共计 8190 个字符，预计需要花费 21 分钟才能阅读完成。
ECMM410: Research Methodologies Course 2021-2022
Chris Edwards 60%, Mark Baldwin 20% and Pierre Friedlingstein 20%
Background
r>The aim of the course is to introduce some of the‘soft skills’required to do
research: for example, communication, literature review, critical thinking etc.
Because of the mix of different subjects within the expected cohort, it is not
possible to cover‘hard skills’e.g. statistical analysis, as different students will
have a different baseline and have different requirements for their work.
Structure
All the timetabled lecture/interactive sessions are scheduled to take place in
Term 1. The assessed coursework will be requested in phases: two towards
the end of Term 1 and the final one in the middle of Term 2.
Wk Date Lecturer 2-hour lecture/interactive session
2 27-Sept CE Introduction: aims of course, why do we do
research? the scientific method, plagiarism, what
is original research? the research process
(including different approaches), explanation of
coursework, communication techniques
3 4-Oct CE The Scientific Literature: finding and reading
research papers: library and on-line journals,
searching, google and Wikipedia
4 11-Oct MB Data graphics and typography
5 18-Oct CE Scientific writing: Structures of MSc/PhD theses,
long and short journal papers, popular articles,
lucidity, the peer-review process, set assessed
coursework: review of paper from the literature
6 25-Oct MB Communicating research: talks, conferences,
workshops, meetings, posters, making an impact
7 1-Nov CE Literature review: literature review vs
assessment vs synthesis, assessed coursework:
literature review
Split MSc and PhD MSc PhD
8 8-Nov CE/PF Presentations Presentations
9 15-Nov CE/PF Presentations Presentations
10 22-Nov MB Presentations
Assessed Coursework
There is no formal exam – 100% coursework assessment.
There are three pieces of coursework.
The two pieces of written coursework are individual exercises and hence
your attention is drawn to the University guidelines on collaboration and
plagiarism (University academic misconduct procedure)
All coursework is compulsory for both PGT (i.e. MSc) and PGR (i.e.
MPhil/PhD) students.
Coursework #1: Presentation (10% of total marks)
Each student will make a short 5-6 minute presentation to a subgroup of the
cohort which will provide:
A brief description of your educational background prior to becoming an
MSc/PGR student at Exeter University
What attracted you to come to study at Exeter University
What subject are you currently studying at Exeter University1
What are your goals and aspirations after completing you studies
How will your time at Exeter help you achieve these goals
The presentation may or may not involve/require slides. You will not be
penalized for not preparing slides – although some presenters find them useful
as‘cues’and aide-memoires to keep‘on theme’. Presentations which are
significantly shorter than 5 minutes will be penalized as well as ones which
over-run the allotted time.
The presentations will take place in Week 8 or 9. (The cohort will be subdivided
and so each student will either present in Week 9 or Week 9.)
Marking Structure
The presentations will be marked against the following set of criteria
The extent to which the presenter adequately addresses each of the
themes outlined in the remit above
Audibility and pace of delivery
Organization
The fluency with which the material is delivered
Time-keeping
extent of eye contact and engagement
(use of appropriate visual aids if employed)
1 For PGR students the emphasis of the talk should be on explaining your research topic in an
accessible way.
Coursework #2: Peer-Review of Journal Paper (30% of total marks)
The objective is to produce a peer-review of a paper that has already
appeared in the literature. It will develop critical reading and thinking.
This coursework is worth 30% of the overall module assessment.
Date coursework set: week 4 (reminder week 6)
Hand-in date/time: 9/12/2021
Hand-in method: PGT & CDT students must use the BART System.
Paper: student to suggest, possibly in consultation with other members
of academic staff or supervisors (in the case of PhD students)
The report must not exceed 2 sides of A4.
Suggested peer-review structure
There is no formal structure for peer reviews, however a suggested
format is:
o Title of the form“Review of Smith et al….”
o Short summary of what is done in the paper and what it
concludes
o A list of major comments/issues/improvements
o A list of minor comments/issues/improvements
o A summary for the Journal Editor to guide their decision
Written Coursework Marking Structure
Since the marker cannot be expected to be knowledgeable about all the
topics chosen by students submitting paper/literature reviews, you are not
expected to assess the review from the standpoint of an expert in those
topics; rather it will be assessed against general criteria, as follows:
Written Coursework #2: Peer-Review of Journal Paper
- Has a suitably terse summary of the paper been produced? [20 marks]
- Are major issues/improvements identified? [25 marks]
- Are minor issues/improvements identified? [25 marks]
- Would it be easy to make a minor revisions/major revisions/reject
decision based on the review? [20 marks] - Is the document well-structured and well-presented and is the standard
of writing adequate? (N.B.: Non-native speakers of English should not
be penalized heavily for language errors unless these are so numerous
as to seriously interfere with the intelligibility of the review.) [10 marks]
Written Coursework #3: Literature Review (60% of total marks)
The objective is to produce a literature review report on a given topic. It
involves developing skills like critical paper reading and writing up the
literature review.
This coursework is worth 60% of the overall module assessment.
Date coursework set: week 7
Hand-in date/time: 11 Feb 2022
Hand-in method: PGT & CDT students must use the EBART System.
Topic: to be suggested by the student in consultation with Chris
Edwards or other members of academic staff or supervisors (in the
case of PhD students it should be the supervisor)
The report must not exceed 6 sides of A4 including references.
Suggested report structure:
- Title. Short, informative title.
- Introduction. A short section providing motivation, the overall aim and
any specific objectives for the literature review undertaken. - Background. You may want to provide here any background
information relevant/required for the review in the next section. - Main part of the report. This should contain the review itself including
analyses/discussion on pros and cons of collected references or
approaches, together with the identification of any potential limitations
and/or gaps. Links between the major references analyzed should also
be established here, together with relevant classification(s). If possible,
you may also want to illustrate some of the main discussion points on
one or more example(s). - Summary and Conclusion. Summarize briefly the work presented in the
report, draw the main conclusions and provide future work
recommendations based on your findings/opinion. - References. Provide the list of references cited in the report.
Remember that each reference listed here must be cited at least once
somewhere in the report text. (Also, if a reference is cited somewhere
in the text, it must appear in this list too.)
The assessment will be based on the following:
- Content: this will be based on the critical review itself, i.e. on the
discussion(s)/comments made, including identified pros/cons of
analyzed pieces of work, potential knowledge gaps identified, links
identified, classifications and future work recommendations made. - Presentation: This will be based on general presentation and the use of
references, figures, tables, equations, etc. - Typography, document layout, and data graphics. This will be based on
implementing the principles discussed in the lecture on Data Graphics
and Typography.
Written Coursework Marking Structure
Since as a marker you cannot be expected to be knowledgeable about all the
topics chosen by students submitting paper/literature reviews, you are not
expected to assess the review from the standpoint of an expert in those
topics; rather it should be assessed against general criteria, as follows:
Written Coursework #3: Literature Review
- Has the topic been clearly defined and introduced? [10 marks]
- Have a reasonable number of sources been reviewed (neither too
many nor too few), and do they all seem to be appropriate to the topic?
(At least eight sources should be reviewed, and probably not more than
a dozen — depending on the topic.) [15 marks] - Have the sources been critically analyzed (as opposed to merely
reported), and compared? [25 marks] - Is there a good overall summary of the conclusions from the review?
[20 marks] - Is the document well-structured and well presented, with sectioning,
figures, tables, equations as appropriate to the subject matter, and is
the standard of writing adequate? (N.B.: Non-native speakers of
English should not be penalized heavily for language errors unless
these are so numerous as to seriously interfere with the intelligibility of
the review.) [20 marks] - Is the referencing complete and in a consistent style, with everything
cited in the text included in the bibliography, and everything listed in the
bibliography cited in the text? [10 marks] - Is the review within the stipulated length limit — neither too long nor too
short? (It is required to be no more than 6 pages of A4; anything less
than 4 pages is too short.) [Drop 5 marks for each page that it exceeds - pages, or for each page that it falls short of 4 pages.]