0 Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences MSc Immunology Course handbook 2018-19 Elie Metchnikoff (1845-1916) and Paul Ehrlich (1854-1915) awarded the Nobel prize for Medicine in 1908 for their pioneering work on phagocytosis. Programme lead: Dr Helen Collins ([email protected])
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
0
Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences
MSc Immunology Course handbook 2018-19
Elie Metchnikoff (1845-1916) and Paul Ehrlich (1854-1915) awarded the Nobel prize for Medicine in 1908 for their pioneering work on phagocytosis.
Programme lead: Dr Helen Collins ([email protected])
1
Contents
1. Aims and Learning Outcomes.................................................................................. 4
2. Programme structure ................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Learning and teaching strategies ...................................................................................... 5
2.2 Immunology conference attendance ................................................................................. 5
2.3 Immunology research seminars ........................................................................................ 6
2.4 Workload .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.5 Calendar ........................................................................................................................... 6
2.6 Governance of the MSc Immunology course ..................................................................... 7
3. Taught Modules Content .......................................................................................... 8
3.1 7MCEMM01 Cellular Interactions in the Immune System .................................................. 8
3.1.1 Module aims and learning outcomes ........................................................................... 8
3.1.2 7MCEMM01 assessment ............................................................................................ 9
3.2 7MCEMM02 Molecular Immunology ................................................................................11
3.2.1 Module aims and learning outcomes ..........................................................................11
3.2.2 7MCEMM02 assessment ...........................................................................................11
3.3 7MCEMM03 Immune Disorders and Infection ..................................................................13
3.3.1 Module aims and learning outcomes ..........................................................................13
3.4 7MCEMM16 Immune Disorders and Respiratory Diseases ..............................................13
3.4.1 Module aims and learning outcomes ..........................................................................13
3.4.2 7MCEMM03/7MCEMM16 assessments ....................................................................14
3.5 7MCEMM17 Research Skills............................................................................................17
3.5.1 Module aims and learning outcomes: .........................................................................17
3.5.2 Research skills attendance and assessments ............................................................17
3.5.3 Project presentations .................................................................................................17
3.5.4 The Research Project proposal ..................................................................................19
3.6 7MCEMM04 Research Project .........................................................................................21
3.6.1 Module aims and learning outcomes ..........................................................................21
3.6.2 Choosing your project topic .......................................................................................21
3.6.3 Location of project work .............................................................................................21
3.6.4 Supervision ................................................................................................................22
3.6.5 Project report contents ...............................................................................................23
3.6.6 Manuscript format ......................................................................................................25
3.6.7 Instructions for binding and submission of your project report ....................................25
3.6.8 Confidentiality ............................................................................................................25
3.6.9 Research Project marking and feedback ...................................................................25
2
4. Assessment & Feedback ........................................................................................ 26
4.1 Overall assessment pattern .............................................................................................26
4.2 Formative and summative assessments ..........................................................................27
4.3 Word limits .......................................................................................................................27
4.4 Late submission ...............................................................................................................27
4.5 Examinations ...................................................................................................................27
4.5.1 Personal Assessment Arrangements .........................................................................28
4.6 Missed assessment .........................................................................................................28
4.7 Academic appeals ............................................................................................................29
4.8 What to do if you need to interrupt your studies ...............................................................29
4.9 Plagiarism and academic misconduct ..............................................................................29
4.10 Award requirements and degree classifications .............................................................30
4.11 Interviews by External Examiners ..................................................................................31
4.12 Assessment criteria ........................................................................................................31
4.13 Coursework and examination feedback .........................................................................45
5 Personal and Academic Support ............................................................................ 46
5.1 Personal Tutors ...............................................................................................................46
5.2 English language .............................................................................................................46
5.3 Student voice ...................................................................................................................46
5.3.1 Student feedback to staff ...........................................................................................46
5.3.2 Module feedback and evaluation ...............................................................................46
5.3.3 Student representation...............................................................................................47
5.4 Books and source material ...............................................................................................47
5.5 Library ..............................................................................................................................48
3
Welcome to MSc Immunology at King’s College London It is our pleasure to welcome you to the College, to the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine, the School of Immunology and microbial sciences and to our MSc course in Immunology. We hope you will enjoy the experience of studying immunology in depth and we will try to create an environment that will encourage your development as an immunologist. Much of the course is devoted to developing skills of study and communication that should help you in many ways in your current studies and future careers. We have a vast experience of teaching postgraduate students. We assume that you have rather little knowledge of the subject to start with, so even if you find the introductory lectures cover familiar ground you will rapidly discover new material and ideas. What follows is presented to help you understand our aims and how we have structured the course. One central point to remember throughout the year you will spend with us is that we are here to help you learn and to understand immunology: we place as much emphasis upon active learning by you, as upon formal teaching by us. We wish you every success and happiness at King’s College. We are proud of the way this course is designed and of the attention we give to students. We are always on hand to help you.
Dr Helen Collins Course Director
Disclaimer This handbook was published in September 2018 and reflects the information available at that time. We have made this information as accurate as possible. Updates to the handbook will be communicated on KEATS. If there is any conflict between information on the web page and this handbook, then the web page should be taken as the authoritative source. If you should find any information that you consider to be out of date, inaccurate or misleading then please contact ([email protected]) with the relevant page number(s) and your reasons for considering the information to be inaccurate. Other student handbooks If you cannot find the information you require in your module handbook it is likely to be in one of the other student handbooks. Faculty Postgraduate Student Handbook Additional useful information relating to your programme and to student welfare can be found in the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine PGT Handbook, see https://internal.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/students/pgt/handbook/index.aspx King’s Student Handbook The university has an online student handbook, covering useful College level information about services for students: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/quality/academic/myhandbook/index.aspx
4
1. Aims and Learning Outcomes Aims:
To provide a thorough coverage of fundamental and applied aspects of Immunology, at a level that expands and develops knowledge gained from an undergraduate degree. This conceptual understanding will enable students to critically evaluate current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline and to evaluate methodologies and develop critiques of them and, where appropriate, to propose new hypotheses.
To develop skills essential to research. This includes the design, practice and interpretation of experiments, a comprehensive understanding of techniques applicable to immunological research, critical analysis of published papers and reviews, and the communication of immunological knowledge through verbal presentations and the written word.
To provide a systematic understanding of knowledge, and a critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights in Immunology, much of which is at, or informed by, the forefront of immunological research.
To encourage and facilitate student participation and independent study and engender originality in the application of knowledge, together with a practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge of Immunology.
Outcomes: Students will gain an understanding of:
genetics, structure and functional organisation of the immune system
biology of immune cells and the nature and biology of molecules important to immune function
protective immunity and immunization
autoimmune disease and other diseases and conditions with immunological aspects
immunology and diseases of the respiratory system
applications of immunological methodology and therapies
immunological research; techniques, design and implementation of experimental strategies, interpretation of results
Students will develop the ability to:
Address complex issues both systematically and creatively, make sound judgements in the absence of complete data, and communicate their conclusions clearly to specialist and non-specialist audiences.
Demonstrate self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems, and act autonomously in planning and implementing tasks at a professional level such as the design, practice and interpretation of experiments.
Advance knowledge and understanding, and to develop new skills to a high level.
5
Students will also acquire qualities and transferable skills to enhance employability:
the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility
decision-making in complex and unpredictable situations
independent learning ability required for continuing professional development.
2. Programme structure The programme comprises 3 taught modules and 2 research project modules. Specialist tutors coordinate each module (see details in Section 2). The programme specifications for the MSc Immunology can be found at http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/quality/academic/prog/specs/index.aspx The modules are: 7MCEMM01: Cellular Interactions in the Immune System 7MCEMM02: Molecular Immunology 7MCEMM04: Experimental Research Project in Immunology 7MCEMM17: Research skills 7MCEMM03: Immune Disorders and Infection
OR 7MCEMM16: Immune Disorders and Respiratory Diseases Students complete three taught modules and the two research project modules in a year. The six month research project is undertaken in King’s College London laboratories. Consolidation and revision weeks: In the first semester, there is a consolidation week (w/c 29th October) and a revision week (w/c 10th December). In these weeks there will be no new taught material delivered but some assessments may occur during these weeks therefore you should plan to be in attendance at the university during these times. These are opportunities for you to consolidate the information you have received to that point.
2.1 Learning and teaching strategies
Lectures: A conventional lecture lasts 50 - 55 minutes, but many of our lecture sessions last up to 3 hours for lectures with a break in the middle, and discussion time at the end. Remember at MSc level lectures should be treated more like research seminars, be prepared to ask questions and seek more information and explanation where you need it. Don't depend upon lecture notes, or textbooks, alone. Group Study Sessions: These sessions involve more interactive learning using a range of different formats including; group discussions, problem directed learning, data interpretation, seminar presentations, a student debate and formative assessment exercises. You are expected to participate actively in these group exercises. Critical self-appraisal is an important feature of this method of study.
2.2 Immunology conference attendance
Students will be registered for and attend the British Society of Immunology Winter School which will be held in Nottingham 3rd—5th December 2018. The cost of attendance at the conference
6
(travel, registration and accommodation) as well as membership of the BSI will be covered by course fees. All students are expected to attend.
2.3 Immunology research seminars
Speakers (usually from other institutions) are invited to give seminars on their research over the course of the year. MSc students are invited to attend these seminars. These seminars will take place on Guy’s campus. You will be informed of the exact time and location of seminars, but most will take place on Wednesdays at 12.15. The subject matter may not relate directly to topics you are studying but nevertheless they provide a valuable opportunity for you to hear about latest research on different Immunological topics.
2.4 Workload
About 50 days are spent in attendance at King's College, usually between 10.00 am and 5pm for participation in lectures, group study session, journal club and core skills tutorials. The experimental research project should typically occupy the equivalent of six months full-time work (5 days per week), in which time experiments should be designed, conducted and analysed and the project report written up. You are expected to spend the remaining time undertaking directed reading, essay writing and preparing material for group study, problem directed learning sessions or in-course assessments.
2.5 Calendar
Month Programme
October 7MCEMM01, 02, 03,
November 7MCEMM03/16
December 7MCEMM06/16, Project allocation Performance Review tutorials Assessment for 7MCEMM03/16
January Examinations
February 7MCEMM04 PROJECT, 7MCEMM17
March PROJECT, 7MCEMM17
April Programme Assessment Sub-board
PROJECT, 7MCEMM17 Performance Review tutorials
May PROJECT, 7MCEMM17
June PROJECT, 7MCEMM17
July PROJECT Project report submission (7MCEMM04) Final project presentations (7MCEMM17)
August Re-sit/Replacement examinations
September Programme Assessment Sub-board
October Ratified degree results published
7
2.6 Governance of the MSc Immunology course
The management of the MSc Immunology course is directed by an MSc Immunology Management Committee that consists of the course director in consultation with other colleagues at King’s College London who teach on the course. The committee meets regularly throughout the year and reports to the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine Postgraduate Taught Education Committee which in turn reports to the Faculty Education Committee, College Education Committee and Academic Board. The MSc Immunology Management Committee is responsible for curriculum development, for monitoring and development of teaching and assessment procedures on the course and for monitoring student progression. A student representative is invited to join the Management committee.
MSc Immunology Management Committee: Dr Helen Collins (Course Director): [email protected], phone: 02078486044 Dr Susan John (Chair of Assessment Sub Board) [email protected] Dr Linda Barber ([email protected]) Dr Patricia Barral ([email protected]) Dr Deena Gibbons ([email protected]) Dr Pierre Guermonprez ([email protected]) Dr Greg Woszczek ([email protected]) External examiner: Dr Andrew Jackson (University of Nottingham)
8
3. Taught Modules Content Over thirty different lecturers lecture on our course. Most of the lecturers are based at King’s College but there are also some lecturers from other institutions in London and beyond. Lectures will be supported by a reading list and occasionally more extensive lecture notes. Please note that lecturing styles vary. In addition, some lecturers may give extensive notes along with a reading list and others will not. You can expect to have a reading list to support all lectures and lecturers are requested to provide these for you. If for some reason you do not get a reading list to support a lecture, then please email the course module organiser as soon after the lecture as possible. We strongly encourage all lecturers to provide us with PowerPoint presentations of their lectures and these will be uploaded onto the course website on KEATS prior to the lecture.
3.1 7MCEMM01 Cellular Interactions in the Immune System
Module Organisers: Dr Greg Woszczek and Dr Pierre Guermonprez
3.1.1 Module aims and learning outcomes This module is designed to acquaint students with fundamental cellular processes involved in the generation of an immune response. It will provide students with detailed knowledge of the cells and organs of the immune system, their organisation and diversity, and their specialised functions at different anatomical locations. The importance of immune cell receptors and cytokines in cellular interactions and co-ordination of immunological mechanisms is also emphasised. Lectures will be supplemented by a course work exercise which will consist of the preparation and presentation (15 minutes) of a poster on an immunological topic. An example of a distinction level poster will be posted on KEATS for students to see and the criteria for assessment can be found in the assessment section of the handbook. Learning outcomes of the module: By the end of the module and the directed reading, students should be able
To describe and discuss the current knowledge of the cellular processes that control the development, maintenance and activation of immune responses
To analyse and interpret primary research papers in the area of cellular immune interactions
To describe and evaluate techniques used to evaluate immune responses
To identify and appraise research strategies used to investigate cellular immune functions
9
3.1.2 7MCEMM01 assessment
7MCEMM01 will be assessed by 70% examination and 30% coursework. The in course assessment will consist of the preparation and presentation of a poster on the development and application of an immunological method. Full detail of the exercise are outlined below and will be discussed in the induction session on the first day of teaching. The poster session will take place on Tuesday 16th October 2018 2-5pm in the Function Room, Henriette Raphael Building All students are required to attend the whole of the poster session.
Poster assessment You will prepare and present a poster on the use and application of an immunological technique/method. The method you are to prepare your poster on will be allocated to you on the first day. You will be asked to verbally present your poster for 15 minutes to two examiners who will talk to you about your poster and ask questions at the end. Feedback: The examiners will provide a provisional mark and verbal feedback on the day of the poster session. The criteria that the examiners will be marking your poster on can be found in the assessment section of this handbook. How to go about preparing a poster: See the following web link for information on preparing and printing a poster. Please also see an example of a distinction level poster on the programme KEATS e-learning site. Your print account will be credited with sufficient funds to print your poster. https://internal.kcl.ac.uk/it/student/printcopyscan/A0-Posters/index.aspx
A poster, just like a research paper, should be divided into sections. Since your poster is concerned with the use and application of an immunological technique, it would be appropriate to divide the poster into sections as follows; Introduction, Method, Application of Method (ie. results obtained from a primary research paper), Discussion/Conclusions.
There are different ways to prepare posters. An efficient way is to use PowerPoint to design and assemble the poster and then print it out on A0 size paper that is the appropriate size. The poster boards on which the posters will be displayed are 87 cm (width) by 175 cm (height) size so the poster should be designed to fit into these dimensions (portrait A0 format).
Remember that text size on a poster should be big enough to be able to read from a reasonable distance. Clearly, font size 12 or below is inappropriate for a poster. There should also not be too much text to read on a poster. Bullet points are an effective way of getting points across and while it is appropriate to use paragraphs of text avoid the use of very long tracts of text.
10
Visual impact on a poster is important, so good graphic illustrations are an effective way of getting information across on a poster.
In preparing this poster you should describe the technique and then outline how the methodology is applied (or was applied) in key experiments in a research paper. There is no need to describe every conceivable situation in which the method is used. It is probably better to pick one area and describe in detail the experiments in which the method is used.
11
3.2 7MCEMM02 Molecular Immunology
Module Organisers: Dr Susan John and Dr Patricia Barral
3.2.1 Module aims and learning outcomes This module is designed to acquaint students with structure and functional relationships of immune cell receptors and gene regulatory pathways that control immune cell development/function. Students will acquire knowledge of structural properties of immune receptors and how these are important in receptor functions such as antigen interaction and signal transduction. In addition, the module explores how immune regulatory molecules can be designed/manipulated for use in vaccines, immunotherapy of disease and basic research. The lectures will be supported by an advanced topics coursework on specialized subjects where groups of students will prepare and present material in the form of a short journal club presentation to their fellow students. These will be presented on Friday 9th November 2018.
Module learning outcomes: By the end of the module and the directed reading students should be able:
To describe and discuss current knowledge about the molecular mechanisms and signalling pathways regulating immune cell development, activation and function
To critically analyse and interpret primary research papers in the area of molecular immunology.
To identify and evaluate the research strategies used to investigate molecular mechanisms and genetic changes during immune cell development and activation
To evaluate the rationale behind the use of specific strategies targeting specific signalling pathways for the treatment of immune-related disorders
3.2.2 7MCEMM02 assessment 7MCEMM02 will be assessed by 70% examination and 30% course work. The in-course assessment exercise (30%) will be based on your performance in advanced topic journal club presentations that you present in class. Full details of this course work exercise will be given to you in the session on Thursday 27th September 2018. There will be 5 advanced topics:
1. miRNA 2. Isotype Class switching 3. Exosomes 4. Complement
5. Antigen processing and presentation
The presentations will take place on Friday 9th November 2018. You will be allocated into groups and told in which session to present but all students are expected to attend all their allocated sessions. Feedback: Two examiners will provide a provisional mark and verbal feedback on the day of the assessment.
12
How to go about preparing your talk: Some guidance notes to follow. Summarise the paper using the following headings:
Introduction (background/rationale)
Materials and methods (only briefly describe!)
Results
Discussion/conclusions
Avoid the use of too much text – try to use bullet points if possible (try not to read from slides or word for word from notes)
Results – you should show primary results, ie. the figures and tables from the paper and explain them
If there are many results show the most informative ones and summarise the others – be selective!
Conclusions are best given as bullet points
13
3.3 7MCEMM03 Immune Disorders and Infection
Module Organiser: Dr Helen Collins
3.3.1 Module aims and learning outcomes
The aim of this module is to review selected areas of immunology that relate to immune disorders as well as protective immunity against infection. This will be achieved by a series of core lectures that will deal with general mechanisms and the nature of selected immune disorders and diseases including autoimmunity, allergy, cancer, viral, bacterial and parasite diseases. Key reading material for student private study will be identified in most lectures. Experts from outside the Division of Immunology, Infection and Inflammatory Disease will deliver some of the lectures and students are urged to talk to these visitors while here. This module is assessed entirely by coursework
A supervised critical essay which will be submitted Wednesday 11th December 2018
A data interpretation exercise which will take place on Friday 7th December 2018
A reflective written piece to be submitted Monday 21st January 2019
Module learning outcomes: By the end of this module and directed reading students should be able:
To describe and discuss current knowledge about the origins and progression of diseases, with special reference to the immune abnormalities, or reactions, involved in terms of the important genes, cells and mediators.
To analyse and interpret primary research papers in the area of immunity to infections and immune disorders
To critically appraise the research strategies used to investigate protective and harmful immunity
To evaluate the rationale behind actual and proposed methods of control or treatment of the diseases.
3.4 7MCEMM16 Immune Disorders and Respiratory Diseases
Module organisers: Dr Greg Woszczek and Dr Helen Collins
3.4.1 Module aims and learning outcomes The aim of this module is to review selected areas of immunology that relate to immune disorders as well as those that relate to health and disorders of the respiratory system including asthma and respiratory infections. This will be achieved by a series of core lectures that will deal with general mechanisms of immune functions in the respiratory tract along with selected examples of immune disorders and diseases that affect the respiratory system. Key reading material for private study will be identified in the lectures. This module is assessed entirely by coursework
A supervised critical essay which will be submitted Wednesday 12th December 2018
A data interpretation exercise which will take place on Friday 7th December 2018
A reflective written piece to be submitted Monday 21st January 2019
14
Module learning outcomes: By the end of this module and directed reading, students should be able:
To describe and discuss current knowledge about the the mechanisms that control immune homeostasis in the lung and the origins and progression of diseases, with special reference to the immune abnormalities, or reactions, involved in terms of the important genes, cells and mediators.
To describe and discuss current knowledge concerning the nature of the immunopathology that accompanies respiratory disorders and infections
To analyse and interpret primary research papers in the area of immune disorders and respiratory disease
To identify and evaluate the research strategies used to investigate immune function in the respiratory system
To evaluate the rationale behind actual and proposed methods of control or treatment of the diseases
3.4.2 7MCEMM03/7MCEMM16 assessments
3.4.2.i Critical essay 7MCEMM03 and 7MCEMM16 will be partially assessed by an in course essay (50%) The essay should be a maximum 5000 words in length and will be on a topic relating to the course.
Aims of the module essay The module essay will give you experience of: 1. Reading, assimilating, critically reviewing and discussing material drawn from scientific papers
in a limited area of immunology. 2. Writing an essay to present the material in a concise, stimulating and publishable form. 3. Use of library facilities to find relevant papers.
Scope of the course You will write an essay of a maximum of 5000 words, excluding the Abstract and Reference list. You will work under the guidance of a specialist Supervisor (to be allocated by the Module organiser).
Selection of topic You will choose your essay topic from a list given to you on the first day. The Module Organiser will then assign you to a Supervisor for discussion and guidance in constructing your essay. Your exact essay title MUST be approved by your assigned Supervisor before you begin writing. Your essay should cover an area of immunology which is of interest to you, but should be sufficiently limited for you to survey the literature adequately and in depth enough to allow a critical evaluation of the topic you have chosen. It is generally best to think of your topic in the form of a question that you attempt to answer in your essay. Controversial issues will give the greatest scope for you to exercise your intellect and will give you the most enjoyment. The requirement is for a critical analysis, not a straight library review. You should be able to identify which studies you think are most important and what their limitations are: your personal opinions are also very important and marks are given for intellectual achievement on your part, so do not be timid in expressing your views.
15
Procedure for library research and preparing the manuscript Plan your study with the help of your Supervisor. Read generally, and then narrow down your study according to the issues you most wish to pursue. Discuss difficult issues with your Supervisor. You are not expected to complete an exhaustive literature search, but you should read and cite enough original papers to show that you have achieved a good coverage. In general, between 30 and 40 references will be cited, but the number will obviously vary with the topic. Avoid quoting general textbooks and review articles. Aim to produce the sort of article you can find in a critical review journal such as Trends in Immunology.
Before you contemplate writing anything, prepare a plan of your essay with your Supervisor’s advice. Do not attempt to write a textbook. The essay must be in good English and should introduce, review and draw conclusions on your chosen topic. Use tables and illustrations sparingly and those that you do use should both be understandable without reference to the text and also be necessary to support the text. A few sub-headings may be useful to divide the text into sections to aid clarity of understanding. Your essay should be typed with one and one half line spacing. Number the pages consecutively. The title page should be downloaded from KEATS and uploaded as part of your essay The text of your essay should commence with the TITLE of the essay and an ABSTRACT, of not more than 250 words that summarizes your essay.
Referencing: References to published work should be identified IN THE TEXT and included in the bibliography following a recognized referencing style.
Supervision You should consult your Supervisor at least every few weeks or so to discuss your work and to ensure that you are making satisfactory progress: it is your responsibility to make the arrangements to see your Supervisor. Please contact the Module Organiser (Dr Helen Collins) if any problems arise. As a suggestion, go to the first meeting with your Supervisor with some general ideas about what you want to write about. At this, agree what the area is to be as precisely as possible. At the next meeting discuss your detailed essay plan. Seek advice on key articles. Subsequently, you should then discuss the significance of papers and ideas that you are developing. Make a plan first, then as you produce text, refine this, and ask your Supervisor for an opinion on its quality, but do NOT ask for a detailed editing of the entire essay.
Your Supervisor will be asked to read your essay and to write a report indicating whether proper and continuing consultation has taken place. Please ensure that you return all documents borrowed from your Supervisor.
Submission and assessment An electronic copy of your essay must be submitted via Turnitin on KEATS by 4pm on Wednesday 12th December 2018. Please download the coversheet from Keats and attach it to your file. In accordance with college regulations, work submitted within 24 hours AFTER the deadline will be marked but the mark awarded will be no greater than the pass mark (50%). Any work submitted more than 24 hours after the deadline will be awarded a mark of zero unless a mitigating circumstances form plus appropriate supporting documentation (eg. Medical certificate) is submitted within 7 days of the deadline.
16
Please note also that the Examiners are especially vigilant for plagiarism. Plagiarism is a College Offence and will be dealt with as a disciplinary matter. Your essay will be marked by your Supervisor, who will also assess not only the finished product but also the way you went about preparing it, and by an Internal Examiner. All essays may be reviewed by an External Examiner.
Feedback: Written feedback from the two examiners will be provided online via KEATS within the college standard turnaround time of 4 weeks (excluding university closure periods). A final meeting with your supervisor will be arranged to discuss the feedback and for you to obtain your grade.
3.4.2.ii Data interpretation exercise 7MCEMM03 and 7MCEMM16 will be partially assessed by a data interpretation exercise (30%). This will take place on Friday 7th December 2018. This will be under examination conditions and you will have 1.5 hours to complete the assessment. You will be given several formative data interpretation exercises prior to this assessment.
3.4.2.iii Reflective essay 7MCEMM03 and 7MCEMM16 will be partially assessed by a reflective essay exercise (20%).
You are asked to prepare a reflective piece on 4 lectures from the Immune Disorders and Infection/Respiratory diseases module. Each lecture reflection should be no more than 250 words and should address the following points:
What are the key immunological features of the Disease?
What are the key research questions arising in this Disease area?
Highlight two recent research papers that address these questions (references not
included in total word count)
You should select 2 Immune Disorders lectures and 2 Infection/Respiratory Disease lectures to evaluate. In addition you should write a maximum of 500 words reflecting as to why you selected these particular lectures. Submission and assessment The deadline for submission of this piece of work is 4pm Monday 21st January 2019. The coursework should be submitted online on the course KEATS page. This coursework is marked by two separate markers. The marking for this coursework will be either - Fail, Pass, Merit, Distinction – an exact % mark will not be given. The marking criteria can be found later in the handbook.
17
3.5 7MCEMM17 Research Skills
Module Organiser: Dr Helen Collins
3.5.1 Module aims and learning outcomes:
This module is designed to develop core skills that will help you in your work and study on the MSc Immunology course and also in your future careers. Working scientists in research and routine laboratories often acquire/develop many of these core skills in their work environment. A range of exercises and topics will be covered including;
Oral and written presentation skills.
Problem directed learning exercises.
Data interpretation exercises
Experimental techniques/strategies, seminars and demonstrations
Careers in science and related areas
Writing a research proposal
Statistics for biologists This module is assessed by coursework only and will consist of writing a research proposal in the form of a mini grant proposal on your eventual research project and a final oral presentation of your research project findings.
3.5.2 Research skills attendance and assessments
The Research skills module is assessed by coursework only. You will be required to write a research proposal on the topic of your research project. Further details are provided below. Additionally you will be asked to present your final research project findings in a seminar presentation. Each of these components will be worth 50% of the module marks. In addition, attendance at all research skills taught sessions is compulsory, and students failing to attend may be excluded from the MSc in accordance with the College regulations.
3.5.3 Project presentations As part of the Research skills module we ask you to make TWO verbal presentations to your class group on your project. Students will give their first formative seminar in March and their second after the submission of the Research project report at the end of July. Please note; your second project presentation will be marked and will count for 50% of the marks for the module. A formal mark is not given for your first presentation, but you will be given feedback on your performance. Your attendance throughout both presentation sessions is obligatory and will be recorded. The presentations are an important experience for you and also allow the course tutors to monitor the suitability of your proposals, help you identify potential problems and assess the progress you are making in your experimental work.
18
1st presentation (formative) At this time most of you will either not have started your project, or will only have done a small amount of work and accordingly this first talk is to present your plans. It is designed as a stimulus to formulate your project strategy and tactics, if you have not already done so. This will be a formative assessment (does not count towards your final mark) but feedback will be provided.
Your talk should be 10 minutes long + 5 minutes for discussion and questions.
Assume that your audience is made up of immunologists, and therefore that you don’t need to go into a lot of basic background material.
Use PowerPoint presentations. Be careful not to use too much information and do not overload each slide with writing or data so that they become illegible.
Presentations will take place on 1st and 8th March 2019 Divide your talk into sections:
Title of project
Aims of the project
Relevant background in which you make clear what is the justification for the project
Methods and plan of approach you will take
Results you expect and problems you anticipate Feedback: Feedback will be provided verbally on the day by the two examiners.
2nd presentation (summative) By this time you will have completed experimental work and handed in the project report, so these talks will form more of a research symposium and will be open to all lecturers and supervisors from the programme. The objectives are similar to those of the first presentation, but you must now concentrate on what you have done, and what conclusions can be made from your experimental data. Some examples of important experimental data should be shown as figures and/or tables. Your talk should be 15 minutes long + 5 minutes for discussion and questions. Divide your talk into sections:
Title of project
Aims of project
Relevant background in which you make clear what is the justification for the project
Methods and plan of approach you will take
Progress so far, including experimental results and their implications.
Conclusions Presentations will take place on Friday 19th July 2019 Feedback: Feedback will be provided verbally on the day by the two examiners.
19
3.5.4 The Research Project proposal Before you begin your project laboratory work you will prepare and submit a Project Proposal which will be assessed and count for 50% of the marks for this module. This document will be written in the style of a Grant Application. You also include in the Project Proposal a Risk Assessment for the project. The Project Proposal should be submitted by 4pm Wednesday 13th February 2019.
Guidelines to writing the MSc Research Project proposal
The Research Project Proposal should contain a clear and concise description of the project, its aims, methodologies and expected outcomes. This proposal should be written in discussion and agreement with your supervisor. The overall length of the proposal should be between 2,500 and 3,000 words. The project will be assessed by an independent immunologist (not your supervisor) for its clarity, whether the information is correct and complete, and whether the design/methodologies will address the aims and hypothesis. The mark will count as 50% of the final mark for the Research Skills Module (7MCEMM17). The proposal should include all of the following sections: 1. Title Short, but descriptive. 2. Scientific Abstract (max 200 words) This should contain a brief summary explaining the background, main aim(s), the experimental design and expected outcome in scientific language (i.e. for a wider immunological audience). 3. Lay Abstract (max 200 words) This should contain a brief summary explaining the background, main aim(s), the experimental design and expected outcome in a language understandable for the wider non-scientific public. 4. Background/Introduction of the Project (min 500 ~ max 750 words) Summarise here the previous research/background leading to the project, and include 5-10 relevant references. 5. Aims/Objectives (approx 200 words) These should be stated clearly and concisely. You can use bullet points. 6. Study Design and Methodology (min 750 – max 1000 words) Describe briefly the materials/methods you will be using and your experimental plan. This includes the cells/species you are planning to use, the basic design of the different experiments, how the experiments are linked to the aims, the time line and how you are planning to analyse your data statistically. 7. Expected Outcomes & Limitations (max 450 words) What do you expect to find? Do you foresee problems and how are you planning to address those?
20
8. Risk Assessment (max 200 words) Assess the possible risks you may face by working with (human) cells, genetically modified material or other (bio)hazardous material and which steps you will take to minimise these risks.
9. Reference list Include 10 references relevant to the project. Feedback: written feedback from the two examiners will be provided via your personal tutor within the college standard turnaround time of 4 weeks (excluding university closure periods)
Careers for researchers in Immunology workshop
The careers workshop will take place on Friday 16th November 2018. We have invited several guests to talk about their career paths. Attendance at this event is compulsory and there will be opportunities for you to talk to our guests in a one to one situation if you have further questions. There will also be a session on CV writing and interview techniques. The programme for this will be published in due course.
21
3.6 7MCEMM04 Research Project
Module Organisers: Dr Helen Collins and Dr Linda Barber
3.6.1 Module aims and learning outcomes The project will give you experience of:
Working independently in a laboratory to an advanced level.
Writing a formal scientific project report.
Taking a critical and analytical approach to your own work.
Module learning outcomes After completing your project you should:
Have a high level of competency in laboratory based skills
Be able to explain why you did the work, how you did it, what you found and what you believe are the implications and significance of your findings.
Be able to identify scientific problems, generate hypotheses, design experiments, record information in laboratory notebooks, apply appropriate statistical methods to data analysis, and display data and results in figures and tables.
Be able to critically discuss your work in relation to the experimental approach taken, the validity of your results and their relation to other published work
3.6.2 Choosing your project topic Students conduct a wide variety of projects as areas of interest vary. You will be introduced to the projects available in our laboratories in the first semester. You will be provided with a handbook listing all of the available projects and there will be an opportunity to discuss the projects in more detail at the Research project fair on Thursday 22nd November 2018. After discussion with the project supervisors, you will be asked to make a choice of project. As far as possible we assign students one of their top three choices, however if one project is very popular we will use a ranking system based on the students’ performance in the poster and advanced topics coursework. Therefore the better you do in the coursework, the more likely it is you will be assigned the project of your choice.
3.6.3 Location of project work You will normally conduct your research in the laboratories of the School of Immunology and Microbial Sciences. However, the location may be different, and you could work in another location within King’s College.
22
3.6.4 Supervision All students need regular supervision, and with the agreement of your Supervisor you should ensure that you have a regular programme of meetings and consultations arranged throughout the time you are working on your project. The Supervisor’s responsibilities include those listed below. If problems arise with supervision, a student should, in the first instance meet and discuss the issues/problems with the Supervisor. If this is not satisfactory, students should consult their Personal Tutor or the Project Coordinators for guidance. Please note that a good working relationship between Supervisor and student is of utmost importance for the success of the project.
Responsibilities of the Supervisor
To give guidance about the nature of research and the standard expected, planning of the project programme, literature and information sources, requisite techniques (arranging for instruction where necessary), and the issue of plagiarism.
To instruct on the correct method of keeping laboratory notes of the work done, and to ensure that notebooks are correctly maintained.
To maintain regular contact with the student, and to be accessible at reasonable times when advice may be needed.
To advise on a schedule to ensure work is completed and the report submitted on time.
To guide the student in preparing verbal presentations of the project plans or results.
To ensure the student is made aware of inadequacy of progress or of standards of work below that generally expected and report immediately to the module organisers any serious problems relating to the satisfactory progress of the project.
To provide, on request, a final report on the project and the manner in which the student conducted the laboratory work and produced the report.
To ensure the student is aware of all legal (e.g. Home office regulations concerning animals), and health and safety regulations governing project work, including ensuring a risk assessment of the project is completed before the project starts, and is updated as necessary during the course of the project.
Responsibilities of the student
To discuss with the supervisor the type of guidance and comment thought to be most helpful and to agree a schedule of meetings.
To take the initiative in promptly raising problems or difficulties, no matter how elementary they seem.
To keep detailed written notes of the work done, in accordance with the scheme agreed with the supervisor.
23
To maintain progress in work according to the agreed schedule, including in particular the presentation of work for comment to your supervisor and ensuring that the preparation of the report is planned in advance to avoid problems in meeting the submission deadline.
To complete and return the monthly progress reports and to report immediately to the module organisers any serious problems with the project. This includes changing or modifying the topic of research.
3.6.5 Project report contents Avoid the use of chapters. The report should be written as a scientific paper, dividing the text into sections under the following section headings. The report should contain, in order: Title Page: showing Title of project, Name, Address (usually where the work was done), the statement "Report submitted in part fulfillment of requirements for Degree of MSc in Immunology at King's College London" and the date of submission. The word count of the manuscript should also be given on the title page. Abstract: of the report on ONE page in not more than 250 words. Abstract must state aims of the work, methods employed, major findings and conclusions. Do not use abbreviations in the Abstract. Single spacing may be used if necessary to contain this on one page. Contents: A list of contents and figures and tables may be included. Abbreviations: List of abbreviations and their meanings. Acknowledgments: Include your Supervisor(s) and names of others who helped, indicate what their contribution was. Show clearly which data in your report (if any) were generated by other people. Declaration: Include the following statement on the same page as the acknowledgments, and add your signature to it. I declare that I have personally prepared this report and that it has not in whole or in part been submitted for any other degree or qualification. The work described here is my own, carried out personally unless otherwise stated. All sources of information, including quotations, are acknowledged by means of reference. Introduction: A detailed account, including critical analysis, of the background to your project. It should place your work in a contemporary immunological context and identify its aims or purpose. It is a good idea to remember that this is the place to introduce the items and topics you will wish to deal with in your later Discussion. This section should not exceed 25% of the whole report. Materials and Methods: List under appropriate headings the materials, formulations and methods you used. These may refer to published procedures but in these cases give enough outline information to enable the reader to follow the principles of the methods used. If methods have been modified or have not been published, give concise details. Remember, the purpose of this section is to enable someone else to repeat your work. Results: This section should describe what you found. The data should be in Figures and Tables (see below) and the text should provide a narrative that is intelligible without reference to the data, i.e. it should be a statement of each finding (English language, no numbers!). It is pointless to repeat verbatim in the text experimental details or numbers that are given in Figures and Tables.
24
Discussion: Here you should discuss the meaning of your findings (NOT repeat the previous section) and present their implications. You should do this by placing your results in the context of previous work in the same area. This is the place to express opinion and argue the case for your theories and ideas. If your project evolved into a series of technical problems, which in the end dominated the experimental work, then you should discuss them in this section. As with any good project, you should include an indication of future work, and a critical assessment of the limitation of your approach and methods. References: References to published work should be identified IN THE TEXT in one of two ways. Either: By sequential numbers placed in square brackets [ ], in which case in the reference list you list the references in the order in which they are cited and refer to them only by numbers (not names) in the text. If you do this, do not convert your text citations to numbers until you have completed writing the report: if you do it too early it is very difficult to edit text and add/remove references. Or: By the author’s surname (no initials) and the year of publication. If two authors, give both names, if three or more, give the first name followed by et al., and the year. List all papers referred to alphabetically at the end of the text in the bibliographic listing Bibliography listing: Whichever method of referencing you use, EVERY reference quoted in the text must appear in the alphabetical/numerical sequence list at the end using standard international abbreviations and style: Waksman BH, Reynolds WE. Multiple sclerosis as a disease of immune regulation. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med, 1984; 175: 282-294. Note that ALL names and initials, full title of the article, name of the journal (abbreviated), the year, and inclusive page numbers MUST be included for each reference. Tables: Each may occupy a separate page or be incorporated in the text, each should be numbered sequentially (Arabic numbers; 1,2, 3 etc) and placed as near as possible to the place where they are referred to in the text. They should be intelligible without reference to the text itself and be given titles which are informative about their content, e.g. the effects studied or the findings of the experiment. Do not give headings such as "Experiment 5". In many cases it is inappropriate to include large amounts of raw data such as those derived from e.g. ELISA titrations; in these cases it is preferable to give derived data. Footnotes (below the table) should be used where needed to simplify the format of the tables and explain contents. Figures: Figures should be numbered sequentially with Arabic numerals (1,2,3 etc), each may occupy a separate page or may be placed in the text as near as possible to the place where they are referred to. Line drawings and illustrations may be laser printed or presented as photographic prints or as high quality xerographic prints. Lettering on the original should be laser printed. Photomicrographs of e.g. histological material should be high contrast prints with the magnification factor shown. Colour Xerox prints of photographs are acceptable, provided they are faithful reproductions of the originals, and provided the bound copy of the report is provided with original photographic prints. Each figure should have a descriptive title and Figure legend which should be positioned below the figure. Please note: The project must be your own work, though it is permissible to include results from work that was, by necessity, done by other people but provided you indicate clearly the extent to which you received help from your collaborators.
25
3.6.6 Manuscript format The manuscript: Must be typed in double or one and one half spacing with standard margins. Number all pages sequentially, including the title page. Length of Report: The text should be between 12,000 and 15,000 words. This INCLUDES Figures, Tables, their footnotes and titles, Title page, Contents page, Abstract, Acknowledgments and References. Reports considerably shorter than this may be returned to the candidates, unexamined and those reports that exceed the word limit by 10% or more will be penalized by a minimum of 10% in line with Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine regulations. Students are required to give the word count of their manuscript on the title page.
3.6.7 Instructions for binding and submission of your project report You must submit TWO copies of your report bound using limp paperback-type binding to the ESS office (1st floor, Henriette Raphael building) by 4.00pm Wednesday 17th July 2019. One copy will be retained by the College, another will be retained by your supervisor, and we suggest that you print an extra copy for yourself. Your printer account will be credited to help with the cost of this. In addition you must also submit your final project report through Turnitin on KEATS by the above deadline. This copy must be identical to the electronic copy submitted. **College deadline policy will be strictly adhered to so please ensure that you leave yourselves plenty of time to prepare and print your report.**
3.6.8 Confidentiality It is undesirable that student’s reports should be classified as confidential. The report is a publication, and should be available for others to read on request. However, we recognize that intellectual property rights may be attached to some projects, especially those done in a commercial setting, and confidentiality can be arranged. In the first instance you or your supervisor should write officially to the Programme Director explaining why this is necessary, and for how long confidentiality should be maintained. The report will then only be made available to examiners, who will be made aware of the confidentiality agreement, for the purpose of assessing the work. Copies of the report will be returned to the supervisor on completion of the examination process.
3.6.9 Research Project marking and feedback The research project report is marked by two separate markers, who are not your supervisor. The overall mark for your project report will be based on your performance in the laboratory and your ability to prepare the final report as well as the final project report itself. All research project report marks are moderated by the external examiners. Written Feedback will be provided online via KEATS as soon as possible after marking of the projects
26
4. Assessment & Feedback
4.1 Overall assessment pattern
The components of the coursework assessments are:
Type and title of in-course assessment Formative or summative
Percentage of module mark
Poster preparation (7MCEMM01) Summative 30%
Advanced topic journal club presentation (7MCEMM02)
Summative 30%
Critical essay on immunological topic (7MCEMM03/16)
Summative 50%
Data interpretation exercise (7MCEMM03/16) Summative 30%
Reflective essay (7MCEMM03/16) Summative 20%
Research proposal presentation (7MCEMM17) Formative 0%
Data interpretation exercise Formative 0%
Research project presentation (7MCEMM17) Summative 50%
Research project proposal (7MCEMM17) Summative 50%
Research project dissertation (7MCEMM04) Summative 100%
Deadlines and methods for submission of coursework:
Type and title of in-course assessment How to submit Submission date and time
Return date
Poster prepared on an immunological topic and its application (7MCEMM01) – 15 mins
Presented on day of assessment
Tuesday 16th October 2018 2-5pm
Feedback provided on day of assessment
Advanced topic journal club presentation (7MCEMM02) – 15 mins
Presented on day of assessment
Friday 9th November 2018
10-1 and 2-5
Feedback provided on day of assessment
5000 word Critical essay on immunological topic (7MCEMM03/16)
Online submission via Turnitin
Wednesday 4pm 12th December 2018
Written feedback will be provided online w/c commencing 21st January 2019
Data interpretation exercise (7MCEMM03/16)
Assessed under examination conditions on day
Friday 7th December 2018
Feedback will be provided via personal tutors w/c 21st January 2019
Reflective essay (7MCEMM03/16) Online submission via Turnitin
Monday 4pm
21st January 2019
Feedback will be provided online w/c 25th February 2019
Research proposal presentation (7MCEMM17) – 15 minutes
Presented on day of assessment
Friday 1st and Friday 8th March 2019
Feedback provided on day of assessment
Research project proposal (7MCEMM17) Submit online via Turnitin
Wednesday 4pm 13th February 2019
Written feedback will be provided online w/c 11th March 2019
27
Type and title of in-course assessment How to submit Submission date and time
Return date
Research project dissertation (7MCEMM04)
Hand to ESS and submit via Turnitin online
Wednesday 4pm 17th July 2019
Written feedback will be provided online
Research project presentation (7MCEMM17)
Presented on day of assessment
Friday 19th July 2019
Feedback will be provided on day of assessment
4.2 Formative and summative assessments Formative assessments: Your mark for any assessment described as formative will not go towards your final degree result. The grade and feedback you receive are designed to help you develop and improve your work. Summative assessments: All marks for assessments (essays, data handling problems, exams, poster presentation, your performance in presenting your research project) described as summative are used to calculate your final degree results. At least two Internal Examiners mark each piece of work, and the External Examiners also scrutinize examination scripts.
4.3 Word limits Some pieces of coursework will have a maximum word limit. Under Faculty of Life Science & Medicine regulations any piece of work exceeding this limit by 10% or more will be deducted a minimum of 10% from the final mark.
4.4 Late submission Work submitted ON the deadline will be marked as late and late penalties will apply. For example, if the deadline is 4.00 pm, then you must have completed submitting your assignment by 3.59.59 at the latest. Work submitted up to 24 hours after the deadline will be marked but the grade awarded will be no greater than the pass mark (50%). Students will be informed what mark would have been awarded had the cap not been applied and will receive feedback on their work. Work submitted more than 24 hours after the deadline will receive a mark of zero. Feedback and an indicative grade will be provided.
4.5 Examinations Final written examinations will be held in January 2019. Written examinations are taken for two taught modules (7MCEMM01 and 7MCEMM02) and consist of essay type questions, short answers and data interpretation. Each written exam is of 3 hours duration. Examples of exam papers from previous years, as well as examples of the types of short answers will be made available to you on KEATS. Examinations are organised by the Examinations office and will take place in the week commencing 7th January 2019. A candidate, who has to repeat any element of the final (January)
28
examinations or course work (resit), may re-enter that part (or those parts) only once and on the next available occasion normally in August for examinations. Modules in which any component requires a resit (coursework or examination) are capped at 50.
4.5.1 Personal Assessment Arrangements For students requiring personal examinations provisions, details can be found at the following web link: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/campuslife/acservices/examinations/paa/paa.aspx Please note the deadlines for applying – Friday 2nd November 2018 for the January examinations.
4.6 Missed assessment
Please note that unjustified failure to submit in-course assessment or unjustified absences from in-course assessments will result in a mark of zero for that assessment element. Please note that unjustified failure to sit the examination will result in a mark of zero. Mitigating circumstances If any of the following apply to you, then you must submit an application for mitigating circumstances with appropriate evidence:
Unable to submit in-course assessment by the deadline (eg essay, poster, practical write
up)
Unable to attend an assessed session eg seminar presentation of poster
Unable to participate in-course assessment (group work)
Unable to attend January/August exams
You do not need to submit an MCF for missed formative assessments. The mitigating circumstances form (MCF) and guidance can be found in the Faculty handbook and on the programme site on KEATS https://internal.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/students/pgt/handbook/assessment/Mitigating-Circumstances.aspx Forms must be submitted to [email protected] as soon as possible either in advance of the assessment or normally within 7 days of your first affected assessment. Evidence should be provided with your form if possible, or if not available immediately it must be provided within 21 days of the first affected assessment. Acceptable evidence is listed in the online guidance. Please note that the module organiser does not approve your MCF: it will be considered by your Assessment Sub-Board. Information on your Assessment Sub-Board can be found on KEATS.
29
4.7 Academic appeals
Students may appeal against a decision of the Assessment Board, but should note that academic judgement cannot be appealed, ie you cannot appeal for a higher mark. Appeals must be made within 14 days of the publication of results. For more information see the Faculty Postgraduate Student Handbook: https://internal.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/students/pgt/handbook/assessment/Appeals-Procedure.aspx
4.8 What to do if you need to interrupt your studies
Please see the Faculty Postgraduate Handbook for information on what to do if you are ill or need to interrupt your studies for another reason: https://internal.kcl.ac.uk/lsm/students/pgt/handbook/support-during-your-studies/Change-of-Registration-Status.aspx
4.9 Plagiarism and academic misconduct At King’s academic misconduct is categorised into three areas: plagiarism, collusion and cheating through deception and fraud. Plagiarism is representing another person’s work as your own, by not giving credit to the actual author. Most cases of plagiarism can be avoided by careful referencing. You may also find the Library page on referencing and plagiarism useful: http://libguides.kcl.ac.uk/Bioscience/referencing You will be allowed to check your work using Turnitin (on line plagiarism detection software) before you submit it for assessment. You can submit work for checking via this facility as many times as you like, but you will only receive one originality report every 24 hours i.e. if you submit your work, revise it and then resubmit it one hour later, you will have to wait 24 hours to receive the report on your second submission. We will only assess the final submission. When using TURNITIN resource, please note the following:
1) Examiners never rely solely on Turnitin to determine whether an assignment is plagiarised. They will always use academic judgement. All that Turnitin does is flag up possible issues with a student’s approach to written work, and you should use it appropriately in order to develop your writing skills and your own academic judgement. Following the advice below should help you. a. When using Turnitin, do not over-focus on a numerical originality score. Look at the full
report. A piece of work that gives a low score may contain plagiarised sections if blocks of text (even small ones) are exact matches to external sources, while work that gives a higher score may not be plagiarised if it contains a high proportion of technical terms that cannot be rephrased.
b. An essay or dissertation that too closely follows the structure of one or two review articles is not an original piece of work, even if the wording has been paraphrased so as to give a low Turnitin score. Even though it may not be detected via Turnitin, this form of plagiarism can be spotted by experienced examiners.
30
c. If you are in doubt about your Turnitin report or have any other questions about plagiarism and collusion SEEK ADVICE. People you can speak to are: module organisers, your personal tutor or the Assessment Sub-Board Chair for your programme.
Given that obtaining a Turnitin report, interpreting it, and obtaining advice and revising your work if necessary all take time, it makes sense to check your work early, NOT just before the submission deadline.
4.10 Award requirements and degree classifications
Students must pass all five modules of the programme and therefore obtain 180 credits in order to be awarded the MSc Immunology.
Compensation is permitted within certain elements of the modules provided that no element of the module is marked less than 40%. If any element of the module is marked less than 40% a resit is required which will result in the capping of the module at 50%. If after compensation the final module mark is <50% then students will be advised as to a resit date for the coursework component where appropriate
Attendance at lectures, tutorials, seminars and group study sessions is compulsory. Persistent absence from any of these may lead to your exclusion from the programme according to College regulations.
The final mark for the course and the percentage weighting for the calculation of merit and distinction will directly reflect the proportion of credits allocated to each module in relation to the overall credit taken within each programme/award, with classification thresholds set according to the core scheme as set out in the “Credit Framework Regulations” of King’s College London.
MSc Distinction: may be awarded to students who achieve a weighted average mark of 70% or above. MSc Merit: may be awarded to students who achieve a weighted average mark of 60% or above. MSc Pass: is awarded to students who successfully pass all modules of the course with marks of 50% or above for each module. PG Diploma: 120 credits are required to obtain this qualification. PG Certificate: 60 credits are required to obtain this qualification Progression: student performance will be reviewed throughout the year in two performance review tutorials with their personal tutors. One of these will discuss examination performance .
31
4.11 Interviews by External Examiners In circumstances where there are issues that present problems with assessment, students may be called for an interview. An example of an issue which might require an interview could be where valid “Mitigating Circumstances” have compromised a student’s performance on the course. A mark as such is not awarded for the interview, but performance in it will be used to help the examiners resolve a student’s overall result. Marks cannot be lowered as a result of an interview. Attendance at an interview, if you are invited to one, is mandatory, so please arrange to be available for this anytime during mid to late September.
4.12 Assessment criteria All assessed work is first marked according to criteria that define the different grades; final marks are then awarded and agreed between the examiners. The following examples include the criteria for written examination essay answers, the research project, the research project proposal, the critical essay and journal club and poster presentations. Please note that these are guidelines only:
32
Taught Postgraduate Generic Marking Criteria The College marking criteria set out below should be read in conjunction with discipline-specific criteria as appropriate and should be viewed as a starting point. The College marking criteria provides guidance on the overall standards expected at different grade bands but discipline-specific criteria may be needed in order to ensure that marking decisions are consistent, fair and transparent to both staff and students.
Level 7
An exceptional answer that reflects outstanding knowledge of material and critical ability ~ Distinction ≥ 70
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Advanced, in-depth, authoritative, full understanding of key issues with evidence of originality
Complex work and key issues analysed Wide range of sources used selectively to support argument/discussion
Strong evidence of critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments
Coherent and compelling work logically presented
A++ (90-100) Insightful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project: publishable quality, outstanding research potential, originality and/or independent thought, ability to make informed judgments. Highest standards of presentation.
A+ (80-89) Insightful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project: work of publishable quality, excellent research potential, originality and/or independent thought, ability to make informed judgments. High standards of presentation.
A (70-79) Thoughtful work displaying in-depth knowledge. For research dissertation/project: good research potential, evidence of independent thought, ability to make informed judgments. High standards of presentation.
A coherent answer that demonstrates critical evaluation ~ Merit 60-69
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
In-depth understanding of key issues with evidence of some originality
Key issues analysed. Relevant sources used effectively to support argument/discussion
Clear evidence of critical approach to key issues and some ability to evaluate arguments
Coherent work logically presented
B+ (65-69) Thoughtful work displaying good knowledge and accuracy. For research dissertation/project: some evidence of research potential, clear thinking and/or ability to make informed judgments. Good standards of presentation.
B (60-64) Work displays good knowledge and accuracy. For research dissertation/project: some evidence of clear thinking and/or ability to make informed judgments. Good standards of presentation.
33
A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles ~ Pass 50 - 59
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Understanding of some key issues with evidence of ability to reflect critically
Some key issues addressed. Relevant sources used to support argument/discussion
Some evidence of critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments
Competent work in places but lacks fluency/coherence
C+ (55-59) Work displays knowledge and understanding in most areas but the standard of work is variable. For research dissertation/project: evidence of clear thinking in places but lacks insight. Satisfactory standards of presentation.
C (50-54) Work displays knowledge and understanding in some areas but some key issues are not addressed. For research dissertation/project: some evidence of clear thinking but lacks insight and fluency. Satisfactory standards of presentation.
A superficial answer with limited knowledge of core material and limited critical ability ~ Fail 40 – 491
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Superficial understanding of some key issues, lack of focus
Key issues not always understood or addressed, gaps in the use of relevant sources used to support work
Limited evidence of a critical approach to key issues and ability to evaluate arguments
Weaknesses in structure, fluency and/or coherence
F+ (40-49) Work displays patchy knowledge and understanding and some key issues are not addressed. For the research dissertation/project: limited evidence of clear thinking, insight and/or fluency. Presentational weaknesses.
An answer almost entirely lacking in evidence of knowledge and understanding ~ Fail 0-39
Understanding
Depth of knowledge
Structure
General
Lack of understanding of, or focus on key issues
Key issues misunderstood or not addressed’ Llimited or no use of relevant sources to support work
No evidence of a critical approach to key issues or ability to evaluate arguments
Work is confused and incoherent
F (33-39) Incomplete answers with only peripheral knowledge relevant to the questions. Displays poor,
disorganized presentation. FF (20-32) Some attempt to write something relevant but with many flaws; nothing of substance,
FFF (0 -19) Serious errors, largely irrelevant material or unacceptably brief.
Approved CASC March 2015
1 A mark ≥40 - <49 is condonable where programme specific regulations permit
34
Written Answers
Distinction Excellent answer
70 Understanding Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis
Selection & coverage
Full range of sources used selectively to support argument
Structure Coherent and compelling argument well presented
General 90 -100 striking insight, of publishable quality
80 - 89 insightful, possibly of publishable quality with some minor revisions
70 - 79 excellent grasp of the subject, high quality in all areas
Merit A coherent answer that demonstrates critical evaluation
60 - 69 Understanding Independent, critical evaluation of full range of theories with evidence of originality
Selection & coverage
Complex work and concepts presented, key texts used effectively
Structure Argument concise and explicit
General 65 - 69 Approaching excellence in some areas
60 - 64 Well developed relevant argument
Pass A coherent and logical answer which shows understanding of the basic principles
50 - 59 Understanding Some capacity to reflect critically but with no significant evidence of originality
Selection & coverage
Sound knowledge base of primary & secondary sources
Structure The argument is developed but lacks fluency
General 55 - 59 Approaching merit
50 -54 Broadly satisfactory, appropriate and accurate
Fail A superficial answer showing limited knowledge
< 50 Understanding Lack of understanding and focus
Selection & coverage
Limited use of sources or out-of-date or irrelevant sources
Structure Argument not fully developed and lacks structure
General Student has failed to answer the question fully
45 - 49 Patchy overall knowledge, presentational weaknesses
35 - 44 Some knowledge but weak grasp of issues, poor presentation
20 - 35 Fundamental mistakes
< 20 Deeply flawed, irrelevant or too brief
35
Oral Presentations
Distinction
70
Excellent presentation
Understanding Authoritative, full understanding of all the issues with originality in analysis
Presentation & coverage
Full range of sources used selectively to support argument, faultless presentation
Structure Coherent and compelling argument well presented
General 90 -100 (A++) striking insight, of publishable quality
80 - 89 (A+) insightful, possibly of publishable quality with some minor revisions
70 - 79 (A)excellent grasp of the subject, high quality in all areas
Merit 60 - 69
A coherent presentation that demonstrates critical evaluation
Understanding Independent, critical evaluation of full range of theories with evidence of originality
Presentation & coverage
Complex work and concepts presented, key texts used effectively, high level of presentation with very minor faults
Structure Argument concise and explicit
General 65 - 69 (B+) Approaching excellence in some areas
60 - 64 (B) Well developed relevant argument
Pass 50 - 59
A coherent and logical presentation which shows understanding of the basic principles
Understanding Some capacity to reflect critically but with no significant evidence of originality
Presentation & coverage
Sound knowledge base of primary & secondary sources, good level of presentation skill with acceptable minor faults
Structure The argument is developed but lacks fluency
General 55 - 59 (C+) Approaching merit
50 -54 (C) Broadly satisfactory, appropriate and accurate
Fail < 50
A superficial presentation showing limited knowledge
Understanding Lack of understanding and focus
Presentation & coverage
Limited use of sources or out-of-date or irrelevant sources
Structure Argument not fully developed and lacked structure, more serious mistakes made, flawed presentation
General Student has failed to answer the assignment fully
45 - 49 Patchy overall knowledge, presentational weaknesses
35 - 44 Some knowledge but weak grasp of issues, poor presentation
20 - 35 Fundamental mistakes
< 20 Deeply flawed, irrelevant or too brief
36
Project/ Dissertation Report
Distinction >90% A++
General This report is publishable with no significant changes.
Distinction 80%-89% A+
Understanding
Critical and independent comment on all observations. Original speculation on results and future direction of the work supported by experimental evidence. Full appreciation of the significance of the findings to the wider scientific field. Considerable evidence of further reading and innovative thinking.
Selection and coverage
Full and systematic account of the work undertaken.
Structure Structure and organisation of the document is exemplary.
General This report is publishable with few minor amendments
Distinction 70% -80% A
Understanding
Comprehensive and critical introduction with the aims clearly defined. The discussion must encompass some critical evaluation of the methods and validity of the results as well as an appreciation of the significance of the findings. Evidence of considerable background reading and independent thought.
Selection and coverage
Methods are described concisely so that experiments can be repeated. Study design should be logical and well controlled. Results section describes in narrative form the findings and relates them accurately to figures and tables. Selection of results presented should be logical and relate to the aims of the work. The discussion should relate the findings of the work to the wider scientific field and appreciation of how the work continue
Structure
Structure of the document is very good. Organisation is logical and conforms to accepted scientific style. References are comprehensive, complete and cited correctly. Figures are of high quality with complete and accurate figure legends.
General This is a project report of high scientific quality which is theoretically of publishable standard with some minor amendments or could form part of a publication.
Merit 60-69% B
Understanding
The introduction and discussion must show evidence that the student clearly understands the scientific background to the work and the significance of their findings. Evidence of independent critical analysis is expected.
Selection and coverage
Study design should be well thought out and well controlled. A reasonable critique of the limitations of the experiments and the validity of the results should be included. Appropriate statistical analysis should be included or the reasons for the omission discussed.
Structure The report must be correctly formatted and presented according to the instructions. References must be cited in an appropriate and consistent style. Errors should be few and minor.
General This report would not be publishable without additional work, but will still be of a high scientific quality.
37
Pass 50-59% C
Understanding
The background must be adequately described in the introduction which is likely to lack some breadth and critical quality. The discussion will lack some depth but it must deal with the findings of the study. Some evidence of further reading, critical evaluation and discussion of the limitations of the study.
Selection and coverage
Methodology must be adequately described and the results clearly presented. A competent account of the work undertaken. May contain some inaccuracies or omissions.
Structure On the whole structured logically but may lack some coherence.
Fail 40-49% F+
Understanding
A reasonable presentation but will lack the depth of understanding necessary for a pass. There should be a fair understanding of the investigation but there may be little awareness of relevance. Interpretation will not always be appropriate and may be incomplete.
Selection and coverage
Contains the more obvious information but may not have been interpreted correctly or fully.
Structure The methods and findings will have been handled in a scientific way but with several lapses, errors or omissions.
General With guided revisions this may reach pass standard on resubmission
Fail 0-39% F
Understanding
Significant deficiencies, for example, lack of proper background literature
review, aims of the work unclear or not relevant to work performed. Weak or
non-existent discussion lacking scientific perspective.
Selection and coverage
Methods not given in detail enough for experiments to be understood or repeated. Findings inadequate in amount or presented as raw data with no interpretation; tables and figures not adequately explained and/or labelled. Many errors or omissions.
Structure Structure erratic or illogical; references incorrectly quoted or insufficient
General This is an unacceptable report with many deficiencies.
38
Poster
Distinction 70%+ A
Understanding Full understanding of current ideas and controversies relating to the subject
Selection & coverage Strong evidence of critical evaluation and ability to understand and answer questions. Able to extrapolate using evidence from the literature
Structure
Highest standards of presentation in the format: visual simplicity and clarity, a logical order of content, excellent effective use of colour and graphics, appropriate text size, and concise use of text
General
90-100 (A++) Outstanding in all areas 80-89 (A+) minor defects in one area 70-79 (A) minor defects in two areas or very minor defects in all areas
Merit 60-69% B
Understanding Very good understanding of current ideas and controversies relating to the subject
Selection & coverage Some evidence of critical evaluation and ability to understand and answer questions. Some extrapolate using evidence from the literature
Structure
Good standards of presentation in the format: visual simplicity and clarity, a logical order of content, excellent effective use of colour and graphics, appropriate text size, and concise use of text
General 65-69 (B+) very good in all areas 60-64 (B) minor defects in all areas
Pass 50-59% C
Understanding Mostly accurate description of key findings. Some evidence of understanding current ideas and controversies relating to the subject
Selection & coverage Some critical evaluation and ability to understand and answer questions
Structure
Satisfactory standards of presentation in the format: visual simplicity and clarity, a logical order of content, excellent effective use of colour and graphics, appropriate text size, and concise use of text
General 55-59 (C+) Satisfactory in all areas 54-55 (C) Minor defects in some areas
Fail 40-49% F+
Understanding Patchy knowledge and understanding of key findings. Limited evidence of understanding current ideas and controversies relating to the subject
Selection & coverage Limited evidence of critical evaluation and ability to understand and answer questions
Structure
Poor standards of presentation in the format: visual simplicity and clarity, a logical order of content, excellent effective use of colour and graphics, appropriate text size, and concise use of text
General
Fail 0-39% F
Understanding Basic understanding of main issues, misunderstood in part
Selection & coverage Very limited depth and breadth , omissions of key aspects
Structure
Very Poor standards of presentation in the format: visual simplicity and clarity, a logical order of content, excellent effective use of colour and graphics, appropriate text size, and concise use of text
General
30-39 some knowledge but very poorly presented 20-29 answered only in part and flawed 10-19 deeply flawed or unacceptably brief 0-9 Serious errors, largely irrelevant material or unacceptably brief/presented
39
Marking criteria – reflective coursework 7MCEMM03/16
Reflective coursework is marked by two separate markers. The marking for this coursework will be either - Fail, Pass, Merit, Distinction – an exact % mark will not be given. The marking criteria are as outlined below: Distinction: Full understanding of the immunological issues pertaining to the disease states with evidence of some critical insight. Coherent and compelling analysis of research questions. Insightful choice of published data to support the argument. Coherent and original reflection on choice of lectures. Merit: Full understanding of the immunological issues pertaining to the disease states. Good appreciation of key research questions. Key texts presented to support arguments. Full reflection on choice of lectures. Pass: Understanding of issues pertaining to disease states. Some capacity to reflect critically on key research questions. Sound choice of supporting literature. Reflective description is developed but lacks insight and fluency Fail: Lack of understanding of the immunological issues pertaining to the disease states. Poor understanding of research questions. Limited or inappropriate or out of date literature to support arguments. Argument in reflective description is not fully developed and lacks structure.
40
MSc Immunology Marking scheme – POSTER PRESENTATIONS
Name:
Poster Title:
Comments and Mark
Visual Impact & Quality of illustrations (3 marks): (Text clarity, artistic merit. Primary data figures given? Figures easily readable, with good figure legends explaining the results shown?)
Overall quality and relevance of content (9 marks): Example(s) of use of technique appropriate/relevant (3 marks) Adequate / appropriate introduction and background (3 marks) Sufficient details given to make results shown understandable?) (3 marks)
Presentation skills (3 marks) Technique explained well (2 marks), Engagement with audience (1 mark)
Student discussion of poster (5 marks): (Good depth of knowledge on the technique and its application, understanding of the results shown, questions answered well?)
Overall mark (out of 20):
Examiner:
41
MSc Immunology marking scheme – ADVANCED TOPICS PRESENTATIONS
Student Name:
Paper title:
Facilitator Comments
Marks
Style of presentation: (3 marks) Confident speaker?
Good pace of delivery?
No/Little hesitation?
Structure of presentation: (3 marks) Introduction clear with good background?
Brief but clear description of methods?
Results – good selection of results chosen?
Conclusions from results clearly outlined?
Description/interpretation: (6 marks) Good presentation of results (figures etc)?
Clear explanation and understanding of the results
shown?
Central findings of the experiments and the overall
study explained clearly and easily understandable?
Conclusions clear and logical?
.
Visual Aids: (3 marks) Easy to read text ie not too much to read per slide and
of good size?
Illustrations good quality and easy to see and
interpret?
Artistic merit of presentation – ie good use of
powerpoint?
Timing? (1 mark) Did student keep to allotted time (15 min) for talk?
Answers to questions (4 marks) Competence and depth of knowledge
GENERAL COMMENTS ON QUALITY/SUCCESS OF ADVANCED TOPIC SESSION AS A WHOLE –
TEAM EFFORT:
42
MSc Immunology marking scheme – RESEARCH PROJECTS __________________________________________________________________________
Please read the attached project report and record your assessment of it on this form.
Please follow the marking criteria supplied on the next page.
Please provide comments and give an overall Grade and a % Mark. Please agree the mark with the
other marker and write agreed mark and reasons for this mark in the box provided.
__________________________________________________________________________
Grade ..................... Mark ....................... ... % __________________________________________________________________________ In writing your assessment, please explain reasons for the mark given.
Please mark the separate components of the research project report as indicated and place the total mark in the top right corner. Marks are broken down as follows. Further guidelines on assessing coverage, structure and depth are attached.
Marks Comments
Scientific abstract (max 10%) - Accurately reflects the report - Contains the right type of information - Is described at the right level - Is within the word limit
Background/introduction (max 20%) - Is well structured and organised - Presents a detailed introduction into
the topic
- Where essential is substantiated by relevant and well referenced figures or tables
- A clear hypothesis is formulated - Aims follow from the background
information
- Aims are clear, concise and
Materials & Methods (max 10%) - Are well structured - Contain good detail that allows
reproduction of experiments - Contain concentrations, names and
sources of reagents and/or cells/species
- Where applicable: refer to ethics / home office
- Include a well formulated statistical section
43
Results section (max 35%) - Is well structured - Explains the rationale for the
experiments - Comprehensively describes the
experimental results - Figures / Tables are informative, well
laid out, annotated well and cross-referenced in the text
- Figures/ Table legends are clear and informative and written in the appropriate style
- Includes evidence of statistical analysis or insight
Discussion (max 25%) - Is well structured and organised - Critically evaluates and discusses the
findings - Places the results in context of
literature - Is well referenced
44
MSc Immunology marking scheme – RESEARCH PROJECT PROPOSALS Please mark the separate components of the research project proposal as indicated and place the total mark in the top right corner. Marks should be based on the following:
- Clarity of expression - Whether the section is logical and comprehensive - Conciseness - Whether all sections are completed
Marks Comments
Scientific & lay abstract (max 10%)
Background/introduction incl references (max 30%)
Aims (max 10%)
Study design & methodology (max 40%)
Limitations & risk assessment (max 10%)
45
4.13 Coursework and examination feedback Under college regulations all coursework marks and examination marks are considered provisional until ratified by BOTH the MSc Immunology programme assessment sub board and the Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine assessment board. Similarly the final MSc result can only be indicative (eg pass/fail) until published on SITS following ratification by the Faculty assessment board. In line with Faculty of Life Sciences & Medicine policy, coursework feedback will be provided within 4 weeks of the assessment (see dates in table). Feedback may be provided directly face-to face, by email or via your personal tutor. One exception to this is feedback from the research project which will not be provided until after the project marks have been agreed by the external examiners and ratified by the MSc Immunology Programme exam board.
46
5 Personal and Academic Support
5.1 Personal Tutors You will be assigned a personal tutor shortly after the start of the course. Please do not hesitate to approach your tutor with personal or study problems. You can also arrange an appointment with your tutor or any of your lecturers for clarification or to discuss topics from lectures or other discussion sessions. Please note that it is up to you to contact your tutor for advice and help. The tutors will help you but you must contact them first if you require help and/or advice. This should generally be arranged by email. Student Performance Tutorials: As well as tutorials that you can arrange informally, you will also be required to attend two formal student performance tutorials with your personal tutor during the year. The first tutorial will take place just before the Christmas break and the second after the January examination results. The purpose of these tutorials is to provide an opportunity for students to meet with their course tutors to review their performance on the course. Notes will be taken at the performance tutorials and a copy of the notes signed by both the student and tutor.
5.2 English language A high standard of literacy is expected of postgraduate students. If English is not your first language, you may feel that you would like some help to improve your conversation, reading or writing skills, even if you have already passed an English proficiency test. You should therefore either discuss this with your personal tutor, or visit the King’s College English Language Centre. They will test your skills and suggest suitable courses.
5.3 Student voice
5.3.1 Student feedback to staff
At the end of each module you will be asked to give some feedback electronically on the module but constructive criticism is welcome throughout the year. The module organisers would also be pleased to hear any comments (good or bad) about the module, and will try to resolve any genuine grievances or difficulties as soon as possible. Less urgent concerns can be raised at the meetings of the MSc Immunology management committee.
5.3.2 Module feedback and evaluation
The module feedback form is used to gather structured, anonymous, aggregate data on the delivery of the module. Data from module feedback questionnaires helps module organisers, Departments and Faculties to gain insight into a number of things, including: the quality of module teaching; the success of new initiatives; curriculum development; and the effectiveness of learning resources. This allows the Department and Faculty to take immediate action where necessary, and facilitates the sharing of good practice. Students, by giving honest feedback in a structured and systematic way, are contributing data that will be used to review, design and develop modules and programmes, and will be benefitting themselves, directly or indirectly, as well as the next student cohort.
47
Module evaluation is anonymous and so you should not use it to pursue complaints to which you wish to have an official acknowledgement and response to, as King’s will not consider anonymous complaints. If you wish to complain about any aspect of the delivery of this programme, you should use the King’s Complaints Procedure: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/aboutkings/orgstructure/ps/acservices/conduct/complaints.aspx
5.3.3 Student representation
In the first couple of weeks you will be asked to elect a student representative to represent you on the MSc management committee. In addition to student programme representatives, there are student representatives on the Faculty Postgraduate Education Committee. You can find their contact details in the Faculty Postgraduate Handbook If you are interested in being a student representative for your programme or department, you can email the Students’ Union on [email protected] or see their Student Representation page: https://www.kclsu.org/representingyou/studentreps/
5.4 Books and source material Although you will work largely with primary papers and contemporary review material, you will find it useful to refer to textbooks. There are many available, so please look at a selection before buying. The following are useful because of the strength of their illustrations and because we sometimes use projection slides based on them.
Standard recommended texts: Immunobiology 8 ed. 2011 Murphy K, Garland Science, published August 2011 (This is the recommended textbook for the course)
Other useful textbooks include: Immunology Kuby J. Freeman Immunology Roitt IM, Brostoff J, Male DK. Times Mirror Cellular and Molecular Immunology Abbas AK, Lichtman AH, Pober JS. Saunders Clinical Immunology Brostoff J, Scadding G, Male DK, Roitt IM Times Mirror Advanced Immunology Male DK, Champion B, Cooke A, Owen M Times Mirror Introductory Immunobiology Davies DH, Chapman & Hall
48
These are useful also to immunologists: The Molecular Biology of the Cell Alberts et al Dealing with genes: the language of heredity Berg P, Singer M. Blackwell Genes Lewin B Oxford Make sure you buy only the latest editions. This is most important, as Immunology is a rapidly evolving subject!!
Journals Nature, Nature Reviews Immunology, Science, Trends in Immunology; These are some useful journals for researching immunological topics for essays, journal clubs etc. All of these are available online. However, check availability online through KCL library services.
5.5 Library
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/library/index.aspx The College libraries have a comprehensive range of immunological journals and access to databases. Full time students can also use computer terminals in the student computing rooms and in the research laboratories to connect to databases. You should also be able to access the library facilities from any computer linked to the internet. If you have trouble finding articles, journals or books, please talk to your tutors. Remember that the range of material available online (access to journal articles etc.) is far more extensive than is available as hard copy in the library itself. Student laptop loans A number of laptops for students are available at each library. The laptops can be borrowed for three hours at a time and may be taken outside of the library. Personal laptops Personal laptops can be used in the library. Access to the internet is by connecting to the EDUROAM network for which you will need a valid student account and password. For more information, see http://www.kcl.ac.uk/it/support/wireless/index.aspx
Related Documents
