Contents
1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 7
2
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES ................................................................................................................... 7
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
3
CONTACTS .......................................................................................................................................................... 11
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4
HEAD OF THE INSTITUTE ..................................................................................................................................... 11
DEPUTY HEAD OF TEACHING .............................................................................................................................. 11
PROGRAMME DIRECTORS .................................................................................................................................... 12
PROGRAMME MANAGER ..................................................................................................................................... 12
ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................................................................................ 13
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5
MSC IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT (LM) ...................................................... 7
MSC IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: POLLUTION AND MONITORING (PM)............................................................ 7
MSC IN CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND SUSTAINABILITY (CCIS) ...................................................................... 8
MSC IN SUSTAINABILITY, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND DESIGN (SUSED) ................................................................ 8
MSC IN TOXICOLOGY AND RISK ASSESSMENT (TARA) ...................................................................................... 11
ENROLMENT ........................................................................................................................................................ 13
TIMETABLE/TERM DATES ................................................................................................................................... 15
ATTENDANCE MONITORING POLICY ................................................................................................................... 15
TIER 4 OF UKBA REGULATIONS.......................................................................................................................... 17
TEACHING & LEARNING ................................................................................................................................ 19
5.1 MODE OF STUDY ................................................................................................................................................. 19
5.2 SCHEME OF STUDIES ........................................................................................................................................... 19
5.3 METHOD OF TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 20
5.3.1 Recording of taught lecture/seminar sessions ............................................................................................ 21
5.3.2 Recording of taught lecture/seminar sessions by disabled students ........................................................... 22
5.4 ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES OF SENIOR TUTORS AND PERSONAL TUTORS .......................................................... 23
6
EXAMINATIONS ................................................................................................................................................. 24
7
ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................................................................................... 24
8
MARKING SYSTEM ........................................................................................................................................... 24
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
9
STUDY BLOCKS, ASSESSMENT BLOCKS AND MODULAR BLOCKS ....................................................................... 24
POSTGRADUATE ASSESSMENT: GRADING AND MARKING .................................................................................... 25
CORE ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................................................................. 27
PROGRESSION REQUIREMENT .............................................................................................................................. 27
MASTERS-LEVEL GRADE DESCRIPTORS ............................................................................................................... 27
AWARD REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................................................................... 29
9.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR A PASS AT MASTERS LEVEL ................................................................................................ 29
9.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR MERIT AT MASTERS LEVEL................................................................................................. 29
9.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR DISTINCTION AT MASTERS LEVEL ...................................................................................... 30
9.4 REASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................................................... 30
9.5 OTHER AWARDS .................................................................................................................................................. 31
9.5.1 Requirement for a Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip.) .................................................................................. 32
9.5.2 Requirement for a Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert.) ............................................................................. 32
10
DISSERTATION................................................................................................................................................... 33
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7
11
OVERVIEW OF THE DISSERTATION PROCESS ........................................................................................................ 33
FORMAL PROCEDURES......................................................................................................................................... 34
TYPICAL FORMAT FOR THE DISSERTATION .......................................................................................................... 36
ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR DISSERTATIONS ................................................................................................... 40
GUIDELINES FOR SUPERVISORS ........................................................................................................................... 41
DISSERTATION SCHEDULE ................................................................................................................................... 42
DISSERTATION GRADE DESCRIPTORS ................................................................................................................... 43
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING PERFORMANCE .......................................................... 47
11.1 OVERVIEW .......................................................................................................................................................... 47
11.2 EXAMPLES........................................................................................................................................................... 48
3
11.3 SUPPORTING EVIDENCE (SEE ALSO SECTION 11.4) ............................................................................................... 49
11.3.1 Self-certification of Illness ......................................................................................................................... 50
11.3.2 Medical supporting evidence...................................................................................................................... 50
11.4 STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES OR CHRONIC MEDICAL CONDITIONS ..................................................................... 51
11.4.1 Supporting evidence for students with disabilities or chronic medical conditions .................................... 52
11.5 SUBMITTING MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES ........................................................................................................ 52
11.6 CONSIDERATION OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES SUBMISSIONS........................................................................ 53
11.6.1 Role of the Mitigating Circumstances Panel .............................................................................................. 53
11.6.2 Action by the Board of Examiners .............................................................................................................. 53
12
APPEALS .............................................................................................................................................................. 54
12.1 APPEALS CONCERNING ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................. 54
12.2 BEFORE MAKING AN APPEAL ............................................................................................................................... 54
12.3 GROUNDS FOR AN ACADEMIC APPEAL ................................................................................................................. 55
12.4 MAKING AN ACADEMIC APPEAL .......................................................................................................................... 56
12.4.1 Stage 1 – Internal Resolution ..................................................................................................................... 56
12.4.2 Stage 2 – The Academic Appeals Committee ............................................................................................. 56
13
SUBMISSION OF WORK AND LATE SUBMISSION PENALTIES ............................................................ 58
13.1 DEFINITION OF SUBMISSION DEADLINES .............................................................................................................. 58
13.2 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND LATE SUBMISSION ........................................................................................ 58
13.3 PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSED COURSEWORK .......................................................................... 59
13.3.1 PGT (except dissertations) – From 1st September 2013 onwards .............................................................. 60
13.3.2 PGT (except dissertations) – Before 1st September 2013 ........................................................................... 60
13.4 PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF MASTERS DISSERTATIONS........................................................................ 60
13.4.1 Masters dissertations late submissions – From 1st September 2013 onwards............................................ 60
13.4.2 Masters dissertations late submissions – Before 1st September 2013 ........................................................ 61
14
GOOD ACADEMIC PRACTICE ....................................................................................................................... 62
14.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... 62
14.2 YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES...................................................................................................................................... 62
14.3 WHAT IS PLAGIARISM? ........................................................................................................................................ 63
14.4 IDENTIFICATION OF PLAGIARISM ......................................................................................................................... 64
14.5 HOW CAN I AVOID PLAGIARISM? ......................................................................................................................... 64
14.6 WHY SHOULD I REFERENCE? ............................................................................................................................... 66
14.7 WHAT SHOULD I REFERENCE? ............................................................................................................................. 66
14.8 HOW SHOULD I REFERENCE? ............................................................................................................................... 66
14.9 REFERENCING TIPS .............................................................................................................................................. 67
14.10 FINAL CHECKS FOR AVOIDING PLAGIARISM ......................................................................................................... 67
14.11 ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT .................................................................................................................................... 67
14.12 WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU ARE ACCUSED OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT .................................................................... 68
14.13 WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU ARE FOUND GUILTY OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT ........................................................... 68
14.14 WHERE TO GET HELP ........................................................................................................................................... 68
15
SUPPORT .............................................................................................................................................................. 70
15.1 BRUNEL GRADUATE SCHOOL .............................................................................................................................. 70
15.2 BRUNEL LANGUAGE CENTRE .............................................................................................................................. 70
15.3 DISABILITY AND DYSLEXIA SERVICE .................................................................................................................. 70
16
IFE – STUDENT PLAN ....................................................................................................................................... 71
17
IFE – TEACHING AND LEARNING COMMITTEE (TLC) .......................................................................... 74
18
IFE – BOARD OF STUDIES (BOS).................................................................................................................... 75
19
IFE – STAFF STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE (SSLC) ............................................................................ 76
20
IFE – MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES PANEL (MC PANEL) ................................................................. 77
21
IFE – PANEL OF EXAMINERS (POE) ............................................................................................................. 80
22
IFE – BOARD OF EXAMINERS (BOE) ............................................................................................................ 81
23
OVERRIDING AUTHORITY ............................................................................................................................. 82
24
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................................................... 83
4
APPENDIX 1: UNIVERSITY CALENDAR SHOWING TERM DATES ...................................................................................... 83
APPENDIX 3: COURSEWORK SUBMISSION SHEET ........................................................................................................... 84
APPENDIX 4: COURSEWORK MARKERS’ REPORT FORM ................................................................................................. 85
APPENDIX 5: ORAL PRESENTATION MARKERS’ REPORT FORM ...................................................................................... 86
APPENDIX 6: EXAMINATION MARKERS’ REPORT FORM ................................................................................................ 88
APPENDIX 7: DISSERTATION; APPROVAL FORM ............................................................................................................ 89
APPENDIX 8: DISSERTATION; MARKERS’ REPORT FORM............................................................................................... 90
APPENDIX 9: DISSERTATION; EXAMPLE TITLE PAGE ..................................................................................................... 92
APPENDIX 10: DISSERTATION; EXAMPLE DECLARATION OF OWN WORK....................................................................... 93
APPENDIX 11: RESEARCH ETHICS REVIEW CHECKLIST .................................................................................................. 94
APPENDIX 12: RISK ASSESSMENT FORM ....................................................................................................................... 96
APPENDIX 13: MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES FORM ..................................................................................................... 97
APPENDIX 14: STUDENT SELF-CERTIFICATION OF ILLNESS FORM ............................................................................... 100
APPENDIX 15: REQUEST FOR INTERNAL RESOLUTION FORM ...................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX 16: UNIVERSITY APPEAL COMMITTEE – APPEAL FORM ............................................................................. 105
APPENDIX 17: GUIDE FOR WRITING REFERENCE CITATIONS ........................................................................................ 109
APPENDIX 18: SUMMARY CHECKLIST OF INFORMATION FOR REFERENCES.................................................................. 112
5
6
1
INTRODUCTION
This handbook for Masters’ students in the Institute for the Environment (IfE) provides
study information for Institute’s MSc programmes. Broadly there are four Masters
programme areas: A) Environmental Science (divided into two alternative pathways of
Legislation & Management (LM) and Pollution & Monitoring (PM); B) Climate Change
Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS); C) Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design
(SuSED) and D) Toxicology and Risk Assessment (TARA). You will be taking one of these
five Masters degrees. Apart from the SuSED and TARA programmes, there is some
overlap between the remaining three remaining programmes by sharing modular blocks.
This handbook is designed to provide you with factual information about the courses, and
advice on study methods, as well as essential regulations. Please note that the
University’s courses are all governed by the Senate Regulations, accessible on the
University website.
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senate-regulations
The Institute for the Environment (IfE) is a Specialist Research Institute (SRI) of Brunel
University with particular focus on postgraduate training through both taught and research
degree programmes (MSc, MPhil, PhD). IfE offers expertise in a variety of environmental
science areas relating to environmental management, environmental monitoring,
environmental change, sustainable business, sustainable design, human and wildlife
health, water and waste management, environmental hazards and risk, and will provide
you with a core knowledge and understanding of contemporary environmental science
issues relevant to the climate change challenges that we all face.
2
POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES
2.1 MSc in Environmental Science: Legislation and Management (LM)
This programme is designed to allow those whose career choice lies in the field of
environmental processes their management and regulatory framework to acquire a broadbased knowledge of the concepts involved. Training is given to students who wish to have
a career as environmental managers with an emphasis on EU legislation and management
practices.
2.2 MSc in Environmental Science: Pollution and Monitoring (PM)
This programme is designed for those who are expected to take up roles as environmental
analysts and environmental mangers with an emphasis on environmental monitoring and
pollution control. Through the specialist module blocks in environmental impact and
monitoring, with a focus on the technology used in the control and measurement of
emissions and pollutants, training is given to students who wish to have a career as
environmental practitioners.
Both LM and PM programmes provide a rigorous academic treatment of scientific
principles and environmental practice. The effects of pollution, the study of the processes
and techniques related to the reduction of emissions to air, land and water, together with
the legislative framework in which they are explored. The difference between the two
programmes is that PM provides a practical approach to measurement methods and
7
techniques, whereas LM deals more with management and legal aspects of the
environment. However, like the CCIS programme, all the module blocks are taken, there
are no options.
2.3 MSc in Climate Change Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS)
The MSc in Climate Change Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS) has been designed to
provide you with a broad and integrated knowledge of how recent and future climate
change is likely to impact on society and the wider environment, and to develop a critical
understanding of the importance of sustainability in energy and resource use in mitigating
and adapting to climate change. The programme aims to address impacts of climate
change on ecosystem function, human-environment interactions, and a range of areas of
human activity in developed and developing societies, and therefore is a multi-disciplinary
program.
We aim to provide you with a core knowledge of processes contributing to environmental
change, including rapid climate change; how ecosystems function and are likely to
respond to climate change; how sustainable development is dependent on better
managing resource and energy use; and how we identify, quantify, communicate and
manage risks presented by human activity and our responses to climate change. You will
then learn how to analyse international policy and how it influences national policy, to
develop an understanding of how global threats presented by climate change can be
tackled internationally; how models of corporate governance are evolving to embrace
sustainability and corporate social responsibility, and how businesses are likely to respond
to climate change risks; how human-environment interactions determine human health and
disease processes and are likely to be altered by climate change.
This diverse range of subject matter will all need integrating, which will take a lot of effort
from staff and students. We expect much of this to occur during the research dissertation,
which will need to be concerned with some aspect of mitigating or adapting to climate
change. To help with this integration of different subject areas and different approaches,
and to prepare you for the dissertation, you will participate (along with all our MSc.
Students from the LM and PM Masters programmes) in a Research and Critical Skills
module. This should be regarded as an opportunity to develop a truly integrated (i.e. interdisciplinary, not just multi-disciplinary) understanding of how we will need to adapt all
arenas of human activity to respond to the rapid global climate change we now anticipate.
We expect that in the process you will develop your critical thinking and professional skills
to maximize your ability to go out and solve climate change problems after you leave us.
Despite the different approaches in the three programmes, they all contain elements of
environmental study and practice, and this is the reason why some module blocks are
shared. However, the programmes are fundamentally different.
2.4 MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (SuSED)
This MSc programme has been designed by the Institute for the Environment (IfE) in
collaboration with the School of Engineering and Design (SED) and the Brunel Business
School (BBS). This is a unique interdisciplinary MSc programme (with Professional
Development) with the aim of fuelling an industrial economy that is by design, restorative,
in which nothing is wasted (in effect a circular economy). We are also joined by Prof.
8
Göran Broman and his team at Blekinge Institute of Technology (BTH Sweden) creator of
the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development (FSSD), including Prof. Karl-Henrik
Robèrt (founder of the Natural Step Foundation and Blue Planet Award winner) and Prof.
Terry Collins, of Carnegie Mellon University (leaders in entrepreneurship, clean technology
and green chemistry). This international partnership with world-leading experts is
important, as the problems faced by society and the potential opportunities that arise for
business and design innovation have a global dimension and require global collaboration.
The taught programme is offered jointly by:
 Brunel Institute for the Environment
 Brunel School of Engineering and Design
 Brunel Business School
In collaboration with:
 Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden – world-leading in sustainability research
and training, including Prof. Karl Henrik Robèrt - Blue Planet Award Winner and
pioneer of the sustainability movement
 Other external academic, business and industrial experts
The structure of the programme is given in Figure 1
Enhanced MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (with Professional Development)
Business
Entrepreneur
Business
Leader
Designer/
Innovator
S
S
Prototype
Development
E
S
S
Business
Internship
M
E
N
Business
Incubator
Bid Writing
Internship
A
Research
Proposal
Project Pitch and Match
Research
Venture
Employers
Funders
Capitalists
T
N
E
M
S
S
E
S
Product
Design
S
Research
Idea
Business
Plan
A
Product
Idea
Allocation of Academic Supervisor and
Mentor Matching Event
Business
Idea
Term 3
Env. (IfE), Business (BBS), Design (SED) + International
Multidisciplinary Teaching in in Terms 1 & 2
12 months (180 Credits)
T
6 months
Professional
Development
(60 Credits)
Standard MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design
Proposal
Writer
Figure 1: Programme Structure of SuSED MSc
This MSc programme consists of two parts: the Standard MSc part is the same structure
as the other MSc programmes run by IfE; the Enhanced MSc is an additional available
9
component, as described below. Successful completion of the Standard MSc in
Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (180 Credits) will require a final project in the
form of a detailed business plan (for those wishing to pursue environmental
entrepreneurship), a product design (for those wishing to pursue career in sustainable
design innovation) or a research proposal (for those wishing to pursue a career in bid
writing). Successful completion of only the taught part (120 Credits) of the programme will
result in a PGDip. in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design. PGCert. in Strategic
Sustainable Development will be awarded to those students who will successfully
complete 60 credits of the taught part of the programme.
Students registered for the Enhanced MSc programme (who have passed Year 1) will
undertake a 6-month Professional Development period in the second year of this 18-month
MSc programme (60 credits); successful completion of which will result a final award (240
credits) of MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (with Professional
Development). Direct entry to Professional Development on its own (i.e. without enrolling
on the MSc) will be considered (subject to approval) for individuals who have produced a
suitable business plan, product design or research proposal independently. Successful
completion of this 6-months Professional Development will result in a PGCert. in
Sustainable Development in Practice (subject to approval by the University LTC).
Professional Development Period (60 Credits)
The Enhanced MSc programme will feature a (60 Credit) Professional Development
programme, the preparation for which will begin in Term 3, with a presentation and
pitching skills workshop and an academic supervisor and mentor matching event. In all
cases the mentor will be independent from the academic supervisor and will have a track
record of success in a relevant area of interest to the student. In order to commence the
Professional Development period, students will have obtained the credits needed for
award of the Standard MSc. Critically, they will have developed a business plan, a product
design, or a research proposal in a relevant subject area with an emphasis on
sustainability (Standard MSc programme requirement). Once assessed for academic
merit, these documents will be reviewed jointly by the Programme Team and Advisory
Panel in order to guide students towards the most suitable pathway in the 6-month
Professional Development period (project Pitch and Match Phase – see Figure 1). The
Finance South East (FSE) Group will assist in matching students who have elected to
produce a Business Plan in Term 3 to a suitable Business Internship opportunity.
Students who have produced a suitable business plan or product design will be given the
opportunity to orally present (“pitch”) their idea/product to an appropriate panel of venture
capitalists, business incubator representatives and investors. Successful pitches will
enable students to enter the business incubator and prototype development pathways.
Workshop space will be provided for students who have created a product design in Term
3 (Prototype Development) and students interested in bid writing will be found a suitable
internship opportunity either within or outside of Brunel (e.g. Pera Innovations). Ultimately,
the purpose of the Professional Development period is to enable students to put
theoretical knowledge and their ideas into practice in order to help launch the students into
their career paths of choice, as (i) business entrepreneurs, (ii) business leaders, (iii)
designers/innovators or (iv) bid writers.
10
2.5 MSc in Toxicology and Risk Assessment (TARA)
The MSc in Toxicology and Risk Assessment (TARA) aims to train students for a career as
registered toxicologists. The training offered is tailored to the real needs of a scientist
working in industry, contract research laboratory or governmental agencies. Moreover, in
order to support toxicologists in employment to further develop their knowledge in specific
areas and support them in their continuing professional development (CPD), we offer
students the ability to register for and attend individual module blocks, as short-courses.
The credits achieved with these short courses will contribute to their self-accreditation for
the Register of Toxicologists.
In terms of the contents of the course, previous analysis of the UK skills base for
toxicologists has identified a number of skills gaps within the toxicologist profession in
employment. In this programme, we address the identified skills gaps by including
compulsory module blocks on risk assessment, and regulation and legislation of
chemicals, as well as experimental toxicology (focusing on relevant toxicity studies and
including a strong statistical component from the experimental design to data analysis).
Moreover, our programme has been designed such that every subject (legislation, risk
assessment, reproductive toxicology, endocrine disruption, mixtures toxicology, etc.) will
be covered from both human end environmental perspective, which will provide full
integration between human and ecotoxicology. In addition to this, and due to the extensive
expertise of the members of IfE, in this programme we offer advanced training in both in
human and environmental key specialist topics, such as mixtures toxicology, endocrine
disruption, ecotoxicology, biometry and statistics.
3
CONTACTS
The contact detail of some key staff members, responsible for day-to-day running of the
Institute and the postgraduate programmes, is given below:
3.1 Head of the Institute
Professor Susan Jobling
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 144
Tel: 01895 – 266284
Email: Susan.jobling@brunel.ac.uk
3.2 Deputy Head of Teaching
Dr Abdul J. Chaudhary
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 129
Tel: 01895 – 266112
Email: abdul.chaudhary@brunel.ac.uk
11
3.3 Programme Directors
Dr Stephen Kershaw
Programme Director: Environmental
Science: Legislation and Management (LM)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 135
Tel: 01895 – 266094
Email: stephen.kershaw@brunel.ac.uk
Dr Abdul J Chaudhary
Programme Director: Environmental
Science: Pollution and Monitoring (PM)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 129
Tel: 01895 – 266112
Email: abdul.chaudhary@brunel.ac.uk
Dr Andrew Russell
Programme Director: Climate Change
Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 131
Tel: 01895 – 267303
Email: andrew.russell@brunel.ac.uk
Dr Edwin Routledge
Programme Director: Sustainability,
Entrepreneurship and Design (SusED)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 148
Tel: 01895 – 266299
Email: edwin.routledge@brunel.ac.uk
Dr Elisabete Silva
Programme Director: Toxicology and Risk
Assessment (TARA)
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 125
Tel: 01895 – 265330
Email: elisabete.silva@brunel.ac.uk
3.4 Programme Manager
Margaret Wescott
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 146
Tel: 01895 – 266105
Email: margaret.wescott@brunel.ac.uk
12
4
ADMINISTRATION
4.1 Enrolment
The Institute for the Environment now offers an additional intake in January from academic
session 2013/14 to recruit those students who are not able to meet the standard
September deadline. The January 2014 intake students will enrol onto a 12 month taught
programme from January to December with an additional 3 month dissertation element
writing up period till the following March. Hence January 2014 and subsequent January
intake students will:
 join the LM, PM and CCIS programmes in Term 2 with the September 2013 intake
students (hence within academic session 2013/14);
 progress through Term 2 and Term 3 together with the September 2013 intake
students;
 join and complete the programmes in Term 1 with the September 2014 intake
students (hence within academic session 2014/15);
 complete the writing up of the dissertation element within an additional three month
period, submitting the Dissertation Project by the end of March 2015. This is also
noting that they would have completed all their taught module assessments within a
12 month period.
Thus January intake students are given an extra 3 months to complete their dissertations
after completion of the taught course. Given the demands of the programmes, and noting
the range of assessments and their submission deadlines as detailed in the last column of
Table 1, we feel that it is prudent to provide January intake students with an additional
three months to write up and submit their dissertation by the end of the following March as
stated in Tables 2 and 3. Also given the range of skills and associated workshops during
the summer months, the proposed January intake scheme of studies is therefore longer
(15 months) than the September start (12 months).
January intake students start the programme in Term 2 of the academic session, and will
progress towards completing the remainder of the programmes always alongside an
existing or incoming cohort as detailed in Tables 2 and 3.
January intake students receive the same level of teaching, pastoral and administrative
support as all other full-time students (and where necessary, this will be extended further
such as in the case of support for the dissertation element). January intake students have
their own induction week (first week of Term 2).
In order to meet the UKBA immigration conditions for continuous study, we propose that
students should start working on their dissertations (IE5500) from Term 3 of the 2013/14
session, although we encourage students to begin thinking about dissertation topics as
soon as they join the MSc course. Students are also encouraged to attend relevant
training sessions offered by the Graduate School. January intake students will select their
research topics and be allocated a supervisor right at the start of Term 2, and start their
dissertations from Term 3 – submitting by March 2015.
The proposed delivery for a January intake is shown in Tables 2 and 3 which highlight how
this intake is co-taught alongside September 2013/14 and September 2014/15 intakes.
13
Table 1: Modules assessment patterns and weightings
Assessment Pattern
Module
Exam
weighting,%
Coursework
Weighting,%
Assessed in
Term
IE5601 Biosphere (15 credits)
30
70
1
IE5504 Environmental Hazards and Risk (15 credits)
30
70
1
IE5507 Environmental Monitoring (30 credits)
30
70
2
IE5508 Integrated Pollution (30 credits)
30
70
1
IE5509 Environmental Management (30 credits)
30
70
2
IE 5510 EU and International Environmental Law (30 credits)
–
100
1
IE5511 Research and Critical Skills (15 credits)
–
100
2
IE5512 Climate and Health (15 credits)
–
100
2
IE5513 Global Climate Change (15 credits)
30
70
1
IE5516 Sustainable Development in Practice (15 credits)
–
100
2
IE5518 Climate Change Policy and Law (15 credits)
–
100
1
IE5528 Responses to Climate Change (15 credits)
–
100
2
IE5500 Dissertation (60 credits)
100%
Submission date : September; Assessed in November (for Sep.
intake)
Submission date: March; Assessed in April (for Jan. intake)
Table 2: September and January intakes and delivery schedule
TERM 2
IE5504
IE5513
IE5508
IE5513
IE5508
Shared Modules
60 Credits
LM
IE5512
IE5507
IE5509
IE5528
IE5507
IE5509
IE5516
IE5516
IE5516
IE5511
IE5511
IE5511
Shared Modules
60 Credits
CCIS
PM
IE5601
IE5601
IE5518
LM
IE5510
IE5504
IE5504
IE5504
IE5513
IE5508
IE5513
IE5500 - Dissertation submission at the end of March (January intake)
PM
IE5504
AM
IE5510
IE5504
PM
Teaching Day 1
Teaching Day 2
September Intake - Academic session 2013/14
IE5518
PM
September Intake - Academic session 2014/15
IE5601
September - December
CCIS
IE5500 - Dissertation submission at the end of Sep. (Sep. intake)
IE5601
TERM
2
TERM 1
January - April
LM
Coursework submission, examinations period and January Intake
PM
Coursework submission and examinations period
September - December
CCIS
Academic Session 2014/15
TERM
3
Coursework submission and examinations period
TERM 1
AM
Time
Academic Session 2013/14
IE5508
Shared Modules
60
Cred.
60 Credits
60
Cred.
14
Table 3: September and January intake and delivery schedule
Term
Academic Session 2013/14
1
(September
– December
2013)






September 2013 intake
(Academic session 2013/14)
Induction (week 0)
IE5601 Biosphere
IE5504 Environmental Hazards and Risk
IE5508 Integrated Pollution
IE5510 EU & International Environmental Law
IE5513 Global Climate Change
IE5518 Climate Change Policy and Law
January 2014 intake
(Academic session 2013/14)
Coursework submission & Institute arranged Exam
Period
Examinations (week 16)
2
(January –
March 2014)






Induction (week 16)
IE5507 Environmental Monitoring
IE5509 Environmental Management
IE5511 Research and Critical Skills (Plus allocation of academic supervisors)
IE5512 Climate and Health
IE5516 Sustainable Development in Practice
IE5528 Responses to Climate Change
Coursework submission & Exam Period (weeks 32 - 34)

IE5500 Dissertation

IE5500 Dissertation
3
(June –
September
2014)
Selection of dissertation topic and
attendance of relevant training
sessions organised by the Graduate
School
Selection of dissertation topic and
attendance of relevant training
sessions organised by the Graduate
School
Academic Session 2014/15
Dissertation submission (20th September 2014)
September 2014 intake
(Academic session 2014/15)
Induction (week 0 )
1
(September
– December
2014)
2
(January –
March 2015)






IE5601 Biosphere
IE5504 Environmental Hazards and Risk
IE5508 Integrated Pollution
IE5510 EU & International Environmental Law
IE5513 Global Climate Change
IE5518 Climate Change Policy and Law
Coursework submission & Exam Period
Dissertation submission
(End of March 2015)
4.2 Timetable/Term Dates
The teaching timetable for each of the five postgraduate programmes will be provided
separately as part of your induction pack (induction week, 16th September 2013 – 20th
September 2013.
Formal teaching sessions will take place in Term 1 (12 weeks long) and in Term 2 (12
weeks long). The Term dates, showing vacation and examination periods, can be found in
Appendix 1.
4.3 Attendance Monitoring Policy
Regular attendance at lectures is expected of you. Lectures deliver core material that you
can build on to deliver coursework. If you miss a lecture, make sure that you obtain lecture
15
notes/presentation materials from the lecturer or download from Blackboard Learn,
because it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that you have studied all the material in
the syllabus for any given module block. You are strongly advised to attend every
teaching session; in a Masters’ programme there are a limited number of teaching
sessions per module block, and missing even one can reduce your appreciation of
the teaching material.
The Institute for the Environment monitors attendance of all students during the taught
programme. Students are required to sign the attendance list which is then held centrally.
This process is a valuable part of our mechanisms of student support. Module leader(s)
and Maggie Wescott must be informed if a student is unable to attend a class.
Attendance is important especially for those students who require a visa to attend a course
in the UK, under the UK Border Agency (UKBA) Tier 4 regulations; Tier 4 is the category
that applies to overseas students (defined as non-EU/EEA nationals). The University is
required to monitor the attendance and enrolment of students to whom it issues
Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for visa purposes, under the Tier 4 Points
Based System. Note that under this scheme, at least ten contact points throughout the
academic year are used to monitor the attendance and engagement of the students. The
engagement points will include coursework submissions, Institute arranged examinations,
University examinations, site visits, and meeting with personal tutors and will ideally be set
at regular intervals throughout the academic year.
Attendance lists allow IfE staff to assemble information about attendance that goes far
beyond the ten engagement points, since it applies to all students and allows us to know if
any particular student is missing classes. Therefore we can contact students to enquire if
there are any issues that are preventing attendance, and offer support as necessary. In
particular, if students have Mitigating Circumstances affecting attendance then students
must be aware of their responsibility to submit the evidence that can be considered by
IfE’s Mitigating Circumstances Panel.
In the case of students under Tier 4 regulations, if attendance is not complying with
requirements, students will be contacted in writing by letter and email, requesting a
response within 10 days of the date of the letter and email. If the student does not respond
within those 10 days, IfE will inform the Student Centre to withdraw the student from the
programme and inform the UKBA.
Signed attendance lists and copies of contact letters are filed in the IfE office. We
encourage students to contact either their personal tutor, or any member of IFE staff, if
there are issues affecting their attendance, so that we can provide appropriate support.
Useful links: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/studyingintheuk/
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/international/immigration/tier4
Brunel University Quality and Standards Office has also produced a document on Tier 4,
and this is copied below for your information.
16
4.4 Tier 4 of UKBA regulations
Policy Statement on Implementation of Tier 4 of the Points Based Scheme (PBS)
From 22nd February 2010, UK educational establishments that act as sponsors of non-EU
migrants under Tier 4, assume full compliance responsibilities.
Tier 4 migrants include international fee paying applicants and students, and, in some rare
cases, other individuals who are subject to immigration control in the UK, but who fall in to
the lower fee paying category.
In order to comply with the requirements of the UK Border Agency (UKBA), Brunel
University, for all Tier 4 students, must:
-
-
Issue Certificates of Acceptance of Studies (CAS)
Maintain up-to-date contact details
Collect and store passport details and proof of eligibility to study in the UK
Notify UKBA of any applicable changes in course of study and/or study status that
impact on course end date or mode of attendance, ie, periods of abeyance,
withdrawal or continuation beyond normal maximum programme duration
Monitor programme engagement
Report non-engagement to UKBA
Responsibility for these requirements will be shared between Brunel International,
Registry, Schools and the students, as follows:
Brunel International
- Carry out Key Sponsor Licence administration activities
- Issue CAS to applicants
- Keep Tier 4 information up to date on applicants’ records
- Provide Batch processing service of visa applications for current Brunel students
Registry / Student Centre
- Ensure required data is on the student record prior to and during Registration
- Report non-engagement and non-enrolment to UKBA
- Provide technical support for monitoring and reporting processes
- Issue CAS to current students to support visa extension applications
- Report changes in a student’s course status to the UKBA
- Withdraw /deregister a student who fails to attend
- Provide information to students about sponsor and student obligations
- Support the maintenance of up to date student contact information
School or other academic unit
- Provide 10 engagement points (as approved by the Academic Registrar) for each
applicable Tier 4 Brunel student and notify the students accordingly in writing for
each UG and PGT programme of study
- Monitor all Tier 4 UG, PGT and PGR international students against the
engagement points
- Follow up students who miss an engagement point
- Report individual student non-engagement to Registry
- Notify Registry in a timely manner to withdraw a student who fails to attend
- Inform students of monitoring and reporting requirements
17
-
Provide Registry in a timely manner with any approved amendments to a student’s
programme of study or mode of attendance
Student
- Apply for and obtain a relevant visa in accordance with UKBA rules and regulations
- Register at Brunel on the CAS stipulated course at the designated time
- Re-enrol annually on the CAS stipulated course
- Comply with the engagement model as notified by your School
- Maintain current and accurate contact information including UK address, email and
mobile phone records using the eVision portal
- Notify your school office of any non attendance in an appropriate time frame
- Explain any periods of absence, and submit evidence to support absences
- Report any relevant changes in circumstances that would be likely to affect your
visa situation
- Provide amended or updated passport and visa documentation
Monitoring and Reporting
All Brunel Tier 4 undergraduate and taught postgraduate students will be monitored
against 10 engagement points per year defined by each School, the first of which will be
registration or re-enrolment. The remaining 9 engagement points will be made up mainly
of assignment submission dates or examinations, but examples of other engagement
points include Institute arranged examinations, seminar attendance, tutor meetings or
School Office attendance days.
Postgraduate research students will be monitored against registration, attendance at
supervisory meetings (routinely every 6 weeks) and end of year progression.
Attendance of students on short courses of less than 12 weeks’ duration will be monitored
weekly; for courses longer than 12 weeks, attendance will be monitored monthly.
Students who fail to register within the permissible registration period will be reported to
UKBA. Subsequent to registration or re-enrolment, students who miss a series of agreed
engagement points within a reporting period will be reported to UKBA, following an attempt
by the School or academic unit to contact the student in writing at their notified address.
18
5
TEACHING & LEARNING
5.1 Mode of Study
Apart from the SuSED (only available in Full-time mode), the other four programmes are
delivered in either Full-time or Part–time modes.
In Full-time mode the programme is delivered over 1 year (3 Terms), with attendance on
two days (we may undertake joint teaching and field visits on a third day in some weeks)
per week during Term 1 and Term 2 (taught module blocks). Given satisfactory completion
of the taught module blocks, the dissertation will be undertaken in the summer term (Term
3). Do be aware that the programme is full time, and that there is a significant amount of
coursework, which accounts for a high proportion (70 to 100%) of the assessment in many
module blocks. Although you are only required to attend two (sometimes three) days per
week, you must make provision to have time to spend doing the coursework.
In Part-time mode the programme is delivered over 3 years (9 terms), with attendance on
one day (we may undertake joint teaching and field visits on a second day in some weeks)
per week during terms 1 and 2 (year one) and terms 4 and 5 (year two). Half of the taught
module blocks will therefore be taken in year one and the remaining half will be taken in
year two. Many part time students begin their dissertation after the first year of study, as
they may wish to attempt to complete their MSc in two years. However, under the
Programme Specifications, part-time students are allowed a further full year to complete
the dissertation, giving an overall period of 3 years maximum for the completion of the full
MSc programme.
Do be aware that there is a significant amount of coursework, which accounts for a high
proportion (70 to 100%) of the assessment in many module blocks. Although you are only
required to attend one (sometimes two) days per week, you must make provision to have
time to spend doing the coursework.
The term timetables, showing vacation and examination periods, can be found in Appendix
1. (Note, due to University timetabling, the Appendix may not be available until September
2013.
5.2 Scheme of Studies
Course descriptions relevant to the programme you are taking are provided as a separate
document to this handbook as Appendix 2, one for each of the five programmes, each
giving an outline of the programme (called Programme Specifications), showing the aims,
learning outcomes, and lists of module blocks for each; please look carefully at the one
relevant to you.
The LM and PM programmes consist of a combination of 15-credit and 30-credit module
blocks, so that in each programme you will be taking two 30-credit module blocks which
provide the principal focus of each degree programme. The CCIS programme comprises 8
taught module blocks of 15 credits each (total taught element 120 credits) and a
dissertation (60 credits). The 15-credit module blocks are largely shared. Diagrams in
Appendix 2 summarise the scheme of studies for Full-time and Part-time students,
respectively for the programme you are taking.
19
Note that for all three programmes (LM, PM and CCIS), one particular module block on
critical learning skills (IE5511), is taken by all students. This module block is designed to
develop your skills in areas that are not specific to any one subject, but are needed in order
to learn how to analyse literature, how to analyse data and develop writing skills etc. Our
experience has shown that all students benefit from such training and the topics covered
are also highly approved by our advisory panel.
The SuSED programme comprises a total of 8 taught blocks, divided into 6 compulsory
study blocks, 8 compulsory assessment blocks and 2 (out of 7) optional modular blocks, as
well as a dissertation. All taught study/modular blocks are worth 15 credits (total taught
element 120 credits), and the dissertations corresponds to 60 credits.
Students registered for the Enhanced MSc programme (who have passed Year 1) will
undertake a 6-month Professional Development period in the second year of this 18-month
MSc programme (60 credits); successful completion of which will result a final award (240
credits) of MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (with Professional
Development).
The TARA programme comprises a total of 8 taught module blocks, divided into 6
compulsory and 2 (out of 3) optional module blocks, as well as a dissertation. All taught
module blocks are worth 15 credits (total taught element 120 credits), and the dissertation
corresponds to 60 credits. The module blocks in TARA are delivered as a combination of
standard (throughout the term) and block delivery (delivered within 1-3 weeks, depending
on the module). Details of these are provided in Appendix 2. Diagrams in Appendix 2 also
summarise the scheme of studies for Full-time and Part-time students
Module block specifications are also provided in Appendix 2 for all five programmes,
where details are given of the learning outcomes, principal topics of study, mode of
delivery, assessments and recommended reading for each module block.
5.3 Method of Teaching and Assessment
The method of teaching will vary for each module block but will normally involve a contact
time of approximately 36 hours per 15 credit module block presented as a combination of
lectures, webinars, seminars/tutorials/practicals/field trips/posters, problem based learning
(PBL) sessions, group-work debates and presentations.
Assessment methods differ between module blocks, and are relevant to the learning
outcomes of each module block, with some module blocks having written examinations,
while others have a mixture of examinations and coursework; others have only
coursework. Do be aware that coursework forms a significant proportion of assessments,
and grades from coursework will have an effect on the overall grade for module blocks.
You are strongly advised to ensure that you make time available to complete coursework
assignments on time.
20
5.3.1
Recording of taught lecture/seminar sessions
Introduction

The University wishes to support all students in their studies, and recognises that
many students find it helpful to be able to record taught sessions. For the purposes
of this policy, these are defined as taught lectures and seminars.

We recognise that the practice of recording sessions may raise issues for staff and
students, particularly around the use of such recordings, and therefore clarity is
required in order to provide fairness and protect the interests of both staff and
students.

The recording of taught sessions is one of the ways in which the University makes
reasonable adjustments for disabled students under the terms of the Equality Act
2010. However, we consider it impractical to differentiate between students that fall
under the Equality Act and those that do not, and believe that all students may
benefit from the opportunity to record taught sessions. Indeed, the UK Quality Code
for Higher Education requires providers to provide an inclusive environment where
all students have access to equivalent learning opportunities (Chapter B3: Learning
and Teaching; Chapter B4: Student Support, Learning Resources and Careers
Education, Information, Advice and Guidance).

This policy sets out the expectations of both staff and students. The Disability and
Dyslexia Service Code of Practice contains additional guidance for those with a
disability-related need, and a shortened version (Recording of Taught Sessions
notice) is displayed in lecture rooms.
Protocol for recording of taught sessions

All students may, in principle, make audio recordings of taught sessions.

As a matter of courtesy, students should inform their lecturer that the
lecture/seminar is being recorded. The lecturer may then, as a courtesy to all
present, inform the class that an audio recording is being made.

For video recording/filming of lecture/seminar sessions students are required to
seek written permission from the lecturer concerned prior to the session.
Permission should be sought as early as possible, and no later than 5 working days
before the session. It is the student's responsibility to seek agreement, which is
given at the lecturer's discretion. The lecturer will also consider the views of other
participants before permission is given.

Any video recording/filming must be as discretely as possible, and record only the
content and not participants in the session.

It is the responsibility of the lecturer to announce at the beginning of the session
that it is being video recorded/filmed.

A lecturer may request at any time that a recording of any type is stopped, for
example if other students are uncomfortable with recordings being made, or where
sensitive material is being discussed.
21
Use of recordings (audio/video/film)

Recordings should not be reproduced, passed to or shared with any other person in
any format or via any type of media.

Recordings must be used solely for the individual's own personal study, and should
be destroyed at the end of the student's programme.

Recordings will be considered inadmissible in any complaint or appeals process.

The content of lectures and seminars remains the academic property of Brunel
University.

The use of recorded content in any assignments must be appropriately referenced
to avoid allegations of plagiarism, which is regarded as a serious disciplinary
offence (Senate Regulation 6).
Breach of this policy

If it is suspected that a session is being recorded without the appropriate consent
being obtained, or otherwise in breach of this policy, staff may confiscate the
recording equipment for the remainder of the session, and the student may be
subject to disciplinary action under Senate Regulation 6.

Sharing of any recorded material through any media is a breach of this policy and
will be subject to disciplinary action by the University.

Recording of one-to-one supervisory sessions is not covered by this policy. This is a
matter of agreement between an individual lecturer and student.
5.3.2
Recording of taught lecture/seminar sessions by disabled students
The University policy for Recording of Taught Sessions applies to all students. This Code
of Practice provides additional guidance for those with disability-related needs.
The University wishes to make every reasonable effort to assist disabled students. To this
end disabled students may record lectures/seminars in accordance with the guidelines
outlined below.
Adherence to these guidelines will ensure that the University is able to make reasonable
adjustments under the terms of the Equality Act (2010) in respect of providing equal
treatment and equal access to educational opportunity for all students regardless of their
disability status.
These guidelines cover both audio recordings and video recording/filming of taught
sessions.

Any student who has a disability-related difficulty in taking notes in taught sessions
should first seek advice from an Adviser in the Disability and Dyslexia Service.
22

If it is agreed that there is a disability-related need to record taught sessions then a
recommendation will be documented in a Support Profile and sent to the relevant
academic School.

For audio recordings, students do not have to seek permission, but should as a
matter of courtesy inform their lecturers that sessions are being recorded.

If it is agreed that there is a disability-related need to video/film taught sessions, the
student will be asked to meet with the appropriate academic staff to ensure that
filming is the most effective strategy to meet their learning needs.

Permission for video recording/filming of sessions must be obtained from the
relevant lecturer no later than 5 working days before recording.

Students should ensure that the process of recording is as discreet as possible. If
video recording/filming, students should ensure cameras are mounted on an
appropriate tripod and not hand-held, and positioned so as to record the contents of
the session only and not any of the attending students.

Should the situation arise whereby a lecturer does not think it suitable to give
permission to record, the student should be advised to contact an Adviser in the
Disability and Dyslexia Service to discuss alternative reasonable adjustments.

The recordings made must be used only for the student’s own personal study; and
should not be reproduced or passed to any other person in any format or via any
type of media as to do so would be a disciplinary offence.

Recordings will be considered inadmissible in any complaint or appeals process.

The content of lectures remains the academic property of Brunel University.

Advice regarding these guidelines can be sought from Advisers in the Disability and
Dyslexia Service, Tel 01895 265213, or disability@brunel.ac.uk
5.4 Roles & Responsibilities of Senior Tutors and Personal Tutors
The University requires that each postgraduate course student shall be assigned a
Personal Tutor to provide support during the student’s period of registration. The Senior
Tutor (or other person designated by the Head of School/Institute) is responsible for
ensuring that, at School/Institute level, all tutors are properly briefed. The Senior Tutor is
also responsible for ensuring that the School/Institute tutoring system is working
effectively. The Personal Tutor should provide help and support on academic matters and
on professional development, and should be able to direct tutees to help and support on
other matters such as personal development, social and other non-academic matters.
More information on the roles and responsibilities of Senior Tutors and Personal Tutors
can be found at:
https://intranet.brunel.ac.uk/student_services/senior%20tutor%20and%20tutors%20roles%
20and%20responsibilities.doc
23
6 EXAMINATIONS
For Term 1 assessment/module blocks that have examinations, the examinations will be
held in the first week of Term 2 (week 16; 6 th to 10th January 2014). There will be no
teaching during this week. Formal teaching will begin in week 17. Term 2
assessment/module blocks have examinations after the Easter vacation (weeks 32 to 34;
28th April to 16th May 2014), as shown in the Term Timetable (see Appendix 1). For Term
1 assessment/module blocks, you will receive interim grades following these examinations,
so you can get an idea of your progress during the course of the programme.
7
ASSESSMENT
The mode of assessment of each assessment/modular block is outlined in the
assessment/modular block outlines (Appendix 2) and is governed by Senate Regulations
3. Further details on assessments will be provided in the study guide for the respective
assessment/modular block. Assessment is composed of written examinations, written
coursework, oral presentations and a dissertation. Different assessment/module blocks use
various combinations of these forms of assessment depending on the purpose of each
assessment/module block; for example some have examinations only, while others have
coursework only, and others are a mixture. Please make sure you carefully read the
assessment requirements for each assessment/module block, since your Masters degree
grade will depend on this (see Appendices 3-8).
8
MARKING SYSTEM
This section of your handbook explains how your degree result will be calculated and the
rules for reassessment. It is a summary of the most important parts of the full degree
regulations (Senate Regulations 3 and 4) which are available on the University's intranet
site:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/rules/senateregs
WARNING! The University's regulations for postgraduate degree programmes and
awards changed for students entering programmes in or after 1 September 2013.
The guidance that follows describes these new regulations. Older handbooks may
contain information on the regulations which is not correct for your studies.
If you have any doubts about the regulations which apply to you, or need any
further information, please contact the School/Institute Office for advice.
8.1 Study Blocks, Assessment Blocks and Modular Blocks
The regulations describe the assessments in your programme as being divided into
'assessment blocks'. Assessment block refers to an assessment, or discrete group of
assessments, to which a credit-rating and Level have been assigned. Assessment
blocks combined with the associated block of study and teaching (a study block in the
24
Regulations) are commonly referred to as 'modules'. We will use the term module in the
following as that is the term you will usually hear.
Your degree is comprised of modules usually totalling 180 credits, including a dissertation
which has a volume of at least 60 credits. Where the credit value of the programme is
greater than 180 credits, this will be set out in the relevant programme specification. The
modules and their credit values will be set out in the programme specification for your
degree, which is available in Appendix 2 of Student Handbook.
The volumes of credits of assessment/modular blocks associated with an award shall
normally conform to the Levels and volumes of credits set out below:
Graduate
Certificate
At least 60 credits at Bachelors Level (FHEQ Level 6)
Graduate Diploma
At least 120 credits at Bachelors Level (FHEQ Level 6)
PGCert
60 credits at Masters Level (FHEQ Level 7)
PGDip
120 credits at Masters Level (FHEQ Level 7)
Masters Degree
At least 180 credits at Masters Level, and shall include a
dissertation assessment block comprising at least 60 credits at
Masters Level (FHEQ Level 7)
In the case of a student being recommended for an aegrotat award, a grade “AE” may be
assigned where mitigating circumstances have been accepted for an assessment.
The overall grade in an assessment block will be determined with reference to the
weightings assigned to each element of assessment in the approved outline.
Failure to meet the requirements to achieve a pass in any element of assessment which is
assessed on a pass/fail basis will result in a grade of F being assigned for the assessment
block overall for that attempt, regardless of the standard achieved in the other element/s of
assessment.
8.2 Postgraduate assessment: grading and Marking
Under the revised Senate Regulation 3 (September 2013 onwards), assessment of taught
postgraduate students is carried out using the grade descriptors listed at the end of this
section. Students are awarded grades or percentage marks in bands for module blocks
and individual elements of assessment within module blocks based on how well they
achieve the defined learning outcomes. The grade descriptors are in line with masters
level definitions set out in the QAA Framework for Higher Education Qualifications.
Under the revised regulations, student work may be either marked or graded at the point of
assessment, according to Institute/School policy. The Institute for the Environment has
adopted a policy where only marks will be awarded at the element level of assessment.
25
Where there are multiple elements of assessment in an assessment/modular block, each
element will be assigned a percentage weighted contribution to the overall outcome of the
assessment/modular block. The grade assigned overall at the module block level will be
determined by finding the simple weighted average of the marks or grades achieved at the
element level (each element either be marked or graded). Each assessment (other than
those assessed on a pass/fail basis) will be either graded or marked, as appropriate to the
type of assessment in question. The following Table (Table 4) indicates the relationship
between marks and grades.
Table 4: Marking System – Indicative mark band, grade and grade point (GP)
Indicative Mark Band
Grade
Grade Point
90 and above
A++
17
80-89
A+
16
73-79
A
15
70-72
A-
14
68-69
B+
13
63-67
B
12
60-62
B-
11
58-59
C+
10
53-57
C
9
50-52
C-
8
48-49
D+
7
43-47
D
6
40-42
D-
5
38-39
E+
4
33-37
E
3
30-32
E-
2
29 and below
F
1
Panels and Boards of Examiners are responsible for all aspects of the assessment of your
programme.
26
8.3 Core assessment
Individual assessments, or whole modules, may be defined as core. A core assessment
or core module is one which, if taken, must be passed at grade C- or better in order for
you to be eligible for the award in question. An assessment or module may be core for
one award and non-core for another award.
You should consult the programme specification for your programme to make sure that
you know which modules or individual assessments are core for your intended award.
Please note that core does not mean the same as compulsory. A compulsory
module is one which must be taken (i.e., not optional) in order to satisfy the
requirements for an award.
For all Masters degrees, the dissertation shall be designated a core assessment block.
8.4 Progression requirement
Any programme-specific progression requirements for individual programmes leading to
awards are set out in the relevant programme specification. If you are undertaking a Level
4 programme element, you must meet the requirements for successful completion of the
Level 4 programme element, as set out in the relevant programme specification, in order to
progress to the Masters-level parts of the programme. However, Brunel Level 4 credit is
not included in the profile or calculation used to determine your eligibility for a Masters
degree award.
8.5 Masters-level grade descriptors
Generic Masters-level Grade Descriptors
These generic grade descriptors are intended to be used as a tool throughout the
assessment process (in assessment design, marking/grading, moderation, feedback and
appraisal) for any assessment set at Masters Level in the University. They are designed to
show no disciplinary bias and are not intended to act as surrogate award or award
classification descriptors. The grade descriptors should be read in conjunction with the
learning outcomes associated with the assessment.
Grade A++
Work of exceptionally high quality, commensurate with publication in a highly esteemed
peer-reviewed journal. Clearly demonstrates a sophisticated, critical and thorough
understanding of the topic. Provides clear evidence of originality and clearly demonstrates
the ability to develop an independent, highly systematic and logical or insightful argument
or evaluation. Demonstrates exceptional ability in the appropriate use of the relevant
literature, theory, methodologies, practices, tools, etc., to analyse and synthesise at
Masters Level. Shows exceptional clarity, focus and cogency in communication.
Grade Band A (A+, A, A-)
Clearly demonstrates a sophisticated, critical and thorough understanding of the topic.
Provides evidence of originality of thought and clearly demonstrates the ability to develop
an independent, highly systematic and logical or insightful argument or evaluation.
27
Demonstrates excellence in the appropriate use of the relevant literature, theory,
methodologies, practices, tools, etc., to analyse and synthesise at Masters Level. Shows
excellent clarity, focus and cogency in communication.
Grade Band B (B+, B, B-)
Clearly demonstrates a well-developed, critical and comprehensive understanding of the
topic. Clearly demonstrates the ability to develop an independent, systematic and logical
or insightful argument or evaluation. Demonstrates a high degree of competence in the
appropriate use of the relevant literature, theory, methodologies, practices, tools, etc., to
analyse and synthesise at Masters Level. Shows a high level of clarity, focus and cogency
in communication.
Grade Band C (C+, C, C-)
Demonstrates a critical and substantial understanding of the topic. Demonstrates the
ability to develop an independent, systematic and logical or insightful argument or
evaluation. Demonstrates a significant degree of competence in the appropriate use of the
relevant literature, theory, methodologies, practices, tools, etc., to analyse and synthesise
at Masters Level. Provides evidence of clarity, focus and cogency in communication.
Grade Band D (D+, D, D-)
Provides evidence of some critical understanding of the topic. Demonstrates some ability
to develop a structured argument or evaluation. Demonstrates an acceptable degree of
competence in the appropriate use of the relevant literature, theory, methodologies,
practices, tools, etc., to analyse and synthesise, but not at Masters Level. Provides
evidence of effective communication.
Grade Band E (E+, E, E-)
Work that demonstrates significant weaknesses, but which provides strong evidence that
Grade D is within the reach of the student.
Grade F
Work that is unacceptable.
28
9
AWARD REQUIREMENTS
In accordance with Brunel University’s Senate Regulation 3, the total number of credits
required for the award of MSc (pass, merit or distinction) is 180 credits.
9.1 Requirements for a pass at Masters Level
Maximum volume of assessment/modular blocks (excluding dissertation) permitted in
the taught part
Grade Bands A, B and C
Grade Band D
(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B- (D+, D, D-)
, C+, C, C-)
Any
30
Grade Bands E and
F (E+, E, E-, F)
With grade below Cin any core block or
core element of
assessment
0
0
Minimum grade required in dissertation
C-
9.2 Requirements for merit at Masters Level
Maximum volume of assessment blocks (excluding dissertation) permitted in the taught
part
Grade Bands A, B and Grade Band D
C
(D+, D, D-)
(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B,
B-, C+, C, C-)
Grade Bands E and F With grade below Cin any core block or
(E+, E, E-, F)
core element of
assessment
Any
0
0
0
In addition, at least one of the following Rules (a) to (e) must be met:
Volume of (weighted module
block) grades at B- or better in
the taught part
GPA of weighted
module block grades
in the taught part
Minimum grade in
dissertation (all
rules)
Rule (a)
At least 33%
At least 11.5
B-
Rule (b)
At least 41%
At least 10.5
Rule (c)
At least 50%
At least 9.5
Rule (d)
At least 58%
At least 8.5
Rule (e)
At least 66%
At least 7.5
29
9.3 Requirements for distinction at Masters Level
Requirements for distinction at Masters level Maximum volume of assessment blocks
(excluding dissertation) permitted in the taught part
Grade Bands A, B and C
Grade Band
(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B- D (D+, D, D-)
, C+, C, C-)
Grade Bands E and F With grade below Cin any core block or
(E+, E, E-, F)
core element of
assessment
Any
0
0
0
In addition, at least one of the following Rules (a) to (e) must be met:
Volume of (weighted module
block) grades at A- or better in
the taught part
GPA of weighted
module block grades
in the taught part
Minimum grade in
dissertation (all
rules)
Rule (a)
At least 33%
At least 14.5
A-
Rule (b)
At least 41%
At least 13.5
Rule (c)
At least 50%
At least 12.5
Rule (d)
At least 58%
At least 11.5
Rule (e)
At least 66%
At least 10.5
Where the credit value of the modules included in the profile for an individual Masters
degree award is greater than 180, this is set out in the relevant Programme Specification.
Where an award includes a module which has zero credits, the achievement required in
that module for the successful completion of any award is set out in the relevant
programme specification
9.4 Reassessment
You will normally be entitled to reassessment on one occasion in Masters level taught part
modules totalling up to a maximum of 60 credits if you:
1.
2.
fail to achieve at your first attempt at least a grade of C- in any taught part
assessment block, including any modules designated ‘core’ under this Regulation;
or fail to achieve a 'pass' in any 'pass'/'fail' modules;
fail to achieve at your first attempt at least a grade of C- in any element of
assessment designated as 'core' under this Regulation; or fail to achieve a 'pass' in
any 'pass'/'fail' element of assessment.
30
If you do not achieve a grade of C- in your first attempt at a Masters level dissertation, you
will be entitled to revise and resubmit such a dissertation on one occasion provided that
you have achieved at least a grade of E- at the first attempt.
Entitlement to reassessment in Brunel Level 4 assessment blocks is set out in the relevant
programme specification.
The maximum grade which will be awarded in any Masters level module (including the
dissertation) subject to reassessment is C- (the threshold grade).
If you achieve a lower standard in reassessment than in first assessment, the higher grade
is counted when a Board of Examiners considers your eligibility for an award.
If, after reassessment, you still do not meet the minimum requirement for the award of a
Masters degree you may be eligible for a lower award (see 'Other awards', below).
Please note that the rules for reassessment are different in several ways from the
above if you have mitigating circumstances, accepted by the Board of Examiners,
for your performance in the original assessment. 'Mitigating circumstances' are
explained further in the relevant section of this handbook.
Timing of reassessment – full-time students
If you are studying full-time and are required to undertake up to 45 credits of reassessment
in taught modules (ie not your dissertation), you will normally complete these within
thirteen months of having started your masters-level study, if you are undertaking a oneyear full-time programme leading to a Masters degree. If you are required to undertake
more than 45 credits of reassessment, the Board of Examiners will make a decision about
the timing.
9.5 Other awards
If you do not successfully complete all the requirements to receive the award for which you
are aiming, you may still be eligible for an award in recognition of what you have achieved
on the programme. You will normally only receive one award: the highest award for which
you have met the requirements at the point that you leave the programme. This could be
either a:


Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip)
Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert)
The programme specification will explain if these awards are available, and if there are
any requirements relating to core assessments which must be met before you can
receive either of the above awards.
The normal requirements for a PGDip and PGCert are as follows:
31
9.5.1
Requirement for a Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip.)
Maximum volume of assessment blocks (excluding dissertation) permitted in the
taught part
Grade Bands A, B and C
Grade Band D
(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, (D+, D, D-)
C+, C, C-)
Grade Bands E and F With grade
below C- in any
(E+, E, E-, F)
core block or
core element of
assessment
Any
0
30
0
Where it is permitted to include the dissertation in the profile for a Postgraduate Diploma
award, this is set out in the relevant Programme Specification.
9.5.2
Requirement for a Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert.)
Maximum volume of assessment blocks (excluding dissertation) permitted in the
taught part
Grade Bands A, B and C
Grade Band D
(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, (D+, D, D-)
C+, C, C-)
Grade Bands E and F With grade
below C- in any
(E+, E, E-, F)
core block or
core element of
assessment
Any
0
15
0
32
10 DISSERTATION
Students are required to submit a dissertation for consideration for the award of an MSc
degree. The dissertation module block carries 60 credits and must be passed with a grade
C- or above to achieve an award of MSc, in addition to an appropriate grade profile in the
120 credits of taught module blocks.
Students will normally be allowed to begin work on their dissertation at the start of
registration. However, you will not be allowed to submit a dissertation until all taught parts
of the course have been completed to the satisfaction of the Board of Examiners.
A dissertation for the award of a Masters Degree should be submitted no later than the last
Friday of the 52nd week of the academic year of study. Any Masters student who fails to
submit by the submission deadline will be awarded a grade F for the dissertation. It will
then be at the discretion of the next Board of Examiners whether they are permitted to
resubmit (for a capped grade C) by a final re-submission deadline defined by the Board.
The deadline for submission for January intake is 31st March.
Where retrievals are required a student may be permitted a ‘new attempt’ at the discretion
of the Board of Examiners.
Where mitigating circumstances which relate to the dissertation are submitted by any
Masters student and accepted on behalf of the Mitigating Circumstances Panel by the
Chair, the period of extension to the submission deadline will not normally exceed 4 weeks
from the date of the original deadline. Where the specific circumstances of the student
may require a period of extension in excess of 4 weeks, the student’s submission shall be
considered by the Mitigating Circumstances Panel.
The module block specification for the Dissertation module block can be found in Appendix
2. Dissertations should be prepared in accordance with the Institute’s published guidelines
and submitted according to procedures described in those guidelines. Later in this
handbook other relevant information, including templates and forms, and the policy on late
submission on Masters Dissertations are given.
10.1 Overview of the dissertation process
The dissertation can be chosen from a list of titles proposed by Institute staff, or can be on
a topic of the student’s own choosing within a relevant field of environmental science, and
which draws upon the research and teaching interests of the Institute for the Environment.
Dissertation titles and plans must be initially approved in principal by the dissertation
supervisor. The dissertation title approval Form (see appendix 7) must be submitted to
either the module leader or the programme leader before commencement of the project.
The dissertation supervisor will be a member of staff who has agreed to supervise the
project and has relevant expertise. It is up to the student to arrange supervision of a
project of their own choosing, and may contact the module block co-ordinator (Professor
John Sumpter) if they need some guidance, in this regard.
Dissertations will involve in-depth analysis of primary or secondary data sources. Primary
sources include data from laboratory experiments or field investigations, questionnaires
etc., i.e. data generated by the student under the supervision of the supervisor. Secondary
data sources include published or unpublished datasets generated by someone other than
33
the student, for example the supervisor, another member of staff or collaborator, or data
available in the peer-reviewed or ‘grey’ literature (e.g. government reports, reports by
organizations external to Brunel University). As a student you are expected to show that
you thoroughly understand the area and offer your own views on the subject to support
that understanding i.e. you must still make a novel contribution the field when analysing
secondary data sources.
A student may also undertake a practical project externally, in collaboration with a third
party organisation however this must be approved by the Institute, and an appropriate
member of IfE staff will need to be satisfied that the external institution can provide
suitable facilities and local supervision at a satisfactory level. The Institute will appoint an
internal supervisor who will guide the student and liaise with the external institution. Parttime students in employment may, for example, undertake their project at their employer’s
premises.
It must be emphasised that projects involving analysis of secondary data sources (eg.
‘literature analyses’) are not easier alternatives to projects generating primary data (e.g.
lab-based); that is, both demand equally high levels of thought and effort in order to
succeed. Both must have a clear research question with specific aims and objectives, a
carefully considered methodology, with due consideration of any ethical issues that might
arise. Moreover, it needs to be pointed out that many students who are undertaking a
laboratory-based project often tend to concentrate too much on the experimental work,
and place too little emphasis on critical analysis during writing-up the dissertation; you
must organise your work so that your dissertation is a well-organised and authoritative
document.
10.2 Formal procedures
The objective of the dissertation is to bring the knowledge and understanding gained from
the taught module blocks to bear on a specific subject of interest to the student.
1.
Students will normally prepare a dissertation that consists of either (i) a critical
review of the literature on a suitable topic within a relevant area of environmental
science (ii) a practical project report. We encourage you to think about your
dissertation from the beginning of the course, and discuss with members of staff.
Some dissertations may be related to research projects run by members of staff.
The module block IE5511, which runs in Term 2, results in a research proposal,
normally submitted in the early part of Term 3. In most cases the proposal then
becomes the research project of the dissertation, but in some cases the proposal
does not lead to a dissertation project, and a new project will be developed for the
dissertation.
2.
The topic of the dissertation (i) must be approved by the dissertation supervisor,
and (ii) the approval Form must be submitted to either the module leader or the
programme leader.
3.
The dissertation is for the award of a Master's degree. It is expected to be of a high
quality and up-to-date in its information. Through your writing you are expected to
show that you thoroughly understand the field and are encouraged to offer your own
views on the subject (within the context of the current literature) to support that
understanding. Examples of previous dissertations can be made available upon
request.
4.
It is suggested that students select an appropriate topic by initially reading review
articles and relevant textbooks. A list of laboratory-based project titles will be given
34
to all students who should then contact the research group leader for further
information.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Once the topic has been agreed in principle you should read the relevant primary
research papers to gain an in depth knowledge of the area. A rough outline plan
should be made and discussed with and approved by your supervisor so that both
of you know what is to be achieved. The plan must also be approved by the
Teaching & Learning Committee (T&LC), where its suitability will also be examined.
This should be undertaken before the beginning of May (exact date will be
announced). This also applies to a laboratory-based project where a time plan
should be worked out beforehand. Self-discipline in completing interim/staged
deliverables (such as draft of chapters) is a key skill in managing the entire process
effectively and it will be included as an aspect of the assessment of the dissertation.
All students will be required to complete the Research Ethics Review Checklist and
Risk assessment prior to the commencement of their project (see attached forms
later in this handbook).
The Institute considers that the demonstration of management and personal skills
by the student as important, and such aspects usually show themselves in a
completed dissertation. Thus the final grade will reflect your organisational ability in
the quality of your dissertation.
Students should seek advice about their dissertation from their Brunel supervisor
and arrange mutually appropriate meetings throughout the time of production of the
dissertation. Please bear in mind that supervisors have other commitments,
including holidays. Therefore you cannot necessarily expect immediate attention for
your draft to be read instantly. You must plan well in advance, to allow for time to do
all the work and write the dissertation. Note that it generally takes longer than you
think to finalise a dissertation, especially with regard to the discussion section.
Dissertations should be between 8,000 and a maximum of 10,000 words,
excluding figures, tables and references. The lower range is expected for
laboratory-based dissertations. A word count (available on all word processors)
should be included at the beginning of the script.
TWO (hard) copies of your dissertation must be submitted for examination, together
with an electronic copy on CD or USB drive. See below, for regulations on
submission. Dissertations should be handed into the Institute Office (please note
opening hours are generally 9am to 5pm, but may vary depending on staff
commitments) and a receipt obtained which should be kept in a safe place. Both
copies must be identical and adequately bound.
All dissertations, after being marked and moderated internally, are read by the
External Examiner to confirm the final grades.
Final approval of a submitted dissertation rests with the External Examiner and the
Examination Board. You must not assume that any comments about your
dissertation made by your supervisor or any other member of the academic staff
prior to submission automatically mean that it will be approved and accepted.
Students obtaining a grade C or above in the dissertation module block will be
eligible for the award of MSc, conditional on having achieved the minimum grade
profile in the taught module blocks.
A student whose dissertation is graded fail may:
(a) be required to revise the dissertation on one further occasion only within the
time limit specified by the Board of Examiners which is normally within three to
six months,
(b) be failed.
35
10.3 Typical format for the dissertation
Title page
(see Appendix 9)
Declaration of own work (see Appendix 10)
Abstract
(1 page)
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
(Including list of figures and plates)
Glossary of terms (acronyms) if necessary
Introduction (Background of the project with a clear statement about the research
question, and the specific aims and objectives of the project)
Literature review
Methods (or Materials and Methods if lab-based project or survey etc.)
Results/Analysis - experimental results or other e.g. questionnaires, focus group reports
(including statistical analyses) or critical analysis of policy documents,
Discussion
Conclusions
References
Appendices
Abstract
The Abstract must not exceed one page of A4. The abstract must be self-contained and
have a beginning, a middle, and an end. The main results/findings should be clearly
summarised. Keep the text in the third person. If you use abbreviations, you should spell
it out first in full, e.g. Institute for the Environment (IfE).etc.
Introduction
This is an extremely important section. A good introduction should provide the necessary
background information and leave the reader with a clear idea of the problem to be tackled
enabling the reader to move onto the more detailed chapters to follow. Remember, you
must write the introduction in such a way that an intelligent, yet uninformed, person could
understand. An essential part of the introduction is to define clearly the overall aims and
objectives of the research project, and to describe how these were addressed in the
report. The style of writing should mimic a scientific review paper: it should be clear but
concise.
Literature Review
An extensive review, with a relevant amount of historical detail, should include all the
seminal work in the field and the importance of the topic within the relevant research field.
This will involve a literature survey, which need not be exhaustive but should concentrate
on the controversial aspects and those most relevant to the work described in the report.
It should not occupy a large part of the dissertation, unless undertaking a library-based or
policy-based project. Consider whether your dissertation were being read for the first time
by someone else with no specialised prior knowledge, e.g. a fellow classmate, would it all
be perfectly clear and make sense?
Research methods
This should describe the general basis of the research approach, including general
methods, statistical analysis, survey methods etc. Specific methods (or alterations to a
general method) used for a particular experiment, questionnaire, etc., can however be
included within in the appropriate chapter dealing with that experiment or survey, or in
individual methodology chapters. Your methodology needs to be clearly described and
justified.
36
Results
The main part of the thesis will depend on the subject matter. For example, a scientific
project with experimental or fieldwork will need to have chapters covering results and
statistical analysis. A more policy-based project will still require an explanation of the
research methods, and may also have results e.g. of questionnaires or interviews, and will
need to include an analysis of your research. Thus the results of your work are the factual
subject matter that will be used in the discussion to lead to conclusions related to the aim
of the dissertation.
Discussion
This section should attempt to tie together the results and what they indicate in a broader
context, including discussion in relation to the literature and implications beyond the
immediate confines of your specific project. It should also illustrate the extent to which the
original aims have been satisfied, any difficulties you have identified and what future work
is suggested. Note that discussion is often quite difficult to write. Discussion is where you
evaluate your results in relation to the aims of the project. You will need to make
comparisons between your work and published work, assessing similarities and
differences between your results and the published results. Therefore you will be able to
provide a perspective of your work in relation to knowledge in the field of study.
Conclusions
In this chapter it is important to summarise your key findings and overall conclusions,
particularly if you have used more than one chapter for your discussions. It should be
brief, with the final conclusions and/or recommendations clearly identifiable without having
to search for them. Bullet points might help if you have a large number of conclusions. It
should then draw wider conclusions. e.g. implications beyond the immediate case study or
survey. This is also where you put any recommendations for future research.
References
When writing reference lists it is important to use the correct format, giving all the details of
the book, article, etc. Although there are minor differences between publications (eg. in
whether the date is enclosed in brackets or not), the following format is more or less
standard.
Examples of references, showing slight differences in style:
ARTICLES, also called PAPERS
Hoodwink, A. and Phoney, B. 1990. The association between lines in the palm and life
expectancy. Journal of Astrology 97: 1-14
Good, B., Bad, S. T. and Ugly, I. 1996. Smoking and cancer. Cancer Research, 10: 25-30.
BOOKS:
Swot, P. 1987. How to be a Good Student. Brunel University Press, Uxbridge and New
York.
Sandberg, A.A. (1990): The Chromosomes in Human Cancer and Leukemia, 2nd Ed.
Elsevier Science Publishing Co., New York, pp. 50-61
BOOK CHAPTERS:
Ghez, C. (1991): The control of movement. In: Principles of Neural Science, 3rd Ed.,
Kandel, E.R., Schwartz, J.H., Jessel, T.M., eds. Elsevier Science Publishing, New York,
pp. 533-547.
Wiseguy, H. 1991. How to fudge results, p.30-37. In: Information and Presentation Skills.
Wizard, Z. (ed.) 1991. Oddly Press, London.
37
Names of journals can be abbreviated, provided you know the correct abbreviation (there
is a recognized list).
In the text, the references are cited either numerically (in order of appearance) or by
author name. For example the above papers would be referred to as Swot (1987);
Hoodwink and Phoney (1990); Good et al. (1996). Please note that there is varying use of
et al. The Harvard system allows for the names of three authors in the citation. For
example, Smith, Williams and Jones (2010); if there were 4 authors, that would be Smith
et al. (2010); but many journals now use that practice that et al. is for papers with more
than two authors. Thus a publication by Williams and Smith (2010) would be cited as
Williams and Smith (2010); but a paper by Williams, Smith and Jones (2010) would
become Smith et al. (2010). We do not mind which one of these arrangements you adopt,
because both are effectively correct; however it is good practice to be consistent, so
please use only one arrangement in any one piece of coursework. If you cite different
papers written in the same year by the same author, use a and b to distinguish between
the papers.
If one author cites work by another author which you are unable to verify, indicate the
original source in the bibliography:
Smith (1862) J. Molecular History 1, 12-15, cited by Jones (1975).
Put the reference to Jones (1975) in the bibliography in the appropriate place: do not cite
Smith (1862) because you have not seen this publication.
Abstracts must be identified as such.
UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL:
Unpublished material is cited as "personal communication" in the text but is not included in
the reference section. Unpublished material includes items such as lecture notes and
personal discussions. However permission must be obtained from the author for anything
included under this heading.
SECONDARY REFERENCING:
When using references which are quoted in the work of another author, and you have the
full reference to the original you must cite both references. Thus you give the original
reference, and say "cited in" and give the full reference where the citation occurred.
In general it is bad practice to use secondary sources, apart from being a lazy and suspect
way of deriving evidence. It may be that the citations are incorrect and this has on
occasions led to a sequence of errors, perpetuated by other authors who have not
bothered to check the original reference themselves. In any case the original may present
a fuller and clearer picture of the material of interest.
REFERENCING OF ELECTRONIC SOURCES:
When incorporating material from the Internet which has been published elsewhere, then
that paper copy is the original source and so should be your source. Information which is
on the Internet should be referred to as follows:
Beckelheimer, J. (1994). How do I cite URLs in a bibliography? (WWW document),
URL. http://www.nrissc.navy.mil/meta/bibliography.html
38
Make sure that this link is correct i.e. the URL is correct since there is nothing more
infuriating than the ‘file not found’ statement displayed by the browser. Also make sure that
there is no charge associated with accessing the material. The use of too many WWWbased references is discouraged.
Any work referred to in the text must be fully listed in the reference list at the end of the
report, and there must be no references in the list which are not used in the text of the
report. Do not include a “bibliography” (a list of publications on the topic); list only the
publications that you have referred to. Also, note that a long reference list of important
papers and books, together with careful use of these in the text, is impressive because it
tells the reader that you have done a lot of background checking on your work and shows
the thoroughness of your efforts; however you must make sure you use those references
effectively in the text – don’t put references in just for the sake of having a long reference
list. There is no excuse for a poor reference list. Failure to fully detail references will be
penalised in the marking. Remember if you have any problems with referencing it is
important to note that the object of the process is to provide as accurate a means as
possible for someone else to locate the exact source of material you are using.
Appendices
The use of appendices in library-based dissertations is actively discouraged. In laboratorybased dissertations, however, appendices may be used to list large sets of relevant raw
data which have been interpreted within the main text body. Any useful parts of the study
not directly relevant to the main theme may also be put in the Appendix, but should be
clearly referenced in the text. You may be penalised if the Appendix is over excessive and
irrelevant (i.e. unconnected with the main text). Under no circumstances should important
material be included in the Appendix instead of the main text, in order to stay within the
word limit. Please make sure that each Appendix has a short introductory section at the
beginning of each Appendix, to explain to the reader the contents of the appendix, and
where in the main body of the dissertation the relevant information is used.
Graphs
Graphical presentation of data is helpful to both you (in showing up unsuspected
relationships) and to the reader, but be careful. Ensure that the axes are correct, i.e. the
dependent variable must be on the Y-axis, logarithmic scales must be correct and
consistent in style, label axes clearly, quote regression formulae and significance of the
graph, make legends as self-explanatory as possible. Do not present the same data in the
form of both tables and graphs unless the two methods of presentation each are used to
demonstrate separate points of importance.
Illustrations other than graphs
The standard illustrations should approach that required for publication. Decide whether
photographs or line drawings give a better representation. Photographs often give only a
general impression; line drawings can show more detail. Include a caption with each
illustration, and insert them at appropriate points in the text. List photographs as ‘Plates’ in
a separate list at the beginning. Students are strongly discouraged from photocopying or
scanning in large quantities of ‘artwork’ derived from review articles or textbooks. This
degrades the quality of YOUR OWN work, and will be reflected in the assessment grade
and likely to be noted in the feedback sheets.
Tables
Each Table should be numbered and have a full descriptive heading placed above.
Column headings should state units of measurement. Avoid large, complicated tables. If
39
you have a large body of numerical data, put it in an Appendix, and provide an appropriate
description in the appendix, to make clear to the reader what this information is for.
Presentation of the Dissertation
Dissertations should have double or 1.5 line spacing throughout, except for table legends,
figure legends and references which can be single-spaced. Number ALL pages
consecutively. Include a list of contents and a brief (max. 1 page) abstract. All tables and
figures should have a title, be well annotated, have an explanatory legend placed below,
and their source quoted. Margins at the binding side should not be less than 4 cm wide to
ensure that text is not lost during binding. Other margins should be not less than 2 cm
wide. Remember to use a consistent format style for headings and sub-headings and text
throughout the report.
Look after your files!!!!
Managing your files, and protecting your data and text are your responsibility. Please
check your documents regularly for viruses, especially if you are using different computers
around Brunel and within external organisations, and remember to keep several backup
copies of your work. Allow plenty of time before submission in the event of unexpected
mechanical faults, delays, corrections etc., and remember to save your work regularly.
There is no remission of time given if you lose your material or cannot get your material
printed/copied in time for the submission deadline. Part of the learning objectives of the
dissertation is that you should get to grips with some basic elements of time management!
Photocopying and Binding
All reports submitted in the first instance must be securely bound in separate binders.
Comb-binding is recommended, and a comb-binder is available in the University print
room for a small charge. You should expect to pay for all photocopying.
10.4 Assessment procedure for dissertations
Two hard bound copies of the dissertations along with an electronic version saved on a
CD or a USB are expected to be submitted to the Institute office no later than the deadline
for submission (Friday 19th September 2014). If you failed to submit the dissertation on
time then you will be awarded a grade F unless you have a valid reason approved by the
MC Panel. The dissertation supervisor will also act as internal examiner and will assess
the overall quality of the dissertation, making use of the marking criteria detailed in
Appendix 8; (s)he will write a report commenting on the strength and weaknesses (where
appropriate) of the dissertation and make a recommendation as to the grade (distinction,
borderline pass/distinction, pass, borderline pass/fail, fail) to be awarded.
Protocol for the Assessment of Taught Masters Dissertations
The following protocol has been agreed by Learning and Teaching Committee for the
assessment of all taught Masters dissertations in the University from September 2007
onwards. Schools/Institute should ensure that appropriate structures are in place to
administer the assessment process as per the protocol.
Appropriate guidance on the assessment of dissertations (including clear
assessment criteria and appropriate grade descriptors) shall be provided to all
dissertation assessors before assessment commences;
2. Each dissertation shall be assessed by two internal assessors, one of whom must
have had no part in advising the student concerning their dissertation. The
1.
40
3.
4.
5.
6.
assessors for a dissertation shall be selected such that their combined knowledge
of the dissertation topic is appropriate;
Independent assessment forms, addressing all of the grading criteria and providing
an overall grade, shall be received by the dissertation co-ordinator from each
assessor separately and independently.
Where the two independently assessed grades differ, a final agreed grade, with
written justification for the agreed grade, shall be provided to the dissertation coordinator by the two assessors jointly;
In all cases where:
a. the two independent assessments differ by more than one grade in step 3
(even if they have reached agreement in step 4); or
b. the two assessors cannot reach agreement in step 4 (irrespective of the
grade difference in step 3),
a 3rd internal assessor shall be appointed to moderate the assessment and shall be
provided with both of the independent assessment forms from step 3, the joint
assessment form from step 4 and the dissertation itself. The 3 rd assessor will have
the opportunity to discuss the dissertation with the first two assessors and the
decision of the 3rd assessor, with documented justification, shall be final;
All paperwork associated with an individual dissertation assessment (including the
two independent assessment forms, the joint assessment form and, if moderation
employed, the moderation assessment form), as well as the dissertation itself, shall
be made available for scrutiny by the External Examiner(s).
10.5 Guidelines for supervisors
A supervisor must ensure that the student produces a dissertation that shows an extension
of knowledge in environmental science and technology or a clear understanding of the
application of fundamental knowledge to a specific problem.
The supervisor must obtain from the student, at the start of the project, a statement
outlining the aims of the dissertation, including an outline plan.
The supervisor along with the student must ensure that the outline plan is approved by the
programme leader prior to commencement and that the ethics checklist and risk
assessment are completed (see Appendices 11 and 12).
The supervisor should ensure that the student obtains appropriate help from Institute or
outside sources, to optimise the content of the dissertation.
The supervisor must make sufficient time available over the period of the preparation of
the dissertation to guide the student’s progress.
The supervisor (or internal supervisor where an external project is carried out) should act
as first marker to the project.
41
10.6 Dissertation Schedule
Dissertation Timetable – Term 3
Discuss with your supervisor and devise a schedule for your dissertation but also use this timetable as a guide to plan your dissertation writing process.
 You need to include in the schedule any other commitments you may have during the dissertation writing period (e.g. examination resits – week 49).
 Plan to submit your first draft at least four weeks before the submission date to get initial feedback from your supervisor.
 Submit the final draft at least 2 weeks before the submission date to get final feedback from your supervisor.
Description
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
40
41
Term 3
July/August
Week Number
42 43 44 45
46
August/September
Week Number
47 48 49 50 51
Selection of a project
 Select an original and manageable project
Literature review
 Collect background information & undertake literature
review
The detailed plan
 Devise a detailed plan of the dissertation
Initial writing
 Draft the various chapters/sections of the dissertation
 Undertake additional literature review if necessary
The first draft and initial feedback from your supervisor
 Compile chapters/sections to prepare the first draft
 Check the flow of the dissertation
 Get initial feedback from your supervisor
 Undertake any additional editing and research
Final draft and final feedback from your supervisor
 Check for errors
 Final proof-read
 Final feedback from your supervisor and final editing
 Prepare for submission
 Get the dissertation bound
0
Submission Date: 19th September 2014
TASK
May/June
Week Number
36 37 38 39
Submit your dissertation
NOTE: If you failed to submit your dissertation on time then you will be awarded a grade F unless you have a valid reason approved by the MCs panel.
42
10.7 Dissertation grade descriptors
To give you an idea of the kind of quality of work appropriate for marking grades of a
dissertation, below is a description of what may be expected at A, B, C, D and E levels.
Thus you may compare your own dissertation work with the text below, and this will give
you a general idea of the level of your work. Please note, however, that the final grade of a
dissertation is based on a range of factors, and so the text below is only a guide, not a
detailed indication of what you will score.
Grade A: Distinction
Exposition of the topic
The report will provide a thorough, authoritative and balanced account of (i) the relevant
research, or (ii) of the data generated during the research project – and its application
within the topic area with a minimum of factual scientific errors. It will be evidenced by (i) a
thorough literature review followed by a critical appreciation of the various aspects of the
topic detailing their strengths and limitations, or (ii) a clear presentation of the data
followed by a critical appreciation of the data detailing their value and relevance in the
scientific context of the topic. Plausible suggestions as to (i) possible future developments
in the field, or (ii) to future experimental work to further advance the project – are included.
Conceptual analysis
The report will reflect an excellent and thorough understanding of (i) the scientific
information, hypotheses and ideas drawn from the literature and will present a very strong
analysis of these aspects supported by a critical and coherent discussion, or (ii) of the
scientific relevance of the data in particular in the context of data drawn from other sources
and will present a very strong analysis of these aspects. The report will give a clear insight
into the topic area evidenced both through the way in which the report organises and
presents the analysis of its findings and through reflections on important aspects of the
literature. It will include a critical and coherent discussion of the data and their potential
application in a wider scientific context.
Presentation
The report will conform very closely to the house-style detailed above; it will be coherently
structured and will be to a high standard of written English with few typographical and
grammatical errors. Diagrammatic material will be relevant, original, clear and easy to
understand. The bibliography will be thorough, topical and will draw from a variety of
source material.
Independence
The student displays a high degree of self-reliance as evidenced by a clear and coherent
progress; student shows initiative and enthusiasm towards the project and experimental
work picking up techniques rapidly and implementing them effectively. Attendance is good
and there is a high level of punctuality; the student integrates well within the research
group.
NOTE, FOR A* GRADE THE DESCRIPTIONS ABOVE ARE SIMILAR, BUT AT A
HIGHER LEVEL, EQUIVALENT TO THE QUALITY OF A PEER-REVIEWED
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL PAPER.
Grade B: Merit
43
Exposition of the topic
The report will provide a detailed review of (i) relevant research and its application within
the topic area or (ii) of the data accumulated during the relevant research project detailing
its application in the topic area - with very few minor factual scientific errors. It will be
evidenced by (i) a literature review followed by a critical appreciation of the topic detailing
its strengths and limitations or (ii) a clear presentation of the data followed by a critical
analysis of the data. In either case, this will tend to be broad in its scope, with good clarity
and depth.
Conceptual analysis
The report will (i) present relevant ideas from the literature in the area and will attempt to
analyse these ideas in relation to the dissertation topic, or (ii) will reflect a very good
understanding of the scientific meaning of the data and their relevance in the context of
other data drawn from the literature. The discussion will have a clear critical dimension and
will end on a sound conclusion. Sensible suggestions as to future experimental strategies
are given.
Presentation
The report will broadly conform to the house-style and will have a logical structure. The
standard of written English in the report is high and easily comprehensible. Diagrammatic
material may on rare occasions rely on scanned-in images but figures will be described
and relevant. Raw data will be clearly presented and explained in a relevant and detailed
manner. The bibliography will be complete but may show some reliance on a few seminal
papers or review articles and/or may also rely on electronic sources such as the WWW.
Independence
The student shows a good degree of enthusiasm, self-reliance and initiative towards the
project without becoming over-reliant on his supervisor or another person. There is little
difficulty in picking up techniques and implementing them effectively. Attendance is good
and overall the student integrates effectively within the research group.
Grade C: Pass
Exposition of the topic
The report will provide an adequate review of (i) relevant research and its application
within the topic area or (ii) of the data accumulated during the relevant research project
detailing its application in the topic area – with some but not too many factual scientific
errors. It will be evidenced by (i) a literature review followed by a critical appreciation of
the topic detailing its strengths and limitations or (ii) a clear presentation of the data
followed by a critical analysis of the data. In either case, this will tend to be somewhat
limited in scope, clarity and depth.
Conceptual analysis
The report will (i) present relevant ideas from the literature in the area and will attempt to
analyse these ideas in relation to the dissertation topic, or (ii) will reflect a good
understanding of the scientific meaning of the data and their relevance in the context of
other data drawn from the literature. The discussion is likely to lack a strong critical
dimension but should show a fair attempt in the organisation and presentation of its
findings and provide a meaningful but somewhat superficial conclusion of the report.
Suggestions as to future experimental strategies are given but they may be too
speculative.
44
Presentation
The report will broadly conform to the house-style and will make a good attempt to
structure the material. Although there may be difficulties with the standard of written
English the report should be readable and should be comprehensible. Diagrammatic
material may rely too much on the inclusion of scanned-in images with poor explanation.
Raw data will be presented and explained but not necessarily in a relevant and detailed
manner. The bibliography will be adequate with some minor errors, but may depend too
much on few seminal papers or review articles and/or may rely too heavily on electronic
sources such as the WWW.
Independence
The student shows some degree of enthusiasm self-reliance and initiative towards the
project without becoming over-reliant on his supervisor or another person. There may be
some difficulties in picking up techniques and implementing them effectively. Attendance is
fair and overall the student makes a reasonable effort to integrate within the research
group.
Grade D: narrow fail
Exposition of the topic
The report will provide (i) coverage of the issues relevant to the dissertation, drawing on
some research and its application in the topic area, or (ii) an adequate account of the data
accumulated during the relevant research project - but this content will tend to be patchy,
superficial, lacking in cohesion and focus and will contain many factual and scientific
errors. Key works in the field that could have an impact on the dissertation, and
interpretation of the results, may be missing.
Conceptual analysis
The report will (i) present issues from the literature in the subject area but will be vague in
its interpretation, or (ii) may have little or no relevant data. Analysis of the main aspects will
be lacking with most of the literature work tending to be presentation of research with little,
if any, attempt to discuss the research and the rationale and implications of the work.
Analysis of data obtained will be lacking with little, if any, attempt to discuss the research
undertaken with respect to the literature and the work undertaken by others. Suggestions
as to future experimental strategies are either absent or trivial to irrelevant.
Presentation
The report will lack coherence in its structure and may contain a high number of
typographical and grammatical errors making the report difficult to read and to understand.
Diagrammatic material may depend heavily on the inclusion of non-original artwork and
the presentation of data may be inappropriate and confusing. Diagrams may be
overcomplicated and/or accompanied by poor annotation and legend. The bibliography
will be inadequate and/or incomplete with some key seminal publications missing and/or
with heavy reliance on electronic sources such as the WWW.
Independence
The student shows little degree of self-reliance, initiative and enthusiasm towards the
project and is over-reliant on the assistance of his supervisor or another person.
Attendance is poor and/or irregular and little effort is made in trying to integrate within the
research group. There may be some evidence of poor academic practice.
45
Grade E: Fail
Exposition of the topic
The report shows (i) little understanding of the issues relevant to the dissertation, often
drawing on irrelevant information which is used out of context in the topic area, or (ii) a
limited account of the data accumulated during the relevant research project - but this
content will tend to be patchy, superficial, lacking in cohesion and focus and will contain
many factual and scientific errors. Key works in the field that could have an impact on the
dissertation, and interpretation of the results, are missing. Clear evidence of poor
academic practice.
Conceptual analysis
The report will (i) present issues from the literature in the subject area but will be vague in
their interpretation and relevance, or (ii) may have little or no relevant data. Analysis of the
main aspects will be lacking with most of the literature work showing no clear attempt to
discuss the rationale and implications of the work in relation to the work of others. Analysis
of data obtained will be lacking with little, if any, attempt to discuss the research
undertaken with respect to the literature and the work undertaken by others. Suggestions
as to future experimental strategies are either absent or trivial to irrelevant.
Presentation
The report will lack coherence in its structure and may contain a high number of
typographical and grammatical errors making the report difficult to read and to understand.
Diagrammatic material may depend heavily on the inclusion of non-original artwork and
the presentation of data may be inappropriate and confusing.
Diagrams are
overcomplicated and/or accompanied by poor annotation and legend. The bibliography is
inadequate with key seminal publications missing and/or with heavy reliance on electronic
sources such as the WWW.
Independence
The student shows little degree of self-reliance, initiative and enthusiasm towards the
project and is over-reliant on the assistance of his supervisor or another person.
Attendance is poor and/or irregular and little effort is made in trying to integrate within the
research group.
NOTE THAT THE UNIVERSITY GRADE DESCRIPTORS, PROVIDED EARLIER IN THIS
STUDENT HANDBOOK ARE THE OFFICIAL STANDARDS FOR GRADING YOUR
WORK, AND WILL BE USED FOR ALL YOUR WORK: EXAMS, COURSEWORK AND
DISSERTATION.
46
11 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING PERFORMANCE
Assessment is an integral part of the teaching and learning experience in higher
education. Sometimes, for good reason and through no fault of your own, you may not be
able to undertake or complete an assessment at the appropriate time. Sometimes, your
academic performance in an assessment may be significantly affected by unforeseen
events, such that you are not able to demonstrate your true abilities in the assessment. If
this happens to you, you must submit a Mitigating Circumstances Form to your School
(see section 11.5). It is your responsibility to do this within the time limits described
below. This will allow the University to ensure that appropriate decisions are taken fairly.
PLEASE READ this guidance and follow the procedures – ignorance of the mitigating
circumstances guidance and procedures is NOT an acceptable mitigating circumstance!
The University's policies on students with mitigating circumstances are set out in detail in
Senate Regulations SR4.30-4.51.
11.1 Overview
A mitigating circumstance is defined by the University as:
“a serious or significant event, and its consequences, which have significantly
impaired the academic performance of a student in one or more assessed
activities possibly over more than one term. Mitigating circumstances may
include medical matters or events directly affecting someone other than the
student…” (SR4.31)
When the University looks at any claim of mitigating circumstances from you, it will act on
the following principles:

You are responsible for informing your School/Institute of any circumstances that
you want to be taken into account. You must do this by submitting a Mitigating
Circumstances Form (see Appendix 13), in advance if possible, but certainly no
later than seven days after the deadline or exam or other assessment event;

If you submit a Mitigating Circumstances Form late (more than 7 days after the
assessment date) it must be accompanied by an explanation for its lateness,
otherwise your claim will be rejected;

Appropriate supporting evidence must also be submitted with the form (or
separately if there is a delay in obtaining the evidence). Without supporting
evidence, your claim of mitigating circumstances will normally be rejected;

All information provided by you will be regarded as confidential (i.e., strictly
restricted to those who need to know in order to reach a decision).
All cases will be formally and carefully considered, but not all will be accepted. Some
circumstances are clearly beyond the control of students, but some are not. For example,
the normal pressures and challenges of student life are unlikely to be accepted as
mitigating circumstances. Likewise, if a student could reasonably have foreseen the
circumstances, they are unlikely to be accepted.
47
11.2 Examples
Below are some examples of typical circumstances that would be accepted, some that
might be accepted, and some that would not normally be accepted:
Examples of circumstances which would normally be accepted (with evidence):
 Bereavement involving a relative or friend to whom you were close
 Serious illness or accident resulting in your hospitalisation, or other medical emergency
 Serious infectious disease
 Childbirth, or pregnancy complications leading to your hospitalisation.
 Jury service
Examples of circumstances which might be accepted (with evidence):
 Planned medical operation (if the School is notified before the deadline or assessment
event)
 Planned hospital tests (if the School is notified before the deadline or assessment event)
 Victim of crime (with Police crime reference number)
 Significant accident, injury, acute ailment or condition requiring medical or other
professional attention
 Private or public transport failure leading to delays of more than one hour
Examples of circumstances that would NOT normally be accepted as mitigating
circumstances:
 Illness in the family (unless it’s a dependant)
 Exam nerves
 Feeling generally anxious, depressed or stressed (where this is not a diagnosis of a
mental health condition)
 Clash of study or assessment with paid employment
 Minor accidents or injuries, depending, of course, what they are
 Minor conditions (e.g. cold, cough, throat infection)
 Childcare problems that could have been anticipated
 Pregnancy
 Day-to-day domestic problems
 Mistaking a deadline, misreading an exam timetable or other time management
problems (including alarm not going off)
 Attending a wedding
 Religious festivals or similar commitments
 Private or public transport failure leading to delays of less than 1 hour
 General financial problems
48
 Legal problems (unless required to attend Court on the day of an examination or
assessment)
 Planned absence due to holidays
 Accommodation changes
 Notes destroyed or stolen (unless supported by a fire or police report)
 Last minute computing equipment problems (discs, machines, printers, viruses)
 Handing-in problems, including failure by a third party to submit work on your behalf
 Weather (unless severe conditions)
 Ignorance of the Regulations or examination/assessment arrangements.
 More than one assessment due in at the same time
If your circumstances are in this last group of examples (circumstances that would NOT
normally be accepted) but you still want to submit a claim, you should discuss this with the
Chair of the Teaching & Learning Committee (T&LC) in the Institute for the Environment
first.
PLEASE NOTE: It is always advisable to discuss problems affecting your studies or
assessment with us as soon as you are aware of them – it may well be that we can
agree arrangements with you to deal with the problem more effectively and in good time,
without having to resort to the mitigating circumstances process (which is often concerned
with remedial action after the event).
11.3 Supporting evidence (see also section 11.4)
You should include supporting documentary evidence (e.g. a medical certificate giving the
nature and duration of an illness and its treatment) with your Mitigating Circumstances
Form. If you fail to provide supporting evidence in reasonable detail your claim may
not be accepted. Supporting evidence you submit should confirm the following:
 The nature of the circumstances
 When and for how long you were affected by the circumstances
 How the circumstances were likely to affect/have affected your ability to study or perform
properly in assessments
Depending on the nature of the supporting evidence, it may only be able to confirm some
and not all of the above points – for example a death certificate will only confirm the nature
and timing of the circumstances, whereas a letter from a health professional might be able
to give information (a professional opinion) on all of the above points.
Examples of acceptable documentary evidence
 Bereavement - copy of death certificate
 Travel delays - letter from transport company
 Legal – letter from police, lawyer or Court
 Medical - letter or medical certificate from hospital, GP or the University Health
Centre (but see 11.3.1 below)
49
See also under Submitting mitigating circumstances (section 11.5).
The University normally expects you to submit original documents in support of your
request for Mitigating Circumstances. If you cannot do this immediately, you may submit a
copy of the document(s) concerned, with the original(s) to follow, either by post or by
taking it in person to your School. Any documents sent by post will be returned as soon as
possible. Any decision made by your School based on copied documents will be
preliminary, and subject to receipt of original documents (and verification, where
necessary). Failure to supply original documents within a reasonable period of time may
result in your request being rejected.
Please note that the submission of falsified documents in support of Mitigating
Circumstances is a disciplinary offence and where, following initial scrutiny, there remains
reasonable doubt that documents are genuine the University will commence disciplinary
procedures in accordance with Senate Regulation 6. This could result in expulsion from
the University if falsification is established. The University will also report such matters to
the police who may take action of their own.
11.3.1 Self-certification of Illness
If your mitigating circumstances are based, in whole or in part on illnesses which have
lasted for up to 7 days, you do not need to submit a medical certificate/doctor’s note.
Instead, you should complete a Student Self-certification of Illness Form (see Appendix
14) and at https://intranet.brunel.ac.uk/registry/QS/handbook.shtml which covers up to the
first 7 days of illness and submit this form with your Mitigating Circumstances Form (see
Appendix 13). For the first 7 days of an illness, your self-certification will have equal status
to a doctor’s note.
Please note that the Student Self-certification of Illness Form requires you to sign
the following declaration:
I declare that the above information is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I
understand that to give false information could result in disciplinary action against me in
accordance with Senate Regulation 6.
11.3.2 Medical supporting evidence
PLEASE NOTE: a note or letter from a doctor simply stating the fact that you have been to
see them is not useful supporting evidence.
In order to allow the University to properly consider your case, a note or letter from a GP or
other doctor would include: a diagnosis, details of treatment or referral, dates of illness or
condition, and ideally a professional opinion on how your illness or condition would have
affected your ability to study or perform properly in assessments. Please follow the
protocol below:
For illnesses that lasted for up to 7 days: please complete a Self-Certification of Illness
form as described in section 11.3.1 above and submit it along with your Mitigating
Circumstances Form – please do not request a medical note from the University Medical
Centre.
50
For illnesses which have lasted (continuously) for more than 7 days (or your
doctor is of the opinion that it will): please request a medical certificate/note from your
doctor at the time of your visit to the doctor and submit it along with a Student SelfCertification of Illness form (for the first 7 days) and your Mitigating Circumstances Form.
Please note that your doctor will be unable to issue a certificate if you were not seen by
him/her during your illness.
For significant, ongoing medical conditions that are being monitored or treated by
the University Medical Centre: please complete a Medical Disclosure Form which will
give permission for the University Medical Centre to share information with the Mitigating
Circumstances Panel. This form is available from the Institute for the Environment Office
and, once completed, must be submitted with your Mitigating Circumstances Form. Please
do not take the Medical Disclosure Form to the University Medical Centre – it will be
refused.
For significant, ongoing medical conditions that are being monitored or treated by a
doctor not in the University Medical Centre: please ask your doctor to write a letter
setting out:





The condition
The symptoms
When the condition arose or was diagnosed
The impact on your ability to study or complete the assessment(s) on time
Whether any acute episode is associated with the condition and whether you have
suffered an acute episode during the time the claim refers to.
11.4 Students with disabilities or chronic medical conditions
If you have a disability or a chronic medical condition and feel that this affects your studies,
you are encouraged to contact the Disability and Dyslexia Service (DDS) as soon as you
arrive at University in order to arrange support. This support is designed to enable you to
meet deadlines, and ensure your condition does not affect your performance. Being a
disabled student (including having a chronic medical condition) in itself is very unlikely to
be accepted as a mitigating circumstance, as the likely impact on your studies is
foreseeable as soon as the disability is known. However, there may be additional
circumstances that affect your performance or prevent you from completing an
assessment on time. Some examples are:




A change in circumstances which means that the support you already get no longer
meets your needs (such as an unforeseen worsening of symptoms, or an acute
flare-up)
A delay in setting up support
A recent diagnosis of a condition where there is not enough time to set up support
A course of treatment which has had unforeseen side effects that affect your
studies.
Please remember that it is your responsibility to inform the University about a disability or
chronic medical condition in a timely manner such that reasonable adjustments can be
agreed and implemented for you – mitigating circumstances can only come into play when
things go wrong unexpectedly.
51
11.4.1 Supporting evidence for students with disabilities or chronic medical conditions
 If the circumstance relates to a medical condition, mental health condition or late
diagnosis, the evidence must state the following:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
The condition
The symptoms
When the condition arose or was diagnosed
The impact on your ability to study or complete the assessment(s) on time
Whether any acute episode is associated with the condition and
Whether it was known to your medical practitioner
Whether you have suffered an acute episode during the time the claim refers to.
The evidence should be a letter from a GP, the University Medical Centre (but see section
11.3) or a hospital; in the case of a late diagnosis for a specific learning difficulty, such as
dyslexia, a diagnostic report is required. The Disability and Dyslexia Service may also be
able to write a supporting letter.
 If the circumstance relates to problems with your support you should follow the
guidance in section 11.3. The Disability and Dyslexia Service may be able to write
a supporting letter.
11.5 Submitting mitigating circumstances
The responsibility for notifying the Mitigating Circumstances Panel and Board of
Examiners of possible mitigating circumstances lies with you, the student:
All mitigating circumstances submissions must be made in written form to the Institute
for the Environment office, no later than 7 days after the assessment event or
assessment submission deadline to which it pertains. All submissions must be made using
the Mitigating Circumstances Form (appendix 13) available from the Institute for the
Environment Office.

Please ensure, in filling in the form, that you are clear about the nature of your
circumstances, when and for how long they affected you, how your ability to
study or perform well in assessments was affected and specify which
assessments were affected.

If your Mitigating Circumstances Form is submitted late and you do not provide a
satisfactory explanation for the lateness it will NOT be accepted.
All mitigating circumstances submissions should, wherever possible, be supported by
documentary evidence (see section 11.3) which can be verified by the University
through contact with a third party. The University may routinely confirm the authenticity
of documents submitted as evidence of mitigating circumstances by contacting directly
the organisation which issued the document concerned. You should indicate in your
submission any conditions of confidentiality which you ask to be observed by
the University in making such enquiries.
If your mitigating circumstances are related to illness or other medical condition,
please read, and follow the instructions in, sections 11.3.1 and 11.3.2 on medical
supporting evidence.
If you feel that your mitigating circumstances are private and sensitive, you are
52
encouraged to discuss them in the first instance with a member of staff who you find
most appropriate, normally your Personal Tutor or the Chair of the Teaching &
Learning Committee (T&LC), who may advise on the nature of the information to be
conveyed to the Board. Information you disclose will be treated in confidence by all
concerned.
You should note that reluctance to disclose information in a timely manner, or
the inability of the University to verify the authenticity of documents submitted
as evidence of mitigating circumstances, may mean that the Mitigating
Circumstances Panel has insufficient information either to accept your
mitigating circumstances or judge correctly their severity.
The adjustment of deadlines for the submission of assessed coursework affected by
mitigating circumstances is determined in accordance with a University-wide Policy on
Late Submission Penalties – described elsewhere in this student handbook.
11.6 Consideration of mitigating circumstances submissions
11.6.1 Role of the Mitigating Circumstances Panel
Students’ written submissions are considered by a Mitigating Circumstances Panel. This
Panel determines whether a submission concerning mitigating circumstances should be
accepted or not. Where mitigating circumstances are accepted, the Panel makes
recommendations in a report to the relevant Board of Examiners (with the student's name
anonymised) concerning the assessments affected and the likely severity of the impact on
the student.
11.6.2 Action by the Board of Examiners
The Board of Examiners will receive the recommendation of the Mitigating Circumstances
Panel and, taking into account your profile of results, decide on the action to be taken.
Senate Regulation 4 defines the range of actions Boards of Examiners may take in
response to accepted mitigating circumstances, as follows.
SR4.46-4.48
4.46 The Board of Examiners may determine to take any of the following actions in
respect of accepted mitigating circumstances:
a the Board may set aside any provisional grade/mark already assigned, and allow
the student a new attempt in the relevant assessment(s) according to an
appropriate schedule to be determined by the Board. The student will be eligible for
an uncapped grade or mark if the assessment affected was a first attempt;
b the Board may assign grades to elements of assessment where mitigating
circumstances have been accepted. The grades assigned are to be used in the
calculation of grade point averages (in the case of undergraduate awards) and in
grade profiles in the normal manner. Grades will not normally be assigned in this
manner unless there are result(s) available in at least one other element of
assessment in the same assessment block to guide the Board. Grades will not
normally be assigned by Boards in this manner in assessment blocks totalling more
than one third of the credits at any given Level;
53
c where a student is discontinuing with a programme and neither a new attempt nor
the assigning of a grade is appropriate or possible, the Board may assign a grade P
in element(s) of assessment in order to enable a student to achieve an aegrotat
award of a CertHE, DipHE or an unclassified degree award. Proceeding in this
manner should reflect the judgement of the examiners that, on the basis of the
evidence available to them, the student would have achieved at least a threshold
standard in the relevant elements of assessment had these not been affected by
mitigating circumstances. Credit assigned a P grade will normally not be recognised
by the University as part of an application for admission with accreditation of prior
learning. Aegrotat awards shall be clearly presented as such and will not be
assigned a classification where this is normally available.
4.47 In extreme cases, where a Board considers that, in the light of the mitigating
circumstances, the constraints set out in the previous Regulation are not appropriate
the Board should present its recommendations to the Chair of Learning and Teaching
Committee for consideration and approval on behalf of Senate.
4.48 Grades assigned due to mitigation or credits assigned to enable an aegrotat pass
shall be indicated as such in student transcripts.
12 APPEALS
12.1 Appeals concerning academic assessment
An Academic Appeal is a procedure that allows a student to formally challenge the
decisions of a Panel or Board of Examiners or of Research degree Examiners on specified
grounds (see Grounds for Appeal below). The procedure for making an appeal is
summarised below, and is also set out in the Senate Regulations, specifically Senate
Regulation 12.
When submitting an appeal you must stick to the published timeframes. If you think that
you have grounds for appeal you should try to see if you are able to resolve the matter by
talking to your personal tutor or the senior tutor first (but please do not delay submitting
your appeal to your School). You must submit your appeal as an individual – group
appeals will not be permitted or accepted. You cannot appeal solely because the result
you have achieved is worse than you would have wished, or worse than you feel you
deserve; you cannot challenge academic judgement (SR12.20).
The University’s procedures for appeals against academic assessment are set out in
Senate Regulation 12, a copy of which can be obtained from the Registry, or from your
School office. The Regulation is also available on the Brunel website and can be found at
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senateregulations/sr12-academic-appeals
12.2 Before making an appeal
Many concerns about results can be resolved simply by contacting your personal tutor,
module block leader, course director or deputy head of teaching to ask for clarification. If
you have a grievance relating to assessment the first step is to contact the module block
leader; this means you should attempt to resolve the matter at a local level within the
Institute. It may be the case that the Institute is able to settle the matter to your satisfaction
54
without the need to launch an academic appeal. If you are not satisfied with the outcome
of the informal process then you have a right to launch an academic appeal.
The
procedures for academic appeals have two main phases. The first is internal resolution by
your home School or Institute. Once this has been completed academic appeals may be
considered by the University’s Academic Appeals Committee. In any case you must
submit a form to seek internal resolution within 14 days of the notification of your
results.
12.3 Grounds for an academic appeal
A request for an academic appeal can be made on one or more of the following grounds
(SR12.19):
a)
b)
c)
That there exist circumstances materially affecting the student’s performance which
were not known to the Examiners or progress review when the decision was taken
and which it was not reasonably practicable for the student to have made known to
the Examiners or progress review beforehand;
That there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of examinations and/or other
assessment procedures, including assessment of coursework, of such a nature as to
create a reasonable possibility that the result might have been different had they not
occurred;
(i) that there is evidence of prejudice or bias on the part of one or more Examiners or
members of staff conducting a progress review; (ii) that there is evidence of
inadequate assessment on the part of one or more Examiners or members of staff
conducting a progress review.
A note on appeals based on ‘mitigating circumstances’
It is not normally acceptable for mitigating circumstances to be submitted and considered
after you have received your results. The Academic Appeals Committee will normally only
consider appeals submitted based on this ground when a student can demonstrate that
they could not have submitted them at the appropriate time. You are reminded that all
mitigating circumstances claims should be submitted to your School office as close as
possible to the time that the circumstances occurred, and no later than seven days after
the assessment affected. Please see your Handbook for further guidance.
If you are in any doubt about whether something might affect your performance, tell your
School about it at the appropriate time.
Information on how to submit claims for mitigating circumstances can be found in a
different section of this Handbook. The University’s general regulations are set out in
Senate Regulation 4, which can be found at
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senateregulations/assessment-of-students-on-taught-programmes.
Appealing against the outcome of your final award
A student who is in the final year of study or who has been examined and awarded in the
case of a research degree, who wishes to appeal against the outcome of the decision to
make their final award must indicate their intention to do so before the date of their degree
congregation. In accordance with SR12.4, once an award has been conferred, either at a
degree congregation or in absentia, a student will not normally be able to submit or
proceed with internal resolution or an academic appeal. Once a request for Internal
Resolution has been submitted, any award which is relevant to the request will not be
conferred until the internal resolution and/or any subsequent appeal processes have been
55
concluded. This means that you will not be able to attend the graduation ceremony whilst
the appeal remains unresolved.
Challenges to academic judgement
You cannot appeal solely because the result you have achieved is worse than you would
have wished, or worse than you feel you deserve. In accordance with SR12.20, no appeal
shall be allowed on the basis that, although the decision of the examiners was properly
made, you believe that the Examiners or assessors conducting a progress review have
erred in their judgement of the academic standard you achieved.
12.4 Making an academic appeal
Before making an appeal, it is important that you understand the reason for the grade
awarded, so you must first discuss the grade with the person who marked the work. If this
does not lead to a satisfactory agreement that the grade is correct then the appeal process
may be used. The procedure for submitting an academic appeal is completed in two
stages. The first is Internal Resolution, which is considered by your home School or
Institute. Only when this stage has been completed can you submit an academic appeal,
which is the second stage of the process.
12.4.1 Stage 1 – Internal Resolution
You must submit a request for Internal Resolution (see Appendix 15) within 10 working
days of the notification of your results (notification includes the publication of results
through the internet or dispatch of notification of results by post). Schools or Institutes will
normally offer you a meeting at which your request can be discussed further, and will
normally aim to determine the outcome of your request within 10 working days of receipt of
your request.
There is a University-wide procedure for dealing with requests for Internal Resolution,
which your School will operate. You must make your request using the standard ‘Request
for Internal Resolution’ form, which will be available from your School or Institute. You
should consult your School/Institute Handbook for details.
The person responsible of internal resolution, normally the Deputy Head of Teaching, will
write to you to acknowledge receipt of your internal resolution form. You will be notified
about the Institute for the Environment’s decision on a pro-forma “completion of internal
resolution form” within a maximum period of 14 days. The pro-forma will contain
information about the grounds/reasons for the decision and what you need to do next if
you are unhappy with the outcome of the internal resolution (see Appendix 15).
12.4.2 Stage 2 – The Academic Appeals Committee
If your request for Internal Resolution does not result in the outcome you had hoped for,
you can then submit an appeal to the Registry for consideration by the Academic Appeals
Committee. You must submit your request within 15 working days of the notification of
the outcome of Internal Resolution. Students who submit a case for consideration by the
Academic Appeals Committee shall normally be asked to provide a copy of the outcome of
Internal Resolution.
56
Appeals must be made in writing using the ‘Academic Appeals (from June 2013)’ form
(appendix 16) and sent to either academic-appeals@brunel.ac.uk via email, or posted to
the Clerk to the Academic Appeals Committee, c/o Room 209, Wilfred Brown Building,
Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH. The form can be found
at http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/appeals-and-complaints.
Sources of Information and Advice:
You should consult the handbook for your programme provided by your School or Institute.
You may also ask for additional information on processes from your School’s or Institute’s
office.
The Appeals and Complaints section of the University website contains more detailed
information, as well as the Academic Appeals form. You can access this page via
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/appeals-and-complaints.
You may also wish to speak to the Advice and Representation Centre (ARC) of the Union
of Brunel Students (UBS). They can be contacted via advice@brunel.ac.uk.
You should remember that it is your responsibility to ensure that your case is
submitted within the permitted deadlines for each stage of the process.
Appendices 15 & 16 are the forms that are used in appeals. If you wish to make an
appeal, please extract these forms and complete them, then submit to the IfE Office.
If you have any problems with this procedure, please contact the Chair of the
Teaching & Learning Committee (T&LC) of IfE first.
57
13 SUBMISSION OF WORK AND LATE SUBMISSION PENALTIES
13.1 Definition of submission deadlines
Submission deadlines are the latest time/dates for submission without late penalty and
earlier submissions are welcomed and encouraged – it is good practice, and is
psychologically beneficial to you, to submit coursework before the specified deadline day.
All coursework deadlines (date and time) will be published normally within the first two
weeks of the relevant term in module block guides. Any necessary changes to the
published deadlines will be notified to students as soon as possible.
For each formal coursework assessment, you will be given the method for submission,
which will be one of:
Physical submission in person or by post (use coursework submission sheet – Appendix 3)
and electronic submission through Blackboard Learn. However, in cases where physical
submission (hard copy) is required the following procedure will be followed.
Formal coursework submissions must be made to the course administrator OR
representative (not to tutors, lecturers, etc.) so that all submissions can be properly
logged. You may submit your work either in person or by post (NOT by email).
Any coursework not submitted to the course administrator OR representative will
be deemed to have not been submitted – this is a strict University policy.
If submitting by post you must obtain a certificate of posting, which you must take to
the course administrator as soon as possible in order to prove the date of posting which will then be treated as the submission date. If you do not produce the certificate
of posting, then the date of receipt by the course administrator will be treated as the
submission date.
The postal address to be used in all cases is: Institute for the Environment, Halsbury
Building, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK.
Electronic submission in Blackboard Learn
You will be given guidance in submitting your coursework via Blackboard Learn, the
Brunel e-learning system. The start date/time of your submission (which can take some
time for large submissions) logged in Blackboard Learn will be treated as the
submission date/time.
All electronic submission will be checked for originality by TurnItIn (plagiarism-detecting
software) for which you will be given specific instructions.
13.2
Mitigating circumstances and late submission
Students who are unable to submit coursework by the given deadline for unforeseen
reasons, must submit formal MCs and supporting evidence (including, where appropriate,
self-certification forms) within 7 days of the submission deadline in order for their MCs
to be considered, as specified in SR4. You must submit a completed Mitigating
Circumstances Form together with supporting evidence to the course administrator or
58
representative – see the section on mitigating circumstances elsewhere in this handbook
(see content list at beginning of handbook).
If you do not submit a Mitigating Circumstances form to the course administrator or
representative within 7 days of the submission deadline (unless not practicable), the
standard late penalties will be applied to your submitted work.
If you do submit a Mitigating Circumstances Form with supporting evidence, this will be
considered by the Chair of the Mitigating Circumstances Panel (or their nominee) who will
decide one of the following:



that the MCs are not significant and decide that the normal late penalty should
apply;
that the MCs are accepted and define a revised submission deadline for you;
that your MCs are serious/long term, suspend the late penalty requirements for your
submission and require you to be counselled concerning your learning and
assessment work plan.
You will be notified of the decision as soon as possible by the Chair of the MC panel. The
Chair of the MC Panel will also ensure that all submitted MCs and the record of the
decisions of the MC Chair are brought before the MC Panel at its normal meeting before
the BoE.
13.3
Penalties for late submission of assessed coursework
The following late penalty structure applies to all full-time and part-time taught-programme
PGT students in the University. The penalty takes the form of a cap, which is applied after
assessment of the work. (Please note that some assessments may contain a learning
outcome related to the ability to submit work strictly to a deadline and is therefore part of
the academic assessment of such learning outcomes. In such cases, the relevant
modular/assessment block outline and coursework specification will define how a failure to
submit to the given deadline will contribute to the marking/grading in the academic
assessment of the coursework. Irrespective of the academic assessment of timeliness,
the standard late penalty structure defined below will still apply after the academic
assessment is completed.)
A working day is here defined as Monday to Friday at any time of year, with the
exception of UK national holidays (if submission cannot be made in person to the
submission point or through Blackboard Learn, submission must be made by post).
An absolute cut-off date may be specified by Schools for all coursework submissions in the
School such that for any work submitted after that date, regardless of mitigating
circumstances, no guarantee is given that the submitted work will be assessed in time to
be presented to the relevant Panel and Board of Examiners.
59
13.3.1 PGT (except dissertations) – From 1st September 2013 onwards
The following applies to all full-time and part-time taught postgraduate programme
students commencing their studies from 1st September 2013 onwards:
The penalty takes the form of a cap, which is applied after assessment of the work.
The following caps will be uniformly applied, in the absence of accepted relevant mitigating
circumstances:
Up to 2 working days late
Up to 5 working days late
Up to 10 working days late
Up to 15 working days late
More than 15 working days late
Mark capped at 60%
Mark capped at 50%
Mark capped at 40%
Mark capped at 30%
Mark capped at 0%
Grade BGrade CGrade DGrade EGrade NS
(non-submission)
13.3.2 PGT (except dissertations) – Before 1st September 2013
The following applies to all full-time and part-time taught postgraduate programme
students commencing their studies before 1st September 2013:
The following caps to be uniformly applied, in the absence of relevant mitigating
circumstances accepted by the BoE:
Up to 2 working days late
Up to 5 working days late
Up to 10 working days late
Up to 15 working days late
More than 15 working days late
13.4
Grade capped at B
Grade capped at C
Grade capped at D
Grade capped at E
Grade capped at F
Penalties for late submission of Masters Dissertations
The following late penalty structure will apply to all postgraduate taught programme
students irrespective of their mode of study.
13.4.1 Masters dissertations late submissions – From 1st September 2013 onwards
The following University policy applies to all Postgraduate Taught Programme
students first registering from 1st September 2013 onwards, irrespective of their
mode of study
All postgraduate taught masters students are required to submit their dissertations by the
submission deadline published by their School which shall be set out in the programme
specification or other programme documentation provided to the student. For one-year fulltime students commencing studies in September, all standard dissertation submission
deadlines shall be before the Friday of the 52nd week of the academic year of study. For
full-time students starting at other times of year all standard dissertation submission
deadlines shall be not more than 52 weeks after the commencement of study.
60
Revision of Dissertation Submission Deadlines
Revision of standard dissertation submission deadlines may apply in both of the following
situations:
a. In cases where a one-year full-time student is entitled to in-session
reassessment relating to the taught part of the programme, the Board of
Examiners may extend the standard submission deadline for the student’s
dissertation by a period of no more than 4 weeks.
b. In cases where mitigating circumstances which relate to the dissertation are
submitted by any Masters student and are accepted on behalf of the Mitigating
Circumstances Panel by the Chair, the period of extension to the standard
submission deadline will not normally exceed 4 weeks from the date of the
original deadline. Such a decision made by the Chair must be reported, as
usual, to the Mitigating Circumstances Panel and to the Board of Examiners.
Where the specific circumstances of the student may require a period of
extension in excess of 4 weeks, the student’s submission shall be considered
by the Mitigating Circumstances Panel.
A Board of Examiners should be held within 2 calendar months of the normal dissertation
submission deadline for the programme to consider recommendations for degrees and
other awards and shall consider the profiles, including the dissertations, of students with
and without revised dissertation deadlines.
Any Masters student who fails to submit by the standard submission deadline (or revised
submission deadline as in a or b above) will be assigned a Grade NS (non-submission) for
the dissertation and will not be entitled to resubmit.
13.4.2 Masters dissertations late submissions – Before 1st September 2013
The following University policy applies to all Postgraduate Taught Programme
students first registering before 1st September 2013 onwards, irrespective of their
mode of study
All postgraduate taught Masters students are required to submit their dissertations by the
submission deadline published by their School which shall be set out in the programme
specification or other programme documentation provided to the student. For one-year fulltime students commencing studies in September, all standard dissertation submission
deadlines shall be before the Friday of the 52nd week of the academic year of study. For
full-time students starting at other times of year all standard dissertation submission
deadlines shall be not more than 52 weeks after the commencement of study.
Revision of Dissertation Submission Deadlines
Revision of standard dissertation submission deadlines may apply in both of the following
situations:
a. In cases where a one-year full-time student is entitled to in-session
reassessment relating to the taught part of the programme, the Board of
61
Examiners may extend the standard submission deadline for the student’s
dissertation by a period of no more than 4 weeks.
b. In cases where mitigating circumstances which relate to the dissertation are
submitted by any Masters student and are accepted on behalf of the Mitigating
Circumstances Panel by the Chair, the period of extension to the standard
submission deadline will not normally exceed 4 weeks from the date of the
original deadline. Such a decision made by the Chair must be reported, as
usual, to the Mitigating Circumstances Panel and to the Board of Examiners.
Where the specific circumstances of the student may require a period of
extension in excess of 4 weeks, the student’s submission shall be considered
by the Mitigating Circumstances Panel.
A Board of Examiners should be held within 2 calendar months of the normal dissertation
submission deadline for the programme to consider recommendations for degrees and
other awards and shall consider the profiles, including the dissertations, of students with
and without revised dissertation deadlines.
Any Masters student who fails to submit by the standard submission deadline (or revised
submission deadline as in a or b above) will be assigned a grade F for the dissertation. It
will then be at the discretion of the next Board of Examiners whether they are permitted to
resubmit (for a capped grade C) by a final re-submission deadline defined by the Board.
NOTE THAT FOR 2013-2014 ACADEMIC YEAR, THE SUBMISSION DATE OF
DISSERTATIONS WILL BE FRIDAY 19th SEPTEMBER 2014, BY 4pm.
14 GOOD ACADEMIC PRACTICE
14.1
Introduction
Good academic practice involves completing your academic work independently, honestly
and in an appropriate academic style, while referencing and acknowledging the sources
you use.
This guidance will explain in more detail what Good Academic Practice means and the
consequences of not engaging in it.
14.2
Your responsibilities
It is important that you:
1.
2.
3.
Read the University guidance on academic practice
Read the guidance on referencing and other academic conventions issued by your
School/Institute and always follow these conventions
If you are unsure, ask for help and clarification at an early stage. See ‘sources of help’
Students are sometimes tempted to try to gain an unfair advantage in their assessments.
This is known as academic misconduct, and one of the most common forms is plagiarism.
62
14.3
What is plagiarism?
Plagiarism is defined as “To take and use as one’s own the thoughts, writings or inventions
of another” (Oxford English Dictionary). It has two elements:
1. taking another’s work; and
2. using the work as your own.
If you take another’s work but do not use it as your own – because you reference it
correctly – it is not plagiarism. If you follow the guidance in this section, you should avoid
plagiarism.
Example: In a book by M. Smith, 2004, there is a passage that describes the
pollination of roses by bees. If you just copied the passage out, and did not refer to
Smith, then this would be plagiarism. Read this:
Bees pollinate roses in a carefully executed complex process which involves the
following features. Firstly the bee lands on the flower, and tucks its wings up, then
slowly walks up into the flower head, and brushes against the stamens, collecting the
pollen on its furry body. It then backs out of the flower, beats its wings and flies to a
nearby rose, repeats the exercise, and rubs pollen off onto the ovary, thereby
facilitating fertilisation of the flower.
(This has been copied word-for-word from Smith’s book, and with no mention of
Smith’s book anywhere, this is plagiarism).
But if you report the information that Smith gave, fully referencing Smith’s book than
that is acceptable. e.g.
Smith (2004) described the role of bees in pollinating roses and demonstrated the
following features. Firstly, Smith observed, the bee lands on the flower and tucks its
wings up, then walks up into the flower head, and rubs its body against the stamens,
collecting pollen. Smith then noted how the bee reversed out and flew to a nearby
flower so that the pollen was transferred to the ovaries to effect fertilisation.
(In this case, Smith’s description is paraphrased and referenced and there is no
problem).
Obviously, in student assignments and examinations, truly original ideas will be rare. You
will, for the most part, be presenting opinions derived from teachers, textbook writers and
others.
It is therefore not plagiarism to write an assignment which begins “in answering this
question I cannot do better than to quote in full the view presented by Jones in his book
‘Standard Answers to Common Essay Questions’, who writes “…” and ends: “Thus Mr
Jones has given us an excellent answer to this very interesting question”.
Of course, such an assignment will fail, but on other grounds because we are seeking your
own words and your ideas, not Jones’s. More specifically, we are looking to see why you
may agree or disagree with published commentaries on the points raised in assessment
questions and/or whether you may come up with any novel ideas and/or criticisms on the
subject area to be analysed.
Plagiarism would include (but is not restricted to) the following scenarios:
1.
Simply copying out Jones’s answer verbatim without any acknowledgement.
This is the most obvious case;
63
2.
3.
4.
14.4
Using substantial extracts of Jones’s answer but transposing the order of
paragraphs here and there, omitting odd sentences and making cosmetic
changes, usually to linking words or phrases, without any acknowledgement of
the source. This form of plagiarism is more common. It might also include
presenting Jones’s original footnote references to his/her sources as if they were
your own sources, without giving Jones due recognition;
Rewriting Jones’ answer entirely in your own words, but preserving essentially
intact both the sequence and structure of his argument, without acknowledging
Jones as being the source of the material;
All (or any) of the above, and not acknowledging Jones (in the text and/or in the
footnotes/endnotes) as the source, but listing Jones’s work in the bibliography.
Simply listing a source in your bibliography without indicating clearly in your
assignment which material from that source is used in your assignment (and
where it is used) is NOT sufficient acknowledgement of the source and DOES
constitute plagiarism.
Identification of plagiarism
Turnitin®UK is an electronic, "text-matching" service used by the University to assist in the
identification of plagiarised work submitted for assessment. This process generates what
is known as an Originality Report but this alone will not be advanced as the only grounds
for suspecting that a piece of work is plagiarised or, indeed, as conclusive evidence
against an accusation of plagiarism.
The University expects all students to comply with the requirements of submitting work to
Turnitin®UK; this includes agreeing with Turnitin®UK that it can be electronically checked
for matches with existing sources and that an Originality Report can be generated.
Work submitted to Turnitin, for the purpose of receiving an Originality Report, is
automatically added to the Turnitin database. Any work submitted will be matched against
numerous online sources, web pages and other student papers and the Originality Report
will indicate the percentage of the submitted text that matches with the sources. All final
submissions to Turnitin will remain on the Turnitin database. Work held on the
Turnitin®UK database may be used for the purpose of detecting future plagiarism and in
any investigation of a suspected academic offence.
Turnitin®UK has a Privacy Pledge and a Usage Policy. The University advises that
students should familiarise themselves with the contents of these.
For further information concerning the use of Turnitin®UK please contact the Head of
Registry at Helen.Emerson@brunel.ac.uk.
14.5
How can I avoid plagiarism?
The guidance on how to avoid plagiarism is given in the following bullet points:
1.
If you wish to use quotations, quote phrases from book or journals in order to
analyse them, and quote writers if they express particularly well what you want to
say, or if they are making a controversial point that you wish to take up. Generally,
quotations should be quite short and should not be merely a vehicle for getting
across information, e.g. the facts of the case, which you can quite easily, if less
elegantly, put into your own words.
64
You do not need to avoid direct quotation entirely.
Quotations are an integral part of most essay writing. However, it is good
academic practice that they should be used judiciously and not so frequently so as
to render the assessment into a disjointed piece of work, characterised by
excessively short paragraphs.
2.
Make your notes, transcribe quotations that you may wish to use, and note clearly
what is transcribed and where you found it. Close the books before you begin to
write your answer and only open them to copy quotations or check doubtful points
3.
Always attribute direct quotations and enclose them within quotation marks.
Always give a full reference (including page number) for all quotations. Merely
referring to the source in the bibliography at the end of the essay is not sufficient.
If you quote from other sources you must ensure that you indicate this clearly by
the use of quotation marks and by noting precisely the source of the quotation, at
the beginning or end of the extract.
4.
Always attribute all ideas that are neither your own nor in common currency. Give
a full reference for all such ideas, following the referencing guidance provided by
the School. Once again, merely referring to the source in the bibliography at the
end of the essay is not sufficient.

It is absolutely vital that the marker(s) of your work know precisely where
any material that you have copied starts and ends, and where you have
copied the material from.

It is entirely your responsibility to ensure that you make these absolutely
clear. Markers MUST NOT be left in a situation where they are unsure
whether particular ideas and/or words are yours or are copied from
somewhere else. Failure to adhere to this advice may leave you open to an
allegation of plagiarism
5.
When you paraphrase and attribute the source of an idea in your essay, each new
aspect or continuation of that idea – as may occur in consecutive sentences –
must be accurately referenced. It is not sufficient to note the source of several
linked ideas, say, just once in a paragraph at the end or beginning, as it is
impossible for the reader to discern which are your source’s ideas and which are
yours.
6.
Factual information such as “3,000 people die on roads worldwide each day”
always has a source. You should always cite the original full reference for each
fact, AND if you accessed the fact in a secondary source rather than the original
this should also be cited in full. Facts without stated sources are unsupported
assertions and constitute poor scholarship. Where you have accessed them in a
secondary source without proper acknowledgement, this, at best, constitutes poor
scholarship. Where you also include unattributed commentary made by the
secondary source on the facts you cite, this may constitute plagiarism.
65
14.6
Why should I reference?
At university, you need to show your understanding of the existing body of knowledge in
your subject. It is vital that you know how to reference this material correctly.
You'll need to engage with a variety of other ideas and texts, and make sure you
acknowledge where these ideas have come from, by telling the reader what these
texts (your sources) are.
This is important in order to:




14.7
Give credit to the people who came up with the arguments you're using and
responding to
Demonstrate that you have engaged with a topic
Enable readers to follow up a topic by investigating your source material
Avoid accusations of plagiarism
What should I reference?
Referencing involves clearly acknowledging your use of, and directing your reader to, your
sources:




14.8
When you quote directly from another person’s work you must put the copied text
inside quotation marks and reference the source
When you paraphrase or summarise another person’s work, you must reference
the source
When you refer to another person’s ideas or theories, you must reference the
source(s), unless you are sure that they are common knowledge
When you copy a diagram, graph or table from someone else's work, reference the
source
How should I reference?
There are a number of different standard referencing systems (e.g., Harvard, APA, MLA,
IEEE, Vancouver) and you should always follow the referencing advice given by your
School. You can also consult the Library’s web pages on referencing:
www.brunel.ac.uk/services/library/learning/referencing
The Library also provides access to “Cite Them Right” to help you with citing and
referencing correctly: http://www.citethemrightonline.com/ and
https://intranet.brunel.ac.uk/library/electronic/citethemright.html
However all referencing systems follow the following rules:
Each reference must appear in two places.
1. in the actual text of your assignment each time it is used (these are called in-text
citations)
2. in full in the reference list* or bibliography# at the end of your assignment.
*A reference list contains the full details of in-text citations
#A bibliography (in the Harvard system) may also list works you have read as
background material, but have not used directly (and therefore have no in-text citation). A
bibliography in other referencing systems reflects both in-text citations and background
66
material. You should ensure you apply the correct format for the referencing system you
are using. In the Institute for the Environment, bibliographies are not used in assessed
work, therefore please provide only reference lists.
The in-text citations essentially are pointers to entries in the reference list and are usually
highly abbreviated. Depending on the referencing system used, in-text citations vary in
format.
14.9





Referencing tips
Give yourself plenty of time to research and write your work. This will avoid last minute
‘panic’ plagiarism
Keep a record all the books and articles you find as you find them - always complete
your references as you write your assignment, rather than filling in missing
references at the end
Follow carefully any guidelines provided by your tutors or in course material
Put yourself in the place of the reader and ask yourself: do I have all the information
they need to find that source again?
Always cite the sources used in your assignments – both direct quotes and ideas
you have paraphrased or summarised. This is the basis of 'good academic
practice'.
14.10 Final checks for avoiding plagiarism
Follow this checklist before submitting your assignment:
1. Are all the sources you have used acknowledged consistently using an
established referencing system (e.g., Harvard, APA)?
2. Are all the sources that appear in your reference list cited in the correct places
within your work?
3. Have you, to the best of your knowledge, used your own words throughout? Is it
clear where all direct quotes start and finish?
4. Has the wording of all direct quotes been copied accurately?
5. Is it clear, in every case, where your paraphrasing of a source text starts and
finishes?
14.11 Academic misconduct
Students are sometimes tempted to gain an unfair advantage in their assessments. This is
known as academic misconduct, and the most common form of misconduct is plagiarism.
However, there are other forms of academic misconduct that are just as serious, and carry
the same penalties if proven:
Collusion includes helping another student to cheat e.g. by letting them copy your work, in
part or in whole.
Cheating in Examinations includes taking unauthorised materials into the exam room or
allowing someone else to sit your exam for you. Having the notes in the examination room
or elsewhere with the intention of referring to them during the examination is itself an
offence.
67
Falsification may include the falsification of results, mitigating circumstances, a doctor’s
certificate or any other document to gain an unfair advantage.
Contract Cheating occurs when a student gets someone else to complete an assignment
for them and then hands it in as their own work e.g. by posting an assignment on an essay
mill website.
Impersonation consists of a substitute taking the place of a student in an examination or
other form of assessment.
14.12 What happens if you are accused of academic misconduct
Where a School suspects academic misconduct they will in the first instance write to you
or ask you to meet with them to discuss the allegations, and you will be asked to a
respond to those allegations. If they do not accept your explanation, your case will be
referred to the Vice-Chancellor’s Representative or to a Disciplinary Panel to determine
whether or not you are guilty of a disciplinary offence. The Advice and Representation
Centre http://brunelstudents.com/Advice/ can assist you in understanding the disciplinary
procedures and in writing your statement.
14.13 What happens if you are found guilty of academic misconduct
If found guilty of an academic offence, there is a range of penalties that might be applied.
This includes expulsion from the University.
Full details of the disciplinary process and the range of penalties can be found in Senate
Regulation 6:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senateregulations/new-sr6-april-2013-onwards-student-misconduct-and-professional-suitability
14.14 Where to get help
If you have concerns about your ability to reference correctly, or any personal issues that
may be affecting your academic performance (however complex they may appear), seek
help promptly.
In the first instance you are advised to speak to your personal tutor in your School.
However, you can also get help from the sources shown below:
 The Academic Skills Service (ASK) is based on the ground floor of the library and you
can attend workshops, access drop-in advice services and access resources to help
you improve your learning at university. Find out more at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/library/ask
 The Counselling Service offers free appointments, arranged either by going to the
Counselling Reception, opposite the Medical Centre (drop in without an appointment
between 2 - 3pm Mon-Fri), or by phoning 01895 265070. Find out more at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/life/welfare/counselling-service
68
 The International Pathways and Language Centre (IPLC) provides international
students, and those for whom English is not their first language, with English support
through a range of courses and one-to-one tutorials. Find out more at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/international/iplc
 The Subject Liaison Librarian for your School will be happy to help you find the
information and resources you need to support your work. You can also drop in to Ask
A Librarian at the Pod, Ground Floor, Library for 1-2-1 advice, on weekday afternoons.
Find out more at: www.brunel.ac.uk/library
 The Graduate School provides skills training, online access to research skills training
courses and a Saturday school for part-time research students. Find out more at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/services/graduate-school
Brunel University has made a useful guide for writing reference citations and
summary checklist of information for references (see Appendices 17 and 18).
69
15 SUPPORT
15.1 Brunel Graduate School
The Graduate School runs seminars from time to time on generic skills of value to learning
and research at all levels.
Further details are available on their webpage:
www.brunel.ac.uk/graduateschool/. Information provided by the Graduate School is
provided below.
The Graduate School is a place where you can meet other postgraduate students, find a
quiet place to study, unwind in the social area and make the most out of your postgraduate
experience.
The Graduate School has a team of academic and administrative staff who work very
closely with student groups, academic schools and service departments across the
University to enhance the postgraduate student experience. We provide free skills training,
tailored to the needs of students at different stages of postgraduate study, from planning a
Master's dissertation to writing a PhD thesis. Our provision includes a combination of two
day research module blocks, seminars, workshops and online training programmes.
The Graduate School itself is centrally located at the front of the Halsbury Building,
presenting a welcoming environment to meet other postgraduate students, study or just
take a break. The Graduate School is a dedicated postgraduate facility with 24 hour
access, which includes a kitchen; a quiet study room; a common room plus a laptop loan
service and lockers. A dedicated Postgraduate Study Centre is located in the Bannerman
Centre (Room 213) with 40 PCs, laptop plug-in points, printer and lounge area.
A number of social events are organized by the Graduate School throughout the year,
including a Welcome Party in October. Coffee mornings every Tuesday give another
opportunity to network with other Brunel University postgraduate students. The
Postgraduate Society also organizes events for postgraduate students, as well as offering
a network for support and advice.
Further information about the Graduate School, including the seminar and training
programmes, details of the Vice-Chancellor’s prizes for students, and contact details for
the Graduate School’s staff, can be found at http://intranet.brunel.ac.uk/graduateschool/
Dr Kate Hone, Director of the Graduate School
15.2 Brunel Language Centre
The Language Centre offers a wide range of services and support to students during their
studies. More details can be obtained from: www.brunel.ac.uk/courses/lc/
15.3 Disability and Dyslexia Service
The Disability and Dyslexia Services has a wide range of experience in supporting
students with a wide range of needs.
More details can be obtained from:
www.brunel.ac.uk/disability/
70
16 IfE – Student Plan
NOTE: All University sections have made a student plan, which is a document explaining
the support provided for students, but also states what is expected of students. Below is
the plan written for the Institute for the Environment.
Purpose of Student Plan
The Institute for the Environment (IfE) Student Plan aims to provide students with an
appropriate learning environment and support, so that they gain maximum benefit from
their experience within IfE and Brunel. This plan explains the mechanisms and structures
of support for IfE post-graduate taught students. This document addresses the four key
characteristics of the Brunel University Students’ Plan, which aims to produce students
who are 1) intellectually confident; 2) academically curious, independent and rigorous; 3)
socially responsible; and 4) prepared for life after Brunel. These 4 aspects are
disseminated through the following sections.
Historical perspective
IfE comprises staff from diverse academic origins (environmental monitoring; biology;
chemistry; public health and epidemiology; geography and Earth sciences), so there is a
wide array of academic expertise available for students. Staff have backgrounds across
the spectrum of experience of academic research, teaching and administration, and
possess a mature and balanced perspective of student requirements for successful
completion of their degrees.
Basic components of IFE provisions for students
The list below shows the mechanisms of provision for students within IfE.
1.
A professional administrator who is often the first point of contact for students and is
often able to answer student queries directly; otherwise contacts individual members
of staff to deal with student queries.
2.
Learning and teaching environment in lectures, seminars, laboratory practical work,
fieldwork and individual tutorials. Many teaching documents are provided, as
appropriate, on Blackboard Learn for students to access and download.
3.
IfE Teaching and Learning Committee (TLC) oversee quality of teaching within IfE,
according to its terms of reference and component staff (see separate section below).
TLC responds to student concerns and oversees modifications of programmes in
order to improve student support. For example, action was taken over concerns
expressed by students about timing of coursework submission dates across parallel
module blocks; student submission dates are carefully discussed between staff and
students to make students clearly aware of any timing issues.
4.
Mitigating Circumstances Panel considers student individual circumstances
confidentially, and makes recommendations to the Examination Board on appropriate
actions for students who have problems affecting their academic work.
5.
Personal tutor system: each student is assigned a personal tutor, with open access
arrangements. Students and personal tutors make individual arrangements for
meetings, and students are also encouraged to approach any member of staff for
academic support. Personal tutors may consider student problems within the remit of
an academic personal tutor, and will make arrangements for more private and/or
professional personal support (for example with the University counsellors) as
71
appropriate. Normally student queries are dealt with on-the-spot, but in some cases
students need to arrange meetings with staff.
6.
Student representatives: one student per degree programme in IfE. Student
representatives are invited to attend TLC meetings, and report back to the student
group in order to provide a thread of communication on general and specific
academic matters affecting any or all students. Open discussion is encouraged and
plenary meetings of the Staff-Student Liaison Committee provide the forum for open
discussion.
7.
Staff-Student Liaison Committee (SSLC) meetings: one per term, to discuss issues
raised by staff and students. Students are encouraged to discuss any points with staff
outside this meeting structure, and any key items can be fed back to staff-student
meetings. SSLC meetings are minuted.
8.
During the summer vacation period, when FT students are working on their
dissertations, individual staff keep contact with the students allocated to them for
supervision; thus support for dissertation work continues through the summer as
appropriate.
Structure of provision
IfE TLC is the principal instrument of student support, since it oversees the academic
programmes of study. A separate Mitigating Circumstances Panel considers individual
student issues in confidence, and reports to TLC and to the Examination Panel, where
final decisions about appropriate actions for acceptance of student work are made. SSLC
minutes are discussed by a TLC meeting, normally the TLC meeting that follows the SSLC
meetings.
Documentation
A range of documents are produced by IFE to provide a framework of support for students
(and staff) in order to maintain a smooth flow of provision.
1.
IfE TLC and SSLC meetings generate minutes to record decisions,
recommendations and issues. Staff-student meeting minutes are provided for
students, and issues raised are discussed in TLC, with appropriate feedback and
modifications to IfE processes.
2.
Students are provided with a hard copy of a handbook at the beginning of each
academic session, updated year-on-year; this is also provided in Blackboard
Learn.
3.
Staff have a handbook, updated year-on-year, detailing the responsibilities of staff,
including student support.
4.
Feedback on student work is provided by comprehensive notes written by markers
on coursework and exam scripts. For coursework, key points of feedback for each
piece of work are also provided in a summary sheet, a copy of which is returned to
the student. Feedback on exams is normally achieved by individual tutorial
discussion, since exams take place at the end of a module block, after the
teaching has finished, so there is no forum available for the whole module block
student group to meet. Some staff provide coursework feedback via Blackboard
Learn but this is not uniform across IfE and is used as considered appropriate by
individual members of staff. Examination scripts and completed coursework are
kept centrally in IfE, and students may view these and discuss them in tutorial
72
meetings with staff (normally the module block leader or personal tutor) on
request.
5.
Grades for each module block are moderated internally by a module block
moderator who is normally not a member of the teaching staff of that module
block, and grades finalised. Module block moderation reports are provided along
with student work for external examiners.
6.
External examiners’ reports following examination boards provide external
feedback into IFE teaching processes and quality, and provide opportunities for
development of teaching.
Wider activities
Students are invited to attend the regular IfE research student lunchtime talks, covering
the range of topics undertaken by PhD and MPhil students supervised by members of IfE
academic staff.
Student responsibilities
Teaching in a higher education context is two-way; thus while IFE staff endeavour to
support students as described in the sections above, students have responsibility to attend
as many classes as they can (ideally all classes). Students also are expected to plan their
work and undertake assignments in a structured way, so as to submit good quality work on
time. There have been numerous individual discussions between personal tutors and
students in order to address individual concerns and assist planning.
73
17 IfE – Teaching and Learning Committee (TLC)
The overall purpose of TLC is to oversee teaching provision in taught programmes within
the Institute for the Environment (IfE), in order to maintain the standard of awards and
quality of programmes within IfE.
Membership of TLC:
 Chair (Dr AJ Chaudhary)
 Programme Leaders
 Programme Manager
 Student representatives (one from each programme)
 Teaching staff
 Q&S representative
 A representative from Brunel Law School
Frequency of Meeting
Teaching and Learning Committee (TLC) will meet at least three times a year (once a term
plus further meetings as required). Formal minutes of meetings will be taken, which will be
kept for record.
Terms of Reference
1. Scrutinise and approve new blocks (modular, study, and assessment) prior to
submission for approval at a higher level, where appropriate.
2. Scrutinise applications for minor modifications to programmes of study, including minor
modifications to blocks (modular, study, and assessment).
3. Scrutinise and approve applications for individual variations to programme
specifications within IfE courses, as necessary.
4. Scrutinise student module block evaluations (coursework assessment forms,
presentation assessment forms, etc.).
5. Review programme literature (e.g. student handbooks, safety handbook, and
prospectus).
6. Overview programmes to ensure comparability of programmes and module blocks for
teaching, learning and assessment.
7. Scrutinise examination papers before sending to External Examiners.
8. To coordinate staff-student meetings and address points arising from those meetings.
9. To respond to teaching quality documents or initiatives referred to the committee or to
IfE (e.g. Student Satisfaction Survey).
10. To monitor peer review, to promote and disseminate good practice of teaching in IfE.
74
18 IfE – Board of Studies (BoS)
The aim of this committee is to monitor the currency, coherence and academic standards
of the programme(s) and this committee will sit beneath UG/PG Teaching and Learning
Committee (TLC).
Membership
 Chair (Dr Elisabete Silva)
 Programme Leader(s)
 Members of the programme team(s) – (module block leaders and representatives
from other schools for collaborative programmes)
 At least one Student Representative from each programme
 An officer who will draft minutes
Frequency of Meetings
Boards of Studies will meet at least three times a year (once a term plus further meetings
as required). Formal minutes of meetings will be taken, which will be presented to TLC.
Terms of Reference
1. To consider and recommend to Teaching and Learning Committee proposals for
programme development.
2. To consider modifications to programme(s) and to make recommendations regarding
modifications for consideration by School Board (or School Learning and Teaching
Committee) where this devolved responsibility has been granted by the School Board.
Such proposals should include the preparation of documentation for consideration,
including amendments to programme specifications.
3. To be responsible for the Annual Monitoring of the taught programme(s) within its
remit, up to and including the Programme-level.
4. To receive and consider report(s) of external examiners and to consider the content of
the response sent to external examiners.
5. To consider proposals and, where appropriate, make recommendations to the Institute
for the assurance and enhancement of the quality of the student learning experience.
6. To consider proposals to ensure the maintenance of the standards of the award(s) and
where appropriate make recommendation to the Institute.
7. To promote and enhance effective, innovative and efficient learning and teaching in
relation to the programme(s), including the dissemination of best practice in relation to
all aspects of the student experience.
8. To receive minutes of Staff/Student Liaison Committees and take action where
appropriate or make recommendations to appropriate bodies within the
School/Institute.
9. To consider matters relating to Professional, Statutory and Regulatory Bodies for the
programme(s) under its remit.
10. To consider recommendations/actions/conditions arising from the various University
review processes as follows: approval events; academic programme reviews.
11. Consideration of any other matters referred to it by the School or University.
75
19 IfE – Staff Student Liaison Committee (SSLC)
Purpose
The Staff-Student Liaison Committee (SSLC) acts as a formal forum for you to voice any
concerns you may have about your welfare, the structure and delivery of the postgraduate
programmes, or any other teaching related issues (academic, administrative, facilities,
student support etc.). It is an important channel of communication between the Institute
and our students. The institute for the Environment (IfE) is committed to enhance students’
learning experience by providing an accessible forum to enable students to discuss
teaching, learning and student support issues with staff in an open manner. The Institute
for the Environment has a single SSLC for all students on postgraduate-taught
programmes. Please note that SSLC is not a forum for students to air their personal
grievances about particular staff members. We are particularly interested to know your
opinion on the topics covered for each module, the quality of teaching materials provided,
teaching strategy, assessment design, the facilities provided by the Institute/University, the
library, IT services, and so forth. Your opinions and suggestions are valued and play a
major role during the annual monitoring and review (AMR) process.
Effectiveness of SSLCs relies on the participation of students and high levels of student
involvement and engagement are expected in the SSLC meetings. Participation and
feedback from students are central to effective quality assurance of the programmes and
Staff Student Liaison Committee is a key forum for student engagement in the Institute for
the Environment.
Membership
 Chair (Dr AJ Chaudhary)
 Programme Manager
 All students
Frequency of Meetings
SSLC will meet at twice a year (once in Term 1 and once in Term 2). Formal minutes of
meetings will be taken, which will be presented to Teaching and Learning Committee
(TLC).
76
20 IfE – Mitigating Circumstances Panel (MC Panel)
Purpose of Mitigating Circumstances Panel
The purpose of the MC Panel is to assess mitigating circumstances of students, without
student representatives. A MC panel is held twice each year, shortly before the IfE Board
of Examiners meeting (June and November), to discuss individual student circumstances
and make recommendations to the Board of Examiners (BoE) for actions appropriate to
individual circumstances. Additionally, through the academic year it may be necessary to
consider student circumstances as they arise, and these will be dealt with either in short
MC panels after TLC meetings, when student representatives have left the room, or in
short extraordinary meetings of the MC Panel, or by Chair’s action.. The minutes from
such meetings will be headed as MC panel meetings and kept separate from TLC minutes.
Membership:
 Chair (different person from Chair of TLC – Dr Steve Kershaw)
 Taught-programme manager
 Leaders of all IfE programmes (one of whom may chair the MC panel)
 Chair of TLC
 (note that no student representatives are members of this Panel)
Mitigating Circumstances and MC Panels
Guidance for Mitigating Circumstances Panels and Boards of Examiners are set out in
Senate Regulation 4. More information on the roles and responsibilities of MC Panels and
BoE can be found at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senateregulations/assessment-of-students-on-taught-programmes
The main points of these regulations are summarised below:
In reaching a decision as to whether a student's mitigating circumstances should be
accepted, Mitigating Circumstances Panels are required to take into account the following
(SR4.34):

circumstances which could reasonably have been foreseen by the student will not
normally be accepted as mitigating circumstances;

both the timing and the duration of the mitigating circumstances presented, and the
impact of the circumstances on the student’s ability to undertake that assessment,
should be consistent with the student’s performance having been significantly
impaired by the circumstances in the relevant assessment/s;

the extent to which the impairment claimed by the student has already been
appropriately addressed by an adjustment to the method of assessment provided
for the student under the Regulations.
The key points relating to MC Panels are:

The adjustment of deadlines for the submission of assessed work affected by
mitigating circumstances is explained in the Policy on Late Submission Penalties
approved by the Learning and Teaching Committee;
77

Consideration of student submissions by MC Panels should be confidential but
not anonymous. Note that discussion of candidates at Boards of Examiners
remains anonymous;

MC Panels accept or reject submissions made by students, following the principles
set out in SR4.34 and the Guidance to students on mitigating circumstances.

MC Panels should not have access to students’ marks or grades when making
these decisions, just the MCs submissions of the students;

Acceptance of MCs means that the MC Panel will recommend that the BoE should
take the MCs into consideration and take appropriate action; Rejection means that
the MC Panel will not recommend that the BoE take the circumstances into
consideration;

MC Panels must properly record the reasons for their decisions for each student;

Where the Panel determines that mitigating circumstances should be accepted, the
Panel makes recommendations in a report to the relevant Board(s) of Examiners
(with the student's name anonymised) concerning the assessments affected and
the severity of the impact on the student (SR4.33).

The University does not define a scale of severity of impact, but an MC Panel
should alert the BoE when it believes that the severity of the impact of MCs is
notable. For example, where not only a student’s ability to be properly assessed but
also their ability to study for a significant period of time leading up to the
assessment(s) was affected by the MCs, the MC Panel should highlight this to the
BoE.

The MC Panel should therefore not make specific recommendation to the BoE
regarding the action it should take; the BoE may need to take into account the
student’s profile of achievement in order to make such decisions.

Where MCs have been addressed satisfactorily already (such as by adjustment to
deadlines) and therefore the BoE need take no action, these cases should not be
reported to the BoE.

Students should be informed of the dates of the MC Panel where their MCs will be
considered (unless Chair’s action is taken) and the outcome of the MC Panels
consideration (i.e., acceptance or rejection) notified to a student without undue
delay.
Mitigating circumstances and Boards of Examiners
Full consideration shall be given to reports on accepted mitigating circumstances referred
by a Mitigating Circumstances Panel at the meeting of the relevant Board of Examiners:
The key points relating to Boards of Examiners and MCs are:

Boards consider reports from MCs Panels;

Consideration of students, even where they have accepted MCs, should be
anonymous at Boards;
78

It is important to stress that under SR4.43-44, the ability/duty of a Board to take
action on accepted mitigating circumstances is not predicated on the student having
“failed” the assessment(s) in question. A myth prevalent in some parts of the
University is that if a student has “passed” an assessment, then their accepted MCs
cannot be taken into account; this is untrue. The Board should take appropriate
action in light of accepted mitigating circumstances regardless of whether a student
has “passed” or “failed” an assessment affected by the mitigating circumstances;

Boards should take one of the actions set out in SR4.46 (for students under “New”
Regulations) or SR4.49 and SR4.51 (for students under “Old” Regulations) in
relation to each assessment for which MCs have been accepted by an MC Panel;

Boards must be made aware that the principles for Board actions to be taken in the
light of accepted mitigating circumstances are radically different between Old and
New Regulations:
1. The meaning of a “P” grade has changed in the move from the Old to New
Regulations. A “P” grade under the New Regulations should only be used
where the Board is recommending an Aegrotat award;
2. Under the Old Regulations a Board may not amend the mark for an element of
assessment (SR4.51), but may assign a mark to a module (SR4.49c), and may
exercise discretion in progression and award decisions in the light of accepted
MCs (SR4.51);
3. Under the New Regulations a Board may assign a grade to an element of
assessment (where confident and justified) (SR4.46b) but has no explicit
powers of discretion concerning progression and award in the light of accepted
MCs (other than making a recommendation to the Chair of Learning and
Teaching Committee (SR4.46d));
4. Thus the principle in the New Regulations is that, once accepted MCs have
been addressed (through a further “first attempt”, for example), a student’s
progression or award profile should be complete, making the previous
discretionary powers of Boards concerning progression and award unnecessary
(and undesirable) in the vast majority of cases.

The following guidance on interpreting the New Regulations (SR2 (2009 onwards)
and SR3(2006 onwards)) is offered to Boards on determining which action to take in
relation to accepted MCs:
i.
The default action is to set aside the original attempt and offer another
opportunity at the assessment (SR4.46(a));
ii.
Before assigning a grade to an element of assessment in the light of accepted
MCs (SR4.46(b)), Boards should consider the confidence with which they can
assign a grade. They should do this by taking into account the severity of the
MCs (the extent to which they are likely to have affected the student’s
assessment) and the student’s profile of achievement (for the Level overall, but
in particular in other elements of the assessment block in question). Where a
Board is not confident in assigning a grade, it should not do so;
79
iii.
The Aegrotat pass in an element (SR4.46(c)) leads to an aegrotat pass overall
in the student's exit qualification and should be used as an option of last resort;
iv.
The alternative option of last resort is to make a recommendation outside the
provisions of the regulations to the Chair of LTC (SR4.46(d)).
21 IfE – Panel of Examiners (PoE)
Purpose
 To verify and confirm the marks/grades for modules/modular blocks/assessment
blocks
 Not to look at individual students (unless error or additional info presented)
 May make specific recommendations to Boards concerning particular assessments
Membership:
 Chair (Dr Dan Pickford)
 External examiners
 All staff members
 Taught-programme administrator
Frequency of Meetings
Panel of Examiners (PoE) will meet at twice a year (June, November). Formal minutes of
meetings will be taken, which will be presented to Board or Examiners (BoE) meeting.
Panel of Examiners (PoE)
More information on the roles and responsibilities of Panel of Examiners (PoE) and Board
of Examiners (BoE) can be found at:
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/university-rules-and-regulations/senateregulations/assessment-of-students-on-taught-programmes
A Panel of Examiners shall not confirm grades/marks for an assessment block until it is
satisfied with the integrity and fairness of the assessment(s) leading to the grades/marks.
Where the Panel of Examiners has insufficient confidence in the integrity and fairness of
the outcomes of an assessment, it shall take appropriate action in order to achieve
sufficient confidence. The Panel of Examiners may require the reconsideration by
assessors of the grades/marks for the complete cohort of students taking an assessment.
Only in exceptional circumstances may the Panel directly adjust the grades/marks for a
particular assessment and must then must record the justification and rationale for the
adjustment. Grades/marks for an individual student may not be adjusted, unless they have
been wrongly recorded or additional information is presented.
Topics for consideration
 Assessment Design Errors
 Academic Judgment
 Moderation effectiveness
 Extraordinary factors
 Adjustment of Results
 Justification of Actions
 Recording of Decisions at all stages!
80
22 IfE – Board of Examiners (BoE)
Purpose
 To receive confirmed marks/grades from Panels
 To consider individual student achievement
 To take into account mitigating circumstances and determine appropriate actions
 To decide on progression and re-assessment
or
To recommend to Senate appropriate awards for each student
Boards have powers of discretion within the regulations – but all decisions must
be justified
Membership:
 Chair (Dr Dan Pickford)
 External examiners
 All staff members
 Taught-programme administrator
 Registry representative
 VC representative
Frequency of Meetings
Board of Examiners (BoE) will meet at twice a year (June, November). Formal minutes of
meetings will be taken, which will be tabled at the next Board or Examiners (BoE) meeting.
Topics for consideration at Boards of Examiners
 Mitigating Circumstances
 Academic Judgment
 Progression and Re-assessment
 Awards
 Extraordinary Decisions – Limited Discretion
 Justification of Decisions
 Recording of Decisions at all stages!
Notification of Results
 Students will be able to view their results through e-vision
 They will not be able to view their results if they are subject to a financial query
81
23 OVERRIDING AUTHORITY
This document has been prepared in conformity with the provisions of Senate Regulations.
If there is ambiguity or omissions, the authority of the Regulations prevail.
82
24 APPENDICES
Appendix 1: University calendar showing term dates
83
Appendix 3: Coursework submission sheet
BRUNEL UNIVERSITY – Institute for the Environment
Attach one fully completed copy of this form to each piece of coursework submitted for assessment. Retain
the lower section as evidence of submission. Use BLOCK CAPITALS.
Your Surname: _____________________ Forename(s): _____________________
Your Personal Tutor's Name: ___________________________________________
Coursework Title: ___________________________________________
Module block Code:
Module block Title:
The work you submit must be your own and must fully acknowledge any quotation or close
paraphrase within it from the published or unpublished works of another person. You should ensure
that you have read and understood the regulations concerning plagiarism (see the Institute’s Student
Handbook and Senate Ordinances), and you should note that tutors place great importance on the
appropriate citation of references. If you are also going to submit this coursework electronically via
Blackboard Learn then please make sure that the electronic version is exactly the same as the hard
copy.
Date work submitted: _____________________ Time: ______________________
Signature of student: ____________________ Accepted by: ___________________
(initials or official date stamp)
************************************************************************************
Coursework Submission Regulations:
A deadline date will be specified for the submission of each piece of coursework. This deadline shall be
strictly enforced and 'extensions' to a deadline will not be permitted. Coursework submitted after the notified
deadline will normally be subject to a penalty calculated in accordance with the following rules:
a) the actual date of submission of the coursework shall be noted, and the number of days that the
coursework is late calculated;
b) the coursework shall be awarded a provisional mark, and guidance provided to the student as to the
quality of the work;
c) a Penalty Mark shall be calculated by deducting five marks from the provisional mark for each day, or
part day, that the coursework is late, until a mark of zero is reached.
d) the Penalty Mark shall be used for assessment purposes, including the calculation of the final module
block mark, and the degree classification.
The Board of Examiners shall consider written evidence of mitigating circumstances provided by a student,
and may, if it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds so to do, set aside the penalty for late
submission. Such evidence should normally be submitted, together with a covering letter, not later than
seven days after the actual date of submission of the coursework to which it pertains.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------This section should be detached and retained by the student as evidence of submission.
Your Surname: ____________________________ Forename(s): ______________________
Coursework Title:
Module block Code:
Module block Title:
The work you submit must be your own and must fully acknowledge any quotation or close paraphrase within
it from the published or unpublished works of another person. You should ensure that you have read and
understood the regulations concerning plagiarism (see the Institute’s Student Handbook and Senate
Ordinances), and you should note that tutors place great importance on the appropriate citation of
references.
Date work submitted: _____________
Time: _____________________
Signature of staff: _________________________
(This is a formal receipt for coursework - staff must only sign if all relevant sections of the form are
completed.)
84
Appendix 4: Coursework markers’ report Form
Institute for the Environment
Written Coursework Feedback Form
Student Name: _______________________________________ Student Number: ________
Module Title/Code: ____________________________________________________________
Coursework Element: __________________________________________________________
1. Quality of presentation (ie. formatting, spelling, grammar, graphics, references)
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Fair
Poor
Fair
Poor
Good
Fair
Poor
Good
Fair
Poor
2. Organisation of the report (eg. use of subheadings)
Excellent
Good
3. Clarity of aims/objectives, scope of report
Excellent
Good
4. Strength and logic of argumentation
Excellent
5. Quality of referencing
Excellent
Additional comments:
MARK/GRADE*:
Has the submission been checked for originality by TurnItIn?
YES/NO
Signature: _______________________________
Date: ______________________
* coursework grades are provisional and subject to moderation and changes at Panel of Examiners
85
Appendix 5: Oral presentation markers’ report Form
The following criteria will be used to assess your presentation. Please take note of the different categories.
Presenter's name:
Marker’s name:
Title of presentation:
Modular block:
Date:
Score
A Presentation
5
4
3
2
1
0
1. Speaks clearly
Unclear presentation
2. Good layout and graphical
material
Inadequate layout/graphical material
3. In time
Overdrawn
4. Overall effective
Ineffective
B Structure/Content
5. Clear purpose
Unclear purpose, no hypothesis
6. Accurate presentation of evidence
Much evidence inaccurate
7. Appropriate depth/search of
material
Insufficient material, flimsy
8. Logical developed argument
Presentation confused
9. Justified conclusion
Unjustified conclusion
10. Responses to questions
Poor answers to most questions
GRAND TOTAL =
(max 50)
COLUMN TOTALS
Overall Comments:
Final Coursework Percentage/Grade:
Please note that this is an interim grade to be finalised at the meeting of the Panel of Examiners (POE).
86
Oral Presentation Markers’ Report Form
Students will be assessed based on 10 criteria. Marks for each criteria will be given between 5 (highest
score) and 0 (lowest score). Overall score (max 50) is a sum of the scores awarded to each of the 10
criteria.
Criteria for assessment are as follows:
A.
Presentation
1.
Speaks clearly/unclear presentation
This section takes into account the clarity of the presentation and the ability of the student to
connect with the audience. Factors that will be considered include: eye contact, steady pace of
speaking, tone of voice, ability to present without reading off notes or screen, enthusiasm for the
subject and confidence.
2.
Good layout and graphical material/inadequate layout and graphical material
This section assesses the quality of the slides, the legibility of the text, the quality of the figures
(size, clarity, colour), the ratio between text and figures (too much text is difficult to read), and the
background and colour balance of slides (too busy or to colourful might distract from the message
and make text difficult to read).
3.
In time/Overdrawn
The students are advised to practice their presentations beforehand to ensure they keep to the
time allowed. Lower marks will be given to students overrun their time.
4.
Overall effective
This section evaluates the overall quality of the presentation. Did it deliver the message
effectively? Was it clear, logical and interesting?
B.
5.
Structure/content
Clear purpose
This criteria assesses if the student has clearly defined the purpose and aim of the study.
6.
Accurate presentation of evidence
Here students are evaluated on the quality and accuracy of the evidence presented.
7.
Appropriate depth/search of material
This section evaluates if the student has conducted the appropriate literature searches and
provided significant evidence to support their findings and conclusions.
8.
Logically developed argument
This section assesses the structure of the presentation and if there is a logical progression
between the different sections. It will also evaluate if the student developed their argument in a
logical and clear way that can be followed by the audience.
9.
Justified conclusions
Here, students will be assessed on the quality of their conclusions. Are they supported by the
findings presented?
10. Responses to questions
Students will be evaluated on their ability to answer questions posed by the audience. Students
will be marked based on the clarity of the answer and their understanding of the subject.
87
Appendix 6: Examination Markers’ report Form
Institute for the Environment
Module Code:
Module Title:
Credits:
Exam marker:
General Comments:
Please provide comments on overall performance highlighting how students may improve overall technique to enhance
results in the future.
Question Specific Comments:
Section to be completed when there are comments regarding performance on individual questions which may
highlight strategies for improving results in the future.
Question #
Mark %
Question 1:
Question 2:
Question 3:
Question 4:
Question 5:
Question 6:
Overall Mark
%
88
Appendix 7: Dissertation; approval Form
Dissertation Approval Form
Brunel University
Institute for the Environment
Student name:
_______________________________________________________________
Student number:
_____________________________________________________________
Programme:
________________________________________________________________
Year of Study:
_______________________________________________________________
Proposed title of dissertation:
__________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
Dissertation supervisor:
_______________________________________________________
Have you completed the Research Ethics Review Checklist?
Y
N
The completed Research Ethics Review Checklist MUST be attached to this form for
dissertation approval – please discuss any ethical issues raised by your research with your
supervisor.
Student signature: ___________________________________ Date: _________
Supervisor signature: ________________________________ Date: _________
This form MUST be completed prior to commencement of your research project.
Once completed and signed, the form should be returned to your Programme
Director or the Module Leader of IE5500 (Prof John Sumpter).
89
Appendix 8: Dissertation; Markers’ report Form
Institute for the Environment
Dissertation; markers’ report form
Name of Student:
Dissertation Title:
1st Marker:
2nd Marker:
Comments on this sheet are provided by the
1st / 2nd Marker (delete one)
CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT
1. Clarity of the title of the dissertation, and to what extent the title reflects the contents
2. The clarity and completeness of the abstract, which is a summary of results of the
dissertation. Can the contents of the dissertation be understood from reading just the
abstract?
3. The clarity of identification of the research aims.
4. The level of detail, and of review of relevant literature discussing previous work in
relation to the chosen topic.
5. The application of relevant techniques and modes of inquiry, together with a clear
explanation of the methodology adopted.
6. Quality of results and the clarity of their presentation
90
7. The coherence of integration of appropriate illustrative materials (e.g. figures, graphs,
maps, photographs, quotations, statistical tables) throughout the report.
8. The thoughtfulness of analysis of the data collected in relation to the aims of the
research
9. Conclusions section: Relevance of key findings in the light of the dissertation’s aims;
thoroughness of reflection on the methodological limitations of the project.
10. Evidence of originality of thought and academic insight.
11. The overall logical and structural coherence of the dissertation, and the extent to which
it conforms to the length and style of presentation prescribed in the module block
guide.
12. Additional comments on any aspect of the dissertation:
Grade recommended by this marker:
Signature: _______________________
Date: ________________________
Agreed Grade:
If the original mark and the agreed mark are significantly different, a brief explanation
should be provided below:
91
Appendix 9: Dissertation; Example title page
Brunel University
Institute for the Environment
Project Title
By
Student Name
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the MSc in Climate
Change Impacts and Sustainability
September 2013
92
Appendix 10: Dissertation; Example declaration of own work
Declaration of Own Work
DECLARATION OF OWN WORK
I declare that this thesis entitled [insert full title of thesis]
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
is entirely my own work and that where material could be construed as the work of others,
it is fully cited and referenced, and/or with appropriate acknowledgment given.
Signature:…………………………………………………………………………………….
Name of Student (Please print):……………………………………………………………………
Name of supervisor:…………………………………………………………………………………
93
Appendix 11: Research ethics review checklist
This checklist, based on the Research Ethics Review Checklist from the ESRC Research
Ethics Framework, was designed to help determine the level of risk of harm to participants’
welfare when participating in research.
This checklist should be completed for every research project. It does not form part of the
assessment criteria for the research proposal, but must be completed to help students
consider the ethical implications of research.
Project Details
1. Project title:
2. Name of student:
3. Module block name/code:
4. Advisor:
PART ONE: RESEARCH ETHICS CHECKLIST
Please answer each question by ticking the appropriate box. If you have answered Yes to
any of the questions, then at the end of the document you need to describe more fully how
you plan to deal with the ethical issues raised by your research. You can discuss your
responses with your advisor.
Does the study involve participants who may be particularly vulnerable
and/or unable to give informed consent, thus requiring the consent of
parents or guardians? (e.g. children under the age of 16; people with
certain learning disabilities)
2a. Will the study require the co-operation of a gatekeeper for initial access
to the groups or individuals to be recruited?
2b. If the answer to Question 2a is Yes, then will the study involve people
who could be deemed in any way to be vulnerable by virtue of their
status within particular institutional settings? (e.g. students at school;
certain disabled people; members of a self-help group; residents of a
nursing home, prison, or any other institution where individuals cannot
come and go freely)
3. In situations where participants are not going about their daily business,
but gathered for the purpose of a study, will it be necessary for
participants to take part in the study without their knowledge and
consent at the time? (e.g. covert observation of people in non-public
places)
YES
NO


















1.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Will the study involve the discussion by or with respondents or
interviewees of sensitive issues, such as their own involvement in
activities such as sexual behaviour or drug use, where they have not
given prior consent to such discussion?
Could the study induce psychological stress or anxiety or cause harm or
negative consequences beyond the risks encountered in normal life?
Will the study involve prolonged or repetitive testing?
Will financial inducements (other than reasonable expenses and
compensation for time) be offered to participants?
Will the study involve recruitment of patients or staff through the NHS?
94
PART TWO: RISK ASSESSMENT
Please also complete the risk assessment table provided over the page. A risk
assessment identifies the possible hazards which you may encounter whilst undertaking
fieldwork. More importantly, it enables you to judge the severity and likelihood of each
hazard, and how you can respond to this.
Do talk with your advisor before completing the form.
Please note that it is your responsibility to follow the Code of Research Ethics, developed
by the University Research Ethics Committee, as well as any relevant academic or
professional guidelines in the conduct of your study. This includes providing appropriate
documentation as described above, and ensuring confidentiality in the storage and use of
data. Any significant change in the question, design or conduct over the course of the
research should be notified to the Unit Research Ethics Officer and may require a new
application for ethics approval.
Name of student (please print): __________________________________
Signature of student: __________________________________________
Date: _________________
95
Appendix 12: Risk assessment Form
Project Title:
Researcher:
Assess the Risks: (Probability X Severity = Risk)
Probability
Insignificant (e.g.
Minor (e.g. first aid
no injuries, very
treatment, low
low financial loss)
financial loss)
1
2
A (Certain)
B (Likely – to be
expected)
C (Probable)
D (Possible but
unusual)
E (Unlikely)
High
Moderate
High
High
Severity
Moderate (e.g.
medical treatment
required, medium
financial loss)
3
Extreme
High
Low
Low
Moderate
Low
Low
Low
Major (e.g. extensive
injuries, high
financial loss)
4
Travel:
Research:
96
Catastrophic (e.g.
death, very high
financial loss)
Extreme
Extreme
5
Extreme
Extreme
High
Moderate
Extreme
High
Extreme
Extreme
Moderate
High
High
Control the Risks: Actions taken or measures introduced to minimise risks to an acceptable level
Hazard (to student or to
Level of Risk
Action (to minimize risk)
participants)
-please give description
Health:
Personal safety:
Theft:
Date:
Appendix 13: Mitigating circumstances Form
INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
CONFIDENTIAL
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES FORM
ALL sections must be completed with the appropriate documentary evidence attached.
Your name
Student ID no.
Your course
Full or part time (FT, PT)
If PT, state year (1, 2 or 3)
Email
Phone no.
Your tutor
Please read the following notes before completing this mitigating circumstances form:
1. This form should be completed by the student presenting the mitigating circumstances.
2. This form, and where necessary, documentary evidence, MUST be submitted within 7 DAYS following the
deadline for an assignment or the date of an examination. If you are unable to attend University to
complete a form you MUST contact the Institute for the Environment (IFE), preferably the Course
Administrator, otherwise any member of staff, by letter, email or phone within 7 days after the deadline.
However, as soon as you become aware of mitigating circumstances that may affect your work, even
before deadlines or examination dates, then please tell the Courses Administrator, IFE’s Chair of Mitigating
Circumstances (MC) Panel, or any member of IFE teaching staff. In many cases, it is very useful to IFE if
you can discuss the MCs with a member of staff, as soon as possible, in order to gain the appropriate
support.
3. Please note that extensions to deadlines will not be given. The Examination Board will consider late
submissions in relation to submitted MCs, documentary evidence and the recommendation of the MC
Panel, and decide whether penalties will apply or not.
4. All information of a personal nature disclosed to the IFE MC Panel is normally confidential to the members
of that panel, which, in IFE, is usually made up of four people: the IFE taught-course Administrator, and the
three Programme Managers, for CCIS, PM and LM, one of whom is usually also the Chair of the IFE
Examination Board, in accordance with Senate Regulation 4. Only when it is absolutely necessary would
another member of staff be consulted in relation to your MCs, if, for example, a particular point needs to be
clarified, about which the panel is unclear. In the Examination Board, your MCs will be noted, but this is
done anonymously because Examination Boards in Brunel consider all students anonymously. The
decision to accept or reject the MCs will be made by the three academic members of the panel.
Notes for completing the form:
1. If the mitigating circumstances have prevented you from attending University and affected all your module
blocks write ALL in the first Module block code and title box in the form below. If specific module blocks are
affected, then you are provided with four boxes for four module blocks; if you need more space, then write
on the reverse of this form.
2. It is important that you explain as fully as possible how the mitigating circumstances have affected your
attendance or submission of coursework. This will assist the IFE MC Panel and the IFE Board of
Examiners in reaching the appropriate decision. Please ensure you fill in all the boxes.
3. If a module block is taught by another School please complete a separate form as we will need to send this
to the subject area teaching the module block.
4. You MUST sign this form. The IFE MC Panel may reject unsigned forms.
Mitigating circumstances cannot be taken into account unless:
1. You submit this form to the Courses Administrator, the Chair of IFE MC Panel, or any member of IFE
teaching staff, with ALL sections completed.
2. The form is submitted within 7 days after the deadline of the assessment to which it applies; submit earlier
if you can.
3. The form is accompanied by appropriate documentary evidence for absence of more than 7 days.
97
In the form below, if ALL your module blocks are affected, please circle “YES” then go to the next page;
if less than all are affected, circle “NO” and complete the rest of the form.
Are all your module blocks affected by your MCs? (circle
one)
YES
NO
If you have circled “NO”, please complete the form below.
MODULE BLOCK(S) AFFECTED (space for 4 module blocks; if you need more then add on reverse
of this page)
Module block code:
Module block title
Item affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1
Waste Management Report, Exam)
Submission deadline or exam date

If an exam, did you attend?
If cw, date you submitted,
or write “not submitted”
If cw not submitted, when
might you be able to submit?

Module block code:
Module block title
Item affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1
Waste Management Report, Exam)
Submission deadline or exam date

If an exam, did you attend?
If cw, date you submitted,
or write “not submitted”
If cw not submitted, when
might you be able to submit?

Module block code:
Module block title
Item affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1
Waste Management Report, Exam)
Submission deadline or exam date

If an exam, did you attend?
If cw, date you submitted,
or write “not submitted”
If cw not submitted, when
might you be able to submit?

Module block code:
Module block title
Item affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1
Waste Management Report, Exam)
Submission deadline or exam date

If an exam, did you attend?
If cw, date you submitted,
or write “not submitted”
If cw not submitted, when
might you be able to submit?

98
From
Dates you have been affected by mitigating circumstances
To:
Details of mitigating circumstances
Please:
1. explain how your mitigating circumstances affected your attendance or submission of coursework;
2. fill in as fully as possible and continue on a separate sheet if necessary;
3. if you have supporting document(s) (e.g. doctor’s letter) please make sure they are dated, and if possible
the document(s) should verify the dates you are affected.
4. You MUST provide documentary evidence for more than 7 days of MCs, but it will help us if you provide
evidence for shorter periods of MCs.

Member(s) of staff aware of these circumstances

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ATTACHED
This form should be accompanied, where appropriate, by a relevant medical certificate or letter from a
counsellor or other qualified person. Please tick the boxes for documentary evidence attached.

 Medical certificate
 Doctor’s letter
 Counsellor’s letter
 Other appropriate evidence (e.g. Jury Service, Social Services, Solicitors, Police)
Other – please specify:
NB. If documentary evidence is not supplied the mitigating circumstances may not be accepted by the
Mitigating Circumstance Panel.
Student signature
Date
Please return this form (in a sealed envelope if you prefer) with attached documents to the
Course Administrator (room HB146), Chair of IFE MC Panel, or any member of IFE teaching staff
For Office use only
Received by the Courses Administrator, Chair of IFE MC Panel,
or member of IFE teaching staff
Name of IFE person receiving this form:
99
Date:
Appendix 14: Student self-certification of illness Form
BRUNEL UNIVERSITY
STUDENT SELF-CERTIFICATION OF ILLNESS
This certificate should be completed by you and must accompany your Mitigating
Circumstances Form in all cases where you are claiming illness.
Name: …………………………………………………………………..
Student ID: ……………………………………………………………..
Date illness commenced: ……………………………………………..
Date illness ended (if it has ended): …………………………………..
Details of illness:
If your illness lasted/has lasted for more than 7 days, please provide a doctor’s note
in addition to this certificate.
Date of doctor’s note (if applicable): …………………………………..
Declaration
I declare that the above information is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge. I understand that to give false information could result in
disciplinary action against me in accordance with Senate Regulation 6.
Signed: ……………………………………….
100
Date: ………………………
Appendix 15: Request for Internal Resolution Form
Office use only
Date received
Signature or
School stamp
INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
REQUEST FOR INTERNAL RESOLUTION
PLEASE READ BEFORE COMPLETING THIS FORM
All documentation relating to Requests for Internal Resolution is kept confidential and any information
you provide is only disclosed to those with the authority or responsibility for making decisions relating
to your appeal.
Before you fill in this form, you should read the section of your School’s Student Handbook called
‘Making an Academic Appeal’ (Section 12.4).
Senate Regulation 12.22 states that
“A student considering the submission of a request for an academic appeal should first submit a
request for internal resolution to his or her School. The request should be submitted in writing in
accordance with the published procedures of the School within 10 working days of notification 1 of the
student’s results. A student submitting a request for internal resolution more than 10 working days
after the notification of results will be required to satisfy his or her School that he or she was unable,
for good reason, to submit a case within 10 working days of notification.”
If you have any queries before you submit your request for internal resolution, you should speak to
the Deputy Head of Teaching, Dr AJ Chaudhary.
Your School/Institute will normally offer you a meeting at which your request can be further discussed.
Your School will normally be required to determine the outcome of your request for internal resolution
within 10 working days of the date of receipt of the request.
Please complete all sections of this form.
Name
Enter your full name here
Student ID number
(including /)
Enter your student ID number here
Title of course
Enter the title of your course here
Type and level of your
course
Select the level of your course relevant to the decision of the Board of
Examiners against which you are appealing
Postal address *
Enter your full postal address here, including the postcode
Email address *
Enter your contact email address here, which should be your Brunel email
address
Telephone number
Enter your contact telephone number here
Date
Enter the date of submission of this request for internal resolution here
* these should be the same contact postal and email addresses that are currently shown in eVision –
please ensure you update your details in eVision if these are not the same.
1
Notification will be taken to include the publication of results through the internet or dispatch of notification of results by post to the
student’s most recently notified address.
101
Section A – Grounds for Appeal
In accordance with SR12.19, an academic appeal may be made on one or more of the
following grounds. Please indicate below which grounds are relevant to your appeal; it is
possible that more than one may apply.
Please select ‘Y’ for those that apply, and ‘N’ for those that do not apply.
A
B
C
That there exist circumstances materially affecting your performance which were
not known to the Examiners or progress review when the decision was taken, and
which it was not reasonably practicable for you to have made known to the
Examiners or progress review beforehand;
Select Y
or N
That there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examinations and/or
other assessment procedures, including assessment of coursework, of such a
nature as to create a reasonable possibility that the result might have been
different had they not occurred;
Select Y
or N
(i)
That there is evidence of prejudice or bias on the part of one or more
Examiners or members of staff conducting a progress review;
Select Y
or N
(ii)
That there is evidence of inadequate assessment on the part of one or
more Examiners or members of staff conducting a progress review.
Select Y
or N
Section B – The decision you are appealing against
What is the decision of the Examiners or members of staff conducting a review that you wish
to appeal against?
Please note that in accordance with SR12.20 you cannot submit an academic appeal on the
basis that you believe that the Examiners or assessors conducting your progress review are
alleged to have erred in the judgement of the academic standard achieved by you.
Enter here the relevant details, relating to the question above, and include as much information as
you feel is necessary in order for the School to reach its decision
Section C – Why should the decision be different?
Please explain why you think this decision should have been different. This is your
opportunity to explain in full your reasons for appeal.
Enter here the relevant details, relating to the question above, and include as much information as
you feel is necessary in order for the School to reach its decision
Section D – What outcome are you seeking from the appeal?
Please explain the outcome you would like from this appeal (for example, to be able to be
reassessed in the module(s) concerned).
Enter here the relevant details, relating to the question above, and include as much information as
you feel is necessary in order for the School to reach its decision
Section E – Supporting documentation
Please list here any documentation you are submitting in support of your request for internal
resolution. Wherever possible, original copies of documents should be supplied, which will
be returned to you as soon as possible.
Please ensure you attach the evidence listed below when you submit this form.
List here the documentation you are submitting in support of your academic appeal and remember to
attach it when you submit your form
102
Section F – Timeliness of request for internal resolution
SR12.22 states that
“…A student submitting a request for internal resolution more than 10 working days after
notification of his or her results will be required to satisfy his or her School that he or she was
unable, for good reason, to submit a case within 10 working days of notification…”
Please confirm below whether you are submitting this request within the permitted deadline.
Select one option from the list
If you are submitting this request more than 10 working days after the notification of your
results or the outcome of your progress review, please state below why this is the case. You
will need to provide a satisfactory explanation, which may need to include supporting
evidence.
Please state here why you are submitting your request for internal resolution more than 10 working
days after the notification of results
Section G – Possible implications of submitting this request
SR12.4 states that
“…Once an award has been conferred, either at a degree congregation or in absentia, a
student will not normally be able to submit or proceed with internal resolution or an academic
appeal. Once a request for internal resolution has been submitted any award which is
relevant to the request will not be conferred until the internal resolution and/or any
subsequent appeal processes have been concluded. Students will also not be permitted to
attend a degree congregation for the purpose of receiving a disputed award until their internal
resolution and/or academic appeal has been resolved.”
Please confirm below that you accept and understand this regulation.
Select the option to confirm that you understand the possible implications of submitting this request
for internal resolution
Please keep a copy of your Request for Internal Resolution form and supporting documentation for
your own records.
Please send this form and the accompanying documentation to:
Margaret Wescott
Programme Manager
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 146
Tel: 01895 – 266105
Email: margaret.wescott@brunel.ac.uk
This section is to be completed by the School
Outcome of Request for Internal Resolution
Was the student offered
a meeting at Internal
Resolution
Select Yes or No
If not, please state why
Please state here why the student was not offered a meeting at
Internal Resolution
Did the student take up
the offer of a meeting at
Select Yes or No
103
Internal Resolution
If not, please state why
Please state here why the student did not attend a meeting at Internal
Resolution
If yes, when did the
meeting take place
Click here to enter the date
What is the outcome of the attempt at resolution at School level?
Please give full details of the outcome of the student’s request for Internal Resolution, including the
reasons for the School’s decision
If you are not happy with the outcome of your request for Internal Resolution you are entitled
to submit an academic appeal.
SR12.25 states that
“Any request for an academic appeal must set out in full the grounds for appeal and must be
submitted in writing by the student to the Clerk to the Academic Appeals Committee promptly
and in any event must be received by the Clerk within 15 working days of written notification
to the student of the formal record of the conclusion of internal resolution by the School…”
You can request a copy of the Academic Appeal form from academic-appeals@brunel.ac.uk or visit
http://www.brunel.ac.uk/about/administration/appeals-and-complaints for a copy.
Signed
Name
Enter your name here
Date
Click here to enter the date
PLEASE ISSUE THE COMPLETED FORM TO THE STUDENT, AND PROVIDE A COPY TO:
Margaret Wescott
Programme Manager
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 146
Tel: 01895 – 266105
Email: margaret.wescott@brunel.ac.uk
If you have any queries, please contact:
Margaret Wescott
Programme Manager
Institute for the Environment
Halsbury Building, Room 146
Tel: 01895 – 266105
Email: margaret.wescott@brunel.ac.uk
104
Appendix 16: University Appeal Committee – Appeal Form
Office use only:
CASE NO
RECEIVED
UNIVERSITY APPEAL COMMITTEE
Notice of appeal under Senate Regulation 6 (Appeals Against Assessment)
You should read Senate Regulation 6 and ‘Academic Appeals: A Guide for Students’ before completing this
form (both are available at http://intranet.brunel.ac.uk/registry/appeals/home.shtml).
Answer all questions, as your appeal may be delayed or rejected if information is missing.
Please complete the form clearly, typed or in black ink. Continue on additional sheets if necessary.
I, the undersigned, wish to appeal against the assessment of my academic progress, as announced
at the last Board of Examiners. I understand that any award for which I have been recommended
will not be awarded whilst my appeal is being considered, and I will not be able to attend a degree
congregation until my appeal is resolved. If I choose to attend a degree congregation or accept my
award I will not be able to submit or proceed with an appeal.
Name
Student ID no.
Signature
Date
Postal address
(at which you can be
contacted quickly over the
next two months. If you would
like correspondence to be sent
to you electronically please
specify an email address AS
WELL AS a postal address)
Email address
Telephone number
Before proceeding with your appeal you are advised to carefully consider the following notes:
1. Many students will have various distractions and responsibilities during their course, which will, at times,
interfere with their studies. These may include financial and housing problems, relationship problems
and minor illnesses. Mitigating circumstances are taken into account in cases where they have
prevented a student from demonstrating their learning in formal assessments: they cannot be used as a
justification for your failure to master the subjects you are studying, or to achieve the results you might
have obtained had you been able to attend and/or study more effectively.
2. You cannot appeal solely because the result is worse than you would have wished or worse than you
feel you deserve. You cannot challenge academic judgment. For example, if a project has been
awarded a lower mark than you feel is justified, you do not have valid grounds for an appeal unless you
can identify a procedural error in the assessment process.
105
Date results received
If you are submitting this form
more than 21 days after the
completion of internal resolution,
please account for the delay
here.
You should note that
appeals received after 21 days
without good reason may be
rejected at the earliest stage.
Title of course
School/Institute
Are you: (please delete as appropriate)
Undergraduate / Postgraduate
Full-time / Part-time / Distance learning
Foundation level / Level 1 / Level 2 / Level 3 / Masters level / Research
1.
SR 6.4 states that a case will not normally be considered by the Academic Appeals Committee until
the possibility of School internal resolution has been exhausted.
YES – I have sought internal resolution and attach a copy of the formal ‘conclusion of internal
resolution’ provided by the School.
NO – please state below why you have not sought an internal resolution. Please note that the
Committee is not obliged to consider appeals that have not been considered at a local level first.
Please state below who you have spoken to and what the outcome was.
2.
SR 6.5 states the grounds upon which a student may appeal against their assessment. Please mark
below to indicate which of the grounds are relevant to your appeal; it is possible that more than one may
apply. (Your appeal may be rejected at the earliest stage if you do not clearly state the grounds upon which
you are appealing. Disputes against academic judgement will not be accepted as grounds for appeal; for
example, the Committee will not consider requests for assessments to be remarked if you think a piece of
work deserved a higher mark than it was given. The University has in place rigorous internal and external
moderation procedures to assure the standard of its marking.)
106
A
That there exist circumstances materially affecting your performance which were
not known to the Board of Examiners when its decision was taken and which it
was not reasonably practicable for you to make known to the Board beforehand.
B
That there were procedural irregularities in the conduct of the examinations
and/or assessment procedures, including assessment of coursework, of such a
nature as to create a reasonable possibility that the result might have been
different had they not occurred.
C
(i) That there is evidence of prejudice or bias on the part of one or more examiners
(ii) That there is evidence of inadequate assessment on the part of one or more
examiners.
3.
What is the decision of the Board of Examiners that you wish to appeal against? (Please attach a
copy of the letter informing you of the decision)
4.
Please explain (i) why you think this decision should have been different, and (ii) what you think the
decision should have been. This is your opportunity to explain in full your grounds for appeal and tell us
what outcome you think would be fair (eg. to be allowed to resit failed module blocks).
5.
If you believe that mitigating circumstances affected your performance, and these were not made
known to the Board of Examiners within seven days of the assessment, please explain here why it was
not possible for you to have submitted the mitigation in accordance with University rules. (Please attach
any supporting evidence, eg. medical certificates).
6.
Please list here any documentation you are submitting in support of your appeal. (Please attach
any supporting evidence, eg. medical certificates, correspondence with the department, extract
from the course handbook, etc.).
107
You should keep a copy of your appeal and all supporting documentary evidence for your own records.
Please send this form, and any supporting documentary evidence to:
Secretary to the Academic Appeals Committee, Quality and Standards Office
Room 216 Wilfred Brown Building, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middx. UB8 3PH
Please ensure that you get proof of postage if you are posting your appeal form. If you do not receive an
email confirming receipt of your appeal with 10 days please contact the Quality and Standards Office at
academic-appeals@brunel.ac.uk
The Committee will endeavour to consider cases promptly but please be aware that each case is
investigated thoroughly and sometimes this can take several weeks. The Committee’s decision can only
be communicated to you in writing, so it is very important that you provide the Secretary with your current
address details.
108
Appendix 17: Guide for writing reference citations
BRUNEL UNIVERSITY HAS MADE A USEFUL GUIDE FOR WRITING
REFERENCE CITATIONS, SHOWN IN THE TABLE BELOW.
Harvard Citation and Referencing:
Quick Guide
TYPE
REFERENCE
IN-TEXT
CITATION
Books with 1
author
Greetham, B. (2001) How to write better essays. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Greetham
(2001, p. 5)
or
(Greetham,
2001, p. 5)
(this applies to
all)
Books with 23 authors
Henderson, P. and Salmon, H. (2001) Social exclusion and community
development. London: Community Development Foundation.
(Henderson and
Smith, 2001,
p.89)
Books with
more than 3
authors
Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. and Tight, M. (1996) How to research. Berkshire: Open
University Press.
(Blaxter et al,
1996, p. 100)
Books with
later editions
Banks, S. (2006) Ethics and values in social work 3rd edn. Basingstoke:
Palgrave.
(Banks, 2006,
p. 3)
Edited Books
Jeffs, T. and Smith, M. (eds) (1987) Youth work. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
(Jeffs and
Smith, 1987)
Classical Texts
Carroll, L. (1984) Alice’s adventures in wonderland. London: Gollancz.
(Original work published 1863).
(Carroll,
1863/1984)
E- Books
Larkey, S. (2007) Practical sensory programmes for students with autism
spectrum disorders. University of Wales Institute Cardiff E-Content Collection.
Available at: www.netlibrary.com [Accessed: 28 November 2008].
(Larkey, 2007,
p.20)
Chapter in a
book
Manning, N. (1998). ‘Social needs, social problems and social welfare’. In
Alcock, P., Erskine, A. and May, M. (eds) The student’s companion to
social policy. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 31-36.
(Manning, 1998,
p.32)
Journal article
Lillis, T. and Turner, J. (2001) Student writing in Higher Education:
Contemporary confusion, traditional concerns. Teaching in Higher
Education 6 (1), pp. 57-68.
(Lillis & Turner,
2001, p.57)
Online journal
article
Imel, S. (1998) Using adult learning principles in adult basic and literacy
education. Educational Resources Information Centre Ohio, USA [Online].
Available at: http://ericacve.org/docs/pab00008.htm [Accessed: 26/11/08].
(Imel, 1998, p. #
if you have it)
109
Bloom, A. (2008) ‘Pupils behave better now than for 20 years’, Times
education supplement, 28 November, p.1.
Or if the author is unknown
Newspaper
TES (2008) ‘Pupils behave better now than for 20 years’, Times education
supplement, 28 November 2008, p.1.
If no date is given put (n.d.) or (no date) in place of the year
(Bloom, 2008,
p.1)
If author is
unknown:
(TES,
November 2008,
p.1)
Online
Newspaper
Lipsett, A. (2008) ‘More teachers facing discipline for bad behaviour
outside school’, The Guardian (28 November) [Online]. Available at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/nov/28/teacher-bad-behaviourschools [Accessed: 28 November 2008].
(Lipsett, 2008,
p.2)
If author is
unknown:
(The Guardian,
2008, p.2)
Blog
Lucas, C. (2011) How palm oil jeopardises global efforts to reduce
emissions. Guardian Environment Blog, 1 June [Online]. Available at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/jun/01/palm-oil-globalemissions [Accessed: 10 June 2011].
(Lucas, 2011)
Website
National Literacy Trust (2011) Policy. Available at:
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/policy [Accessed: 7 January 2011].
(National
Literacy Trust,
2011)
Film
The boy in the striped pyjamas (2008) Directed by Michael Herman [Film].
London: BBC Films.
(The boy in the
striped pyjamas,
2008)
DVD/Video
The Matrix reloaded (2003) Directed by A. and L. Wachowski [DVD]. Los
Angeles: Warner Brothers Inc.
(The Matrix
reloaded, 2003)
Television/
Radio
Programme
The culture show (2008) BBC 2 Television, 28 November.
(The culture
show, 2008)
Podcast
BBC Radio 4 (2008) You and yours: disability-programme highlights
[Podcast]. 5 December. Available at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/directory/
station/radio4/ [Accessed: 5 December 2008].
(You and yours,
2008)
Lecture
Huyton, J. (2007) Critical thinking [Lecture presented to BA Community
Education]. 14 March.
(Huyton, 2007)
Image
MacMillan, I. (1969) The Beatles: Abbey road [Photograph]
(Abbey road,
1969)
Image
(Online)
Magritte, R. (1928) The empty mask [Oil on canvas] National museum of
Wales: online gallery [Online]. Available at:
http://www.museumwales.ac.uk/en/art/
online/?action=show_item&item=1264 [Accessed: 3 December 2009].
(The empty
mask, 1928)
Map
Ordnance Survey (2008) Chester and North Wales, sheet 106, 1:50000.
Southampton: Ordnance Survey (Landranger series).
(Ordnance
Survey, 2008)
110
Email
Smith, J. (2008) Email to John Stephens, 3 August.
(Smith, 2008)
Interview
Blair, A. (2003) Interviewed by Jeremy Paxman for Newsnight BBC Two
Television, 2 February.
(Blair, 2003)
Works by
authors in the
same year or
with similar
names
Moon, J. (1999a) Reflection in learning and professional development.
London:
Kogan Page.
Moon, J (1999b) Learning journals: a handbook for academics, students
and professional development. London: Kogan Page.
111
(Moon, 1999a)
(Moon, 1999b)
Appendix 18: Summary checklist of information for references
Summary Checklist of Information for References
Book
Chapter
from Book
E-book
Electronic
journal
article
Journal
article
Internet site
Newspaper
article
Author
Year of
publication
Title of article
or chapter
Title of
publication
Issue info
e.g. volume
Place of
publication
Publisher
Edition
Page nos.
URL
Date
accessed
Extract from: Pears and Shields “Cite Then Right: the Essential Referencing Guide” (8th edn) p.13 Published by Palagrave 2010
112