Student Handbook2013-2014

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 EnvironmentHalsbury BuildingBrunel University

UB8 3PHUK

1

2

Table of Contents1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................7

2 POSTGRADUATE PROGRAMMES....................................................................................................................7

2.1 MSC IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: LEGISLATION AND MANAGEMENT (LM).....................................................72.2 MSC IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: POLLUTION AND MONITORING (PM)...........................................................72.3 MSC IN CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS AND SUSTAINABILITY (CCIS).....................................................................82.4 MSC IN SUSTAINABILITY, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND DESIGN (SUSED)................................................................82.5 MSC IN TOXICOLOGY AND RISK ASSESSMENT (TARA)......................................................................................11

3 CONTACTS............................................................................................................................................................11

3.1 HEAD OF THE INSTITUTE......................................................................................................................................113.2 DEPUTY HEAD OF TEACHING...............................................................................................................................113.3 PROGRAMME DIRECTORS.....................................................................................................................................123.4 PROGRAMME MANAGER.......................................................................................................................................12

4 ADMINISTRATION..............................................................................................................................................13

4.1 ENROLMENT.........................................................................................................................................................134.2 TIMETABLE/TERM DATES.....................................................................................................................................154.3 ATTENDANCE MONITORING POLICY....................................................................................................................154.4 TIER 4 OF UKBA REGULATIONS..........................................................................................................................17

5 TEACHING & LEARNING..................................................................................................................................19

5.1 MODE OF STUDY..................................................................................................................................................195.2 SCHEME OF STUDIES.............................................................................................................................................195.3 METHOD OF TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT..........................................................................................................20

5.3.1 Recording of taught lecture/seminar sessions.............................................................................................215.3.2 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 STUDY BLOCKS, ASSESSMENT BLOCKS AND MODULAR BLOCKS.......................................................................248.2 POSTGRADUATE ASSESSMENT: GRADING AND MARKING.....................................................................................258.3 CORE ASSESSMENT...............................................................................................................................................278.4 PROGRESSION REQUIREMENT...............................................................................................................................278.5 MASTERS-LEVEL GRADE DESCRIPTORS................................................................................................................27

9 AWARD REQUIREMENTS.................................................................................................................................29

9.1 REQUIREMENTS FOR A PASS AT MASTERS LEVEL................................................................................................299.2 REQUIREMENTS FOR MERIT AT MASTERS LEVEL.................................................................................................299.3 REQUIREMENTS FOR DISTINCTION AT MASTERS LEVEL.......................................................................................309.4 REASSESSMENT.....................................................................................................................................................309.5 OTHER AWARDS....................................................................................................................................................31

9.5.1 Requirement for a Postgraduate Diploma (PGDip.)...................................................................................329.5.2 Requirement for a Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert.)...............................................................................32

10 DISSERTATION....................................................................................................................................................33

10.1 OVERVIEW OF THE DISSERTATION PROCESS.........................................................................................................3310.2 FORMAL PROCEDURES..........................................................................................................................................3410.3 TYPICAL FORMAT FOR THE DISSERTATION...........................................................................................................3610.4 ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE FOR DISSERTATIONS....................................................................................................4010.5 GUIDELINES FOR SUPERVISORS.............................................................................................................................4110.6 DISSERTATION SCHEDULE....................................................................................................................................4210.7 DISSERTATION GRADE DESCRIPTORS....................................................................................................................43

11 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING PERFORMANCE...........................................................47

3

11.1 OVERVIEW............................................................................................................................................................4711.2 EXAMPLES............................................................................................................................................................4811.3 SUPPORTING EVIDENCE (SEE ALSO SECTION 11.4)...............................................................................................49

11.3.1 Self-certification of Illness...........................................................................................................................5011.3.2 Medical supporting evidence.......................................................................................................................50

11.4 STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES OR CHRONIC MEDICAL CONDITIONS.....................................................................5111.4.1 Supporting evidence for students with disabilities or chronic medical conditions.....................................52

11.5 SUBMITTING MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES.........................................................................................................5211.6 CONSIDERATION OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES SUBMISSIONS........................................................................53

11.6.1 Role of the Mitigating Circumstances Panel...............................................................................................5311.6.2 Action by the Board of Examiners...............................................................................................................53

12 APPEALS................................................................................................................................................................54

12.1 APPEALS CONCERNING ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT..................................................................................................5412.2 BEFORE MAKING AN APPEAL................................................................................................................................5412.3 GROUNDS FOR AN ACADEMIC APPEAL..................................................................................................................5512.4 MAKING AN ACADEMIC APPEAL...........................................................................................................................56

12.4.1 Stage 1 – Internal Resolution.......................................................................................................................5612.4.2 Stage 2 – The Academic Appeals Committee...............................................................................................56

13 SUBMISSION OF WORK AND LATE SUBMISSION PENALTIES.............................................................58

13.1 DEFINITION OF SUBMISSION DEADLINES...............................................................................................................5813.2 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND LATE SUBMISSION........................................................................................5813.3 PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF ASSESSED COURSEWORK..........................................................................59

13.3.1 PGT (except dissertations) – From 1st September 2013 onwards...............................................................6013.3.2 PGT (except dissertations) – Before 1st September 2013............................................................................60

13.4 PENALTIES FOR LATE SUBMISSION OF MASTERS DISSERTATIONS........................................................................6013.4.1 Masters dissertations late submissions – From 1st September 2013 onwards.............................................6013.4.2 Masters dissertations late submissions – Before 1st September 2013..........................................................61

14 GOOD ACADEMIC PRACTICE.........................................................................................................................62

14.1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................6214.2 YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES.......................................................................................................................................6214.3 WHAT IS PLAGIARISM?.........................................................................................................................................6314.4 IDENTIFICATION OF PLAGIARISM..........................................................................................................................6414.5 HOW CAN I AVOID PLAGIARISM?..........................................................................................................................6414.6 WHY SHOULD I REFERENCE?................................................................................................................................6614.7 WHAT SHOULD I REFERENCE?..............................................................................................................................6614.8 HOW SHOULD I REFERENCE?................................................................................................................................6614.9 REFERENCING TIPS................................................................................................................................................6714.10 FINAL CHECKS FOR AVOIDING PLAGIARISM.........................................................................................................6714.11 ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT......................................................................................................................................6714.12 WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU ARE ACCUSED OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT....................................................................6814.13 WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU ARE FOUND GUILTY OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT...........................................................6814.14 WHERE TO GET HELP............................................................................................................................................68

15 SUPPORT................................................................................................................................................................70

15.1 BRUNEL GRADUATE SCHOOL...............................................................................................................................7015.2 BRUNEL LANGUAGE CENTRE...............................................................................................................................7015.3 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..............................................................................................................................824

24 APPENDICES.........................................................................................................................................................83

APPENDIX 1: UNIVERSITY CALENDAR SHOWING TERM DATES......................................................................................83APPENDIX 3: COURSEWORK SUBMISSION SHEET...........................................................................................................84APPENDIX 4: COURSEWORK MARKERS’ REPORT FORM.................................................................................................85APPENDIX 5: ORAL PRESENTATION MARKERS’ REPORT FORM......................................................................................87APPENDIX 6: EXAMINATION MARKERS’ REPORT FORM................................................................................................89APPENDIX 7: DISSERTATION; APPROVAL FORM.............................................................................................................90APPENDIX 8: DISSERTATION; MARKERS’ REPORT FORM...............................................................................................91APPENDIX 9: DISSERTATION; EXAMPLE TITLE PAGE.....................................................................................................93APPENDIX 10: DISSERTATION; EXAMPLE DECLARATION OF OWN WORK......................................................................94APPENDIX 11: RESEARCH ETHICS REVIEW CHECKLIST..................................................................................................95APPENDIX 12: RISK ASSESSMENT FORM........................................................................................................................97APPENDIX 13: MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES FORM......................................................................................................98APPENDIX 14: STUDENT SELF-CERTIFICATION OF ILLNESS FORM...............................................................................101APPENDIX 15: REQUEST FOR INTERNAL RESOLUTION FORM......................................................................................102APPENDIX 16: UNIVERSITY APPEAL COMMITTEE – APPEAL FORM.............................................................................106APPENDIX 17: GUIDE FOR WRITING REFERENCE CITATIONS........................................................................................110APPENDIX 18: SUMMARY CHECKLIST OF INFORMATION FOR REFERENCES.................................................................113

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 broad-based 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. inter-disciplinary, 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

Term

3

ResearchIdea

Business Idea

Research Proposal

BusinessPlan

Business Incubator

Bid WritingInternship

6 monthsProfessional

Development(60 Credits)

BusinessEntrepreneur

BusinessLeader

ProductIdea

ProductDesign

A

S

SE

S

S

M

E

N

T

Proj

ect P

itch

and

Mat

ch Vent

ure

Capi

talis

tsEm

ploy

ers

Rese

arch

Fund

ers

Business Internship

PrototypeDevelopment

Designer/Innovator

ProposalWriter

Enhanced MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (with Professional Development)

Mul

tidisc

iplin

ary

Teac

hing

in in

Term

s 1 &

2En

v. (If

E), B

usin

ess (

BBS)

, Des

ign

(SED

) + In

tern

ation

al

A

S

SE

S

S

M

E

N

T

Allo

catio

n of

Aca

dem

ic S

uper

viso

r and

Men

tor M

atch

ing

Even

t

12 months (180 Credits)

Standard MSc in Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design

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 component, as described below. Successful completion of the Standard MSc in

9

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 JoblingInstitute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 144 Tel: 01895 – 266284Email: Susan.jobling@brunel.ac.uk

3.2 Deputy Head of Teaching

Dr Abdul J. ChaudharyInstitute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 129 Tel: 01895 – 266112Email: abdul.chaudhary@brunel.ac.uk

11

3.3 Programme Directors

Dr Stephen KershawProgramme Director: Environmental Science: Legislation and Management (LM)Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 135Tel: 01895 – 266094Email: stephen.kershaw@brunel.ac.uk

Dr Abdul J ChaudharyProgramme Director: Environmental Science: Pollution and Monitoring (PM)Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 129Tel: 01895 – 266112Email: abdul.chaudhary@brunel.ac.uk

Dr Andrew RussellProgramme Director: Climate Change Impacts and Sustainability (CCIS)Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 131Tel: 01895 – 267303Email: andrew.russell@brunel.ac.uk

Dr Edwin RoutledgeProgramme Director: Sustainability, Entrepreneurship and Design (SusED)Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 148Tel: 01895 – 266299Email: edwin.routledge@brunel.ac.uk

Dr Elisabete SilvaProgramme Director: Toxicology and Risk Assessment (TARA)Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 125Tel: 01895 – 265330Email: elisabete.silva@brunel.ac.uk

3.4 Programme Manager

Margaret WescottInstitute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 146 Tel: 01895 – 266105Email: 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

ModuleAssessment Pattern

Exam weighting,%

CourseworkWeighting,%

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 scheduleAcademic Session 2013/14 Academic Session 2014/15

Tim

e TERM 1 TERM 2TERM

3 TERM 1TERM

2

September - December January - April September - DecemberCCIS PM LM

Cour

sewo

rk su

bmiss

ion,

exa

min

atio

ns p

erio

d an

d Ja

nuar

y In

take

CCIS PM LM

Cour

sewo

rk su

bmiss

ion

and

exam

inat

ions

per

iod

IE55

00 -

Diss

erta

tion

subm

issio

n at

the

end

of S

ep. (

Sep.

inta

ke)

Sept

embe

r Int

ake

- Aca

dem

ic se

ssio

n 20

14/1

5

CCIS PM LM

Cour

sewo

rk su

bmiss

ion

and

exam

inat

ions

per

iod

IE55

00 -

Diss

erta

tion

subm

issio

n at

the

end

of M

arch

(Jan

uary

inta

ke)

Sept

embe

r Int

ake

- Aca

dem

ic se

ssio

n 20

13/1

4

Teac

hing

Day

1

AM

IE5601 IE5601IE5512 IE5507 IE5509

IE5601 IE5601

IE5518 IE5510 IE5518 IE5510

PM IE5504 IE5504 IE5504 IE5528 IE5507 IE5509 IE5504 IE5504 IE5504

AM IE5513 IE5508 IE5513 IE5516 IE5516 IE5516 IE5513 IE5508 IE5513

PM IE5508 IE5511 IE5511 IE5511 IE5508

Shared Modules Shared Modules Shared Modules

14

60 Credits 60 Credits60 Cred. 60 Credits

60 Cred.

Table 3: September and January intake and delivery scheduleTerm September 2013 intake

(Academic session 2013/14)

Aca

dem

ic S

essi

on 2

013/

14

1(September

– December

2013)

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

2(January –

March 2014)

Coursework submission & Institute arranged Exam Period

January 2014 intake(Academic session 2013/14)

Examinations (week 16) 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)

3(June –

September 2014)

IE5500 Dissertation

Selection of dissertation topic and attendance of relevant training sessions organised by the Graduate School

IE5500 Dissertation

Selection of dissertation topic and attendance of relevant training sessions organised by the Graduate School

Dissertation submission (20th September 2014)

Aca

dem

ic S

essi

on 2

014/

15

1(September

– December

2014)

September 2014 intake(Academic session 2014/15)

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

2(January –

March 2015)

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, 16 th 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.

15

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 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/tier4Brunel 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

17

- Notify Registry in a timely manner to withdraw a student who fails to attend- Inform students of monitoring and reporting requirements- 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 FWork 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

(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-)

Grade Band D

(D+, D, D-)

Grade Bands E and F (E+, E, E-, F)

With grade below C- in any core block or core element of assessment

Any 30 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 C

(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-)

Grade Band D

(D+, D, D-)

Grade Bands E and F

(E+, E, E-, F)

With grade below C- in any core block or 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

(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-)

Grade Band D (D+, D, D-)

Grade Bands E and F

(E+, E, E-, F)

With grade below C- in any core block or 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. 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;

2. 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 one-year 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

(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-)

Grade Band D

(D+, D, D-)

Grade Bands E and F

(E+, E, E-, F)

With grade below C- in any core block or core element of assessment

Any 30 0 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

(A++, A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-)

Grade Band D (D+, D, D-)

Grade Bands E and F

(E+, E, E-, F)

With grade below C- in any core block or core element of assessment

Any 15 0 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. Part-time 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.

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.

5. 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).

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. All dissertations, after being marked and moderated internally, are read by the External Examiner to confirm the final grades.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. 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)AcknowledgementsTable of Contents (Including list of figures and plates)Glossary of terms (acronyms) if necessaryIntroduction (Background of the project with a clear statement about the research question, and the specific aims and objectives of the project)Literature reviewMethods (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, DiscussionConclusionsReferencesAppendices

AbstractThe 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.

IntroductionThis 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 ReviewAn 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 methodsThis 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

ResultsThe 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.

DiscussionThis 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.

ConclusionsIn 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.

ReferencesWhen 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 PAPERSHoodwink, A. and Phoney, B. 1990. The association between lines in the palm and life expectancy. Journal of Astrology 97: 1-14Good, 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 WWW-based 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.

AppendicesThe use of appendices in library-based dissertations is actively discouraged. In laboratory-based 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.

GraphsGraphical 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 graphsThe 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.

TablesEach 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 DissertationDissertations 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 BindingAll 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.

1. 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

40

assessors for a dissertation shall be selected such that their combined knowledge of the dissertation topic is appropriate;

3. 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.

4. Where the two independently assessed grades differ, a final agreed grade, with written justification for the agreed grade, shall be provided to the dissertation co-ordinator by the two assessors jointly;

5. 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;

6. 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 3Discuss 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.

Term 3

TASK DescriptionMay/June July/August August/September

Week Number Week Number Week Number35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 0

1 Selection of a project

Subm

issi

on D

ate:

19th

Sep

tem

ber

2014

Select an original and manageable project2 Literature review

Collect background information & undertake literature review

3 The detailed plan Devise a detailed plan of the dissertation

4 Initial writing Draft the various chapters/sections of the dissertation Undertake additional literature review if necessary

5 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

6 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

7 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 topicThe 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 analysisThe 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.

PresentationThe 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.

IndependenceThe 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 topicThe 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 analysisThe 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.

PresentationThe 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.

IndependenceThe 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 topicThe 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 analysisThe 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

PresentationThe 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.

IndependenceThe 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 topicThe 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 analysisThe 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.

PresentationThe 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 topicThe 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 analysisThe 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.

PresentationThe 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.

IndependenceThe 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)

See also under Submitting mitigating circumstances (section 11.5) .

49

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.

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

50

the time of your visit to the doctor and submit it along with a Student Self-Certification 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.

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 The condition

51

o The symptomso When the condition arose or was diagnosedo The impact on your ability to study or complete the assessment(s) on timeo Whether any acute episode is associated with the condition and o Whether it was known to your medical practitionero 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 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.

52

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;

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

53

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/senate-regulations/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 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

54

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) 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;

b) 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;

c) (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/senate-regulations/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 concluded. This means that you will not be able to attend the graduation ceremony whilst the appeal remains unresolved.

Challenges to academic judgement

55

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.

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.

56

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.

13.3.1 PGT (except dissertations) – From 1 st September 2013 onwards

59

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 Mark capped at 60% Grade B-Up to 5 working days late Mark capped at 50% Grade C-Up to 10 working days late Mark capped at 40% Grade D- Up to 15 working days late Mark capped at 30% Grade E-More than 15 working days late Mark capped at 0% Grade NS

(non-submission)

13.3.2 PGT (except dissertations) – Before 1 st 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 Grade capped at BUp to 5 working days late Grade capped at CUp to 10 working days late Grade capped at DUp to 15 working days late Grade capped at EMore than 15 working days late Grade capped at F

13.4 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 1 st September 2013 onwards

The following University policy applies to all Postgraduate Taught Programme students first registering from 1 st 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 full-time 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

60

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 1 st September 2013

The following University policy applies to all Postgraduate Taught Programme students first registering before 1 st 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 full-time 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 Examiners may extend the standard submission deadline for the student’s dissertation by a period of no more than 4 weeks.

61

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 19 th 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. Read the University guidance on academic practice2. Read the guidance on referencing and other academic conventions issued by your

School/Institute and always follow these conventions3. 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.

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:

62

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;

2. 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

63

presenting Jones’s original footnote references to his/her sources as if they were your own sources, without giving Jones due recognition;

3. 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;

4. 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.

14.4 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.

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

64

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:

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

14.7 What should I reference?

Referencing involves clearly acknowledging your use of, and directing your reader to, your sources:

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

14.8 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/ andhttps://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 material. You should ensure you apply the correct format for the referencing system you

66

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.

Falsification may include the falsification of results, mitigating circumstances, a doctor’s certificate or any other document to gain an unfair advantage.

67

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/senate-regulations/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

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

68

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 PlanThe 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 perspectiveIfE 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 studentsThe 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

71

professional personal support (for example with the University counsellors) as 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 provisionIfE 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.

DocumentationA 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 activitiesStudents 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 responsibilitiesTeaching 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 MeetingTeaching 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 Reference1. 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 PanelThe 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/senate-regulations/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/senate-regulations/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 EnvironmentAttach 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 EnvironmentWritten 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

2. Organisation of the report (eg. use of subheadings)

Excellent Good Fair Poor

3. Clarity of aims/objectives, scope of report

Excellent Good Fair Poor

4. Strength and logic of argumentation

Excellent Good Fair Poor

5. Quality of referencing

Excellent Good Fair Poor

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 5 4 3 2 1 0

A Presentation1. Speaks clearly Unclear presentation

2. Good layout and graphical material Inadequate layout/graphical material

3. In time Overdrawn

4. Overall effective Ineffective

B Structure/Content5. 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

COLUMN TOTALS GRAND TOTAL =(max 50)

Overall Comments:

Final Coursework Percentage/Grade:

86

Please note that this is an interim grade to be finalised at the meeting of the Panel of Examiners (POE).

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. Structure/content5. 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 FormBrunel 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 NThe 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 EnvironmentDissertation; 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 CHECKLISTPlease 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.

YES NO1. 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)

4. 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?

5. Could the study induce psychological stress or anxiety or cause harm or negative consequences beyond the risks encountered in normal life?

6. Will the study involve prolonged or repetitive testing? 7. Will financial inducements (other than reasonable expenses and

compensation for time) be offered to participants?

8. 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: Date:

Assess the Risks: (Probability X Severity = Risk)Probability Severity

Insignificant (e.g. no injuries, very

low financial loss)1

Minor (e.g. first aid treatment, low financial loss)

2

Moderate (e.g. medical treatment required, medium

financial loss)3

Major (e.g. extensive injuries, high financial loss)

4

Catastrophic (e.g. death, very high financial loss)

5A (Certain) High High Extreme Extreme ExtremeB (Likely – to be expected)

Moderate High High Extreme Extreme

C (Probable) Low Moderate High Extreme ExtremeD (Possible but unusual)

Low Low Moderate High Extreme

E (Unlikely) Low Low Moderate High High

Control the Risks: Actions taken or measures introduced to minimise risks to an acceptable levelHazard (to student or to participants)-please give description

Level of Risk Action (to minimize risk)

Health:Personal safety:

Theft:

Travel:

Research:

96

Appendix 13: Mitigating circumstances Form

INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT CONFIDENTIAL

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES FORMALL 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 titleItem affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1Waste Management Report, Exam)Submission deadline or exam dateIf an exam, did you attend?If cw, date you submitted,or write “not submitted”If cw not submitted, whenmight you be able to submit?

Module block code: Module block titleItem affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1Waste Management Report, Exam)Submission deadline or exam dateIf an exam, did you attend?If cw, date you submitted,or write “not submitted”If cw not submitted, whenmight you be able to submit?

Module block code: Module block titleItem affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1Waste Management Report, Exam)Submission deadline or exam dateIf an exam, did you attend?If cw, date you submitted,or write “not submitted”If cw not submitted, whenmight you be able to submit?

Module block code: Module block titleItem affected (e.g. IE5509 CW1Waste Management Report, Exam)Submission deadline or exam dateIf an exam, did you attend?If cw, date you submitted,or write “not submitted”If cw not submitted, whenmight you be able to submit?

98

Dates you have been affected by mitigating circumstancesFrom To:

Details of mitigating circumstancesPlease: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 ATTACHEDThis 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 onlyReceived by the Courses Administrator, Chair of IFE MC Panel,or member of IFE teaching staff

Name of IFE person receiving this form:

Date:

99

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: ………………………………………. Date: ………………………

100

Appendix 15: Request for Internal Resolution Form

Office use only

Date received

Signature or School stamp

INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTREQUEST FOR INTERNAL RESOLUTION

PLEASE READ BEFORE COMPLETING THIS FORMAll 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 notification1 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 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 Yor N

B 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 Yor N

C (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 Yor 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 Yor 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 WescottProgramme ManagerInstitute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 146 Tel: 01895 – 266105Email: 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 Internal Resolution

Select Yes or No

103

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 WescottProgramme ManagerInstitute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 146 Tel: 01895 – 266105Email: margaret.wescott@brunel.ac.uk

If you have any queries, please contact:Margaret WescottProgramme Manager Institute for the EnvironmentHalsbury Building, Room 146 Tel: 01895 – 266105Email: 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 2-3 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 articleLillis, 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

Newspaper

Bloom, A. (2008) ‘Pupils behave better now than for 20 years’, Times education supplement, 28 November, p.1.

Or if the author is unknown

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-behaviour-schools [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-global-emissions [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/ RadioProgramme

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)

LectureHuyton, 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.

(Moon, 1999a)

(Moon, 1999b)

111

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