FNAS Research Projects - science.uwa.edu.au · The Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science...

1

FNAS

Research Projects SCIE 4501- 4504

A Guide for Students

and

Supervisors

2011 – 2012 (semester 2 start)

Administrative Unit Coordinator: Ms Madeleine Bergmeier

Email: [email protected] Phone: 6488 7741

Academic Unit Coordinator: Assoc/Prof Patrick Finnegan Email: [email protected] Phone: 6488 8546

3

CONTENTS

Page OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................................ 5

REQUIREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 6

Meetings .............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Assignments ........................................................................................................................................................ 7

Penalties for late submission ............................................................................................................................... 7

EXTENSIONS..................................................................................................................................................... 8

STEPS TO SUCCESS ......................................................................................................................................... 8

REGISTRATION FORM .................................................................................................................................. 15

SUPERVISOR CONTACT SHEET .................................................................................................................. 15

PROJECT OUTLINE ........................................................................................................................................ 15

PROPOSAL SEMINAR .................................................................................................................................... 17

RESEARCH PROPOSAL ................................................................................................................................. 20

LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................................................................. 20

RESEARCH ARTICLE..................................................................................................................................... 28

RESEARCH SEMINAR ................................................................................................................................... 39

EXAMPLE OF ABSTRACT SUBMISSION ................................................................................................... 41

FACULTY POLICY ON PLAGIARISM ......................................................................................................... 43

APPEALS AGAINST ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................... 44

CHARTER OF STUDENT RIGHTS ................................................................................................................ 44

GUILD STUDENT CENTRE CONTACT DETAILS ...................................................................................... 44

APPENDIX 1 STUDENTS WHO TAKE SCIE4501 – 4504 ............................................................................ 45

APPENDIX 2 CALCULATION OF THE HONOURS MARK ....................................................................... 46

SUPERVISOR CONTACT SHEET .................................................................................................................. 47

5

OVERVIEW

The Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science Research Project is an independent, but

supervised, research project offered within the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences

(FNAS). For many students, this is the first taste of the excitement of doing real science,

where the outcomes of the research are not known with certainty and where new knowledge

is created. By undertaking the Research Project, you will define your own project and, in

consultation with your supervisor/s, develop hypotheses, set objectives, plan and execute the

research, interpret the results and present those results in oral and written forms. The final

output of the Research Project will be a Research Article similar in content and context to a

peer-reviewed research article in a professional journal. By the time you submit your

Research Article, you will have learned or further developed your skills in finding relevant

scientific literature, reading scientific literature and identifying gaps in knowledge, thinking

and analyzing critically, designing statistically robust experiments, and writing and orally

presenting scientific results. Importantly, you will also increase your time management skills.

The focus of the Research Project is to provide you with the tools necessary to carry out

independent research. With this goal in mind, the assessment of your progress is focused

squarely on the process of doing research and your ability to assess, interpret and integrate

the results that you produce. While the focus is not on the quantity of results that you

generate, assessors will have a minimum expectation depending on your project. It is highly

probable that a student with an adequate set of high quality results that are well presented,

interpreted and integrated will score better in the Research Project than a student who

produces an outstanding set of results that are poorly compiled into the final Research

Article.

The FNAS Research Project is divided into 4 parts, which together make up 24 points. All

four parts are worth 6 points each and are equivalent. Students should view the four parts as

one fully integrated 24-point activity. The Research Project will contribute towards a

calculation for your eligibility for an honours ranking in a four-year BSc degree program or

an End-on-Honours year. Students taking the project as part of a Graduate Diploma do not

receive an honours ranking, but the Research Project will contribute 50 per cent to the final

weighted average mark for the Graduate Diploma.

Your work will be assessed by two assessors from a panel of assessors selected by the Heads

of the four Schools that make up FNAS. As the assessors might not be directly in your

discipline, it is very important that you write and present your work in such a way that

a knowledgeable person can understand it, even if it is outside of their discipline. The

Academic Unit Coordinator will not assess any of your work.

Please read this booklet carefully as it covers most aspects of the Research Project.

Questions

Please direct all questions to the Administrative Unit Coordinator, Ms Madeleine Bergmeier

([email protected]) who will either reply directly or forward the query to the

Academic Unit Coordinator as appropriate. Please do not send questions directly to the

Academic Unit Coordinator.

6

REQUIREMENTS AND ASSESSMENT

Meetings

All students in a Research Project are required to attend a number of Lectures (Table 1) held

throughout the academic year. These lectures are designed to provide guidelines for

successful completion of the required project activities. Your attendance and participation is

essential. All lectures will be recorded on Lectopia for revision.

Lectures will run Tuesdays 1 – 3pm. The venues will be advised at a later stage.

Table 1. Lecture dates and topics for students enrolled in SCIE 4501-4504 Research Projects mid 2011 – mid 2012.

Date* Lecture Lecture/Workshop Staff

02-Aug-11 1 Introduction to Unit Academic/Admin Coordinators

02-Aug-11 2 Information gathering & record keeping Patrick Finnegan

09-Aug-11 3 Project and Time Management James Fogarty

09-Aug-11 4 Statistical Analysis Michael-Saam Renton

16-Aug-11 5 Project Proposal Patrick Finnegan

16-Aug-11 6 Risk Assessment Management

23-Aug-11 7 Seminars I Lucienne Tessens

23-Aug-11 8 Seminars II Lucienne Tessens

30-Aug-11 9 Literature Review Patrick Finnegan

30-Aug-11 10 Basic Concepts of Chemistry Greg Cawthray

06-Sep-11 11 Critical Analysis

06-Sep-11 12 Basic Chemistry Procedures Greg Cawthray

13-Sep-11 13 Critical Analysis Workshop

13-Sep-11 14 Ethics and Reproducibility

28-Feb-12 15 Research Articles I

28-Feb-12 16 Presenting scientific data Academic/Admin Coordinators

06-Mar-12 17 Research Articles II

06-Mar-12 18 Research Article Workshop

17-Apr-12 19 Research Conference preparation Academic/Admin Coordinators

* Actual lecture dates will be posted on WebCT at the start of semester.

Please ensure that you read all emails and the announcements posted on WebCT.

7

Assignments

You are required to complete the assignments set out in Table 2. All late assignments attract

a penalty (refer to „Penalties for late submission‟ below Table 2).

Table 2. Timeline including assignments, the assessed value of the assignment, and the due date for

students enrolled in SCIE 4501- 4504 FNAS Research Projects mid 2011 – mid 2012.

Assignment Page Value Semester Due dates

Registration Form (WebCT)A 15 2 10am Mon 15 August 2011

Supervisor Contact SheetB 15 2 10am Mon 15 August 2011

Project OutlineA, C

15

2 10am Mon 29 August 2011

Proposal SeminarD 17 2 12-16 September 2011

Research Proposal for Supervisor Comment

A 21 2 10am Mon 10 October 2011

Final Research ProposalA, B

(Part 1- Literature Review (15%) + Part 2 Project Proposal (5%))

21 20% 2 10am Mon 7 November 2011

Research Article for Supervisor Comment

A 28 1 10am Mon 23 April 2012

Abstract submissionA 39 1 10am Mon 14 May 2012

Final Research ArticleA, B, E

(Research Proposal including Literature Review attached as an appendix)

30 70% 1 10am Mon 21 May 2012

PowerPoint FileA 39 1 10am Mon 4 June 2012

Research Seminar (Research Conference) 39 10% 1 Tues 5, Wed 6 June 2012

A To be uploaded on to WebCT.

B

To be handed to the Administrative Coordinator, Faculty Office. C To form the basis for the Research Proposal.

D Schools will organise proposal seminars and advise students of their seminar schedule.

E The Research Proposal, including the Literature Review, is to be attached to the Research Article, but is

not assessed further.

Penalties for late submission a) Registration Form: 1% per day of total unit value

b) Project Outline: 5% per day of Research Proposal value

c) Project Seminar: 5% per day of Research Proposal value

d) Research Proposal for Supervisor Comment: 5% per day of Research Proposal value

e) Research Proposal (Literature Review plus Project Proposal: 5% per day of Research

Proposal value

f) Research Article for Supervisor Comment: 5% per day of Research Article value

g) Research Article: 5% per day of Research Article value

h) Final Seminar Abstract: 5% per day of the Research Seminar value

i) Powerpoint files for research conference: 5% per day of the Research Seminar value

8

EXTENSIONS

Extensions are not normally granted. If you have an exceptional reason for being unable to

meet a deadline, you may request „Special Consideration‟ by completing the appropriate form

and handing it in to the Administrative Coordinator (usually within 3 working days after the

date on which the relevant work for assessment is due) with original documentation that

supports your request e.g. a medical certificate or other appropriate documentation [Faculty

rule 1.2.1.21 (1)].

Student Services provides a „special consideration‟ brochure and the application form at the

following webpage: http://www.studentservices.uwa.edu.au/ss/counselling/services_for_students/academic_support

STEPS TO SUCCESS

Your goal for the next year is to learn how to do science. You will convince your assessors of

your ability to do science by writing a Research Proposal, a Literature Review and a Research

Article, and by presenting a Research Seminar. In each of these tasks, you should aim to

demonstrate logically, clearly and concisely how you:

Made use of literature to identify a research objective, developed the research program,

interpreted observations and recognised the significance of your findings.

Analysed the problem conceptually and, through logical argument, reduced its

complexity to a number of simpler elements.

Questioned the meaning of these elements.

Made judgments about the importance of these elements.

Developed plausible and testable hypotheses, models and ideas about relationships

between important elements that would lead to a resolution of the problem.

Designed methods to examine, through some combination of experiments, literature,

models and observations, relationships between the important elements.

Gathered evidence to support, or refute, the hypothesised relationships.

Interpreted the evidence in the light of:

the hypotheses (ideas) being tested,

the underlying assumptions,

the methods used to obtain the evidence, and

the prevailing body of knowledge.

Identified the problems and methods for further research.

This approach contrasts sharply with one that simply describes and summarises. Investigation

of your problem may involve experiments with plants, soils or animals, collection of data in a

survey, comparisons of a number of field-sites or formulation and testing of simulation

models. However, everyone should follow this process of critical, creative and quantitative

thinking to resolve the problem(s) and communicate progress and results.

To help you achieve your goal, we offer you the following advice.

9

Be passionate, organized and enthusiastic

You should have a deep commitment to your project and feel excited and passionate about

the experiments you are doing. After all, this is your project, carried out by you under the

expert guidance of your supervisor. To be successful, you need to be innovative and

inventive, with the desire and enthusiasm to discover more about your chosen research topic.

You will also need to be extremely well organized to complete the assignments on-time and

to your satisfaction, as you will also probably have other assignments throughout the

semester.

A successful and rewarding career often comes with a work schedule that goes beyond a

regular 9am - 5pm workload. You may find yourself doing research in the early mornings,

evenings and/or at weekends. This is especially true when it comes to working with plants or

animals that require daily maintenance.

It is your responsibility to follow all relevant university and laboratory rules. These may

include, but are not limited to, appropriate safety training, ethical use of animals and human

subjects, and the keeping of a lab notebook with entries describing all tasks and experiments.

All students and researchers at the University are bound by the Code of Ethics and Code of

Conduct (http://www.hr.uwa.edu.au/publications/code_of_ethics). Please check with your

supervisor about the requirements of your project, because the governing rules will vary

depending on the project.

Choosing a supervisor

The most important step in a rewarding research project is to choose a project that you are

passionate about. First, choose the area of research that excites you and then discuss potential

projects with likely supervisors. The choice of supervisor is very much up to you. However,

you must have at least one co-supervisor from within FNAS.

Staff in the Faculty enjoy supervising research students, so do not feel reluctant about

approaching someone. Most academic staff can supervise many topics, but all have their

specialties. Because research supervision costs a lot of time and a research project costs a lot

of money, the research topic you choose must be in a key area of interest of a potential

supervisor. The advantage of working in a field in which your supervisor is an expert is that

s/he can guide you to the literature and already knows the issues and previous results.

However, you should certainly not limit yourself to working within a staff member's

specialty. Approach the staff member and make it known that you wish to work in his or her

field. S/he may be very pleased to negotiate about the topic of a project. This holds even for

well described projects available in project booklets. It is always a good idea to approach

staff about potential projects as early as possible to avoid the possibility of staff becoming

fully committed to other research projects.

Sometimes students seek supervision and advice from researchers outside the Faculty of

Natural and Agricultural Sciences or the University and each year, many excellent projects

are supervised externally. Such collaborations are strongly encouraged and will certainly help

you develop contacts in other organisations. We have excellent working relationships with

various government departments, research organizations and industry partners in the areas of

agriculture, conservation, mining, urban and regional planning, etc. If you wish to do a

research project with an industry partner, contact them directly or through a FNAS staff

member as early as possible (i.e. up to 6 months prior to starting the project). If you decide to

choose a supervisor from outside FNAS, you will need another supervisor from within the

Faculty. The UWA supervisor ensures that the student meets the requirements and academic

outcomes set by the Faculty.

10

Having difficulties?

In the past, some students have found it difficult to decide who to approach as a potential

supervisor. If you have your own project ideas and you don’t know who to approach, contact

the appropriate Programme Coordinator. A list of Programme Coordinators is available on

the FNAS website, or from the Administrative Coordinator. Lectures in the first weeks of the

semester will also help you identify potential supervisors. By the end week 2, you should

have contacted potential supervisors, completed a Supervisor Contact Sheet, identified a

supervisor and completed the on-line registration form (See Table 2). It is your responsibility

to identify a supervisor by the end of week 2.

Key questions you should ask a potential supervisor are:

1. Can we agree on a project that is interesting to us both?

2. Will you be away for an extended period during the year?

3. How often are you available to meet?

4. What is the best way to contact you?

5. What are your expectations of a student engaged in a research project?

The role of a supervisor: what to expect?

An effective student - supervisor interaction is a two-way relationship. Staff in the Faculty

enjoy supervising students particularly when students are enthusiastic about the project. Like

any relationship the more you contribute the more you will gain. At each stage of the

process, deciding on a topic, developing ideas and designing experiments, analysing and

interpreting results, and integrating your results with current thinking, your supervisor will

give you considerable guidance. But remember that to obtain the best from your supervisor

you need to think clearly about all the issues involved. A supervisor should be a guide and

help you develop your thought processes, offering suggestions and encouragement for ideas

and well-developed thoughts and helping you to become more critical of your own work. To

do this well a supervisor must be a good listener. As the project progresses, you will become

more and more independent in your thinking and your project will truly become yours. Even

at this stage, be sure to share your thoughts and ideas with your supervisor for valuable

feedback. Beware of a supervisor who feeds you with all the ideas. Initially this may seem to

be an easy path, but in the longer term you will not become an independent researcher and

will not meet the academic outcomes of the Research Project.

The Research Project is hard work. It is your responsibility to drive the project and complete

the necessary tasks. Remember, the Research Project belongs to you and not your supervisor.

Take heed of your supervisor’s advice on the time required to complete each stage of the

project.

Hopefully you will enjoy the relationship that you build with your supervisor. However, if

you feel that the relationship is not working and you feel that you cannot discuss this with

your supervisor seek advice from the Administrative Unit Coordinator.

It is advised that within the first four weeks of the project students and supervisors complete

the Student Perception of Research Supervision survey. You will find the relevant

information at http://www.catl.uwa.edu.au/etu/spors. This survey is completed by both the

student and the supervisor, who then meet to discuss their respective responses to the

questions. The discussion is particularly valuable when the student and supervisor responses

turn out to be completely different. In this case you and your supervisor need to come to an

agreement on how these differences in perception can be addressed.

11

Choosing a topic

Within reason, the choice of topic is up to you. Staff will often make suggestions about the

general area, and they will almost certainly need to guide you to define and refine the

problem. In all likelihood, they will also be responsible for financing most of the research.

They will also help you to devise an effective methodology to analyse the problem. But the

first definition of the problem should be yours; this is an important part of being able to

conduct independent research.

Good science often requires interdisciplinary research. For example, many problems in plant

nutrition or conservation require knowledge of plant physiology, soil characteristics and

microbial communities. Land and water management often involves the use of plants.

Animal nutrition and distribution needs to be studied in the context of ecosystem production.

Few crops can be considered in isolation from their genetic resources, interaction with weeds,

and nutritional requirements. Many management and policy problems cannot be answered

unless you bring together the biological, physical, technical and economic elements of the

problem. So, you should not be concerned if you wish to do a cross-disciplinary research

project. After all, science is a collaborative effort. You should feel free to discuss your

project, and seek advice and technical expertise from all staff and students in the Faculty.

Information gathering and record keeping

In any research it is important to know what similar work has been done. For this you read

articles from learned journals and books. You should read articles that report research results

relevant to the research that you wish to do, also paying attention to the methods that were

used. You should also read articles that report other scientific methodologies that you may be

able to adapt to your research. To read this information, it is necessary to develop skills in

finding the relevant literature. At first, your supervisor may suggest a list of reading and help

guide you in your reading selections. You should quickly learn to find for yourself journal

articles relevant to your work and interests and not simply rely on your supervisor to point

you to all the relevant articles. When reading, take brief notes, and devise a record-keeping

system, possibly computer based (e.g. EndNote), so that you can rapidly find a particular

point. There is nothing more annoying than knowing that you have read a relevant bit of

information, but forgetting where you have read it. This reading will provide the basis of your

Literature Review and the introduction to your Seminars and Research Report.

The internet is a wonderful tool for gathering information. However, you need to use this

resource wisely. You will need to develop skills for effectively searching the internet and to

differentiate valuable and reputable sites from those that are not.

It is vitally important to be well-organized and thorough in your record keeping. Accurate

records are needed for the literature that you have read, the conversations that you have had,

the plans you have made and particularly of the results of the experiments that you do. Many

supervisors will expect that you will keep a laboratory notebook, collecting all your methods

and results in one place to refer to later on. It is often impossible to tell which bit of

information will be needed later, for example, which detail of a method will be the crucial

one that needs further exploration. So, it is essential that all pertinent information be

recorded. It is much better to record too much information than to find out later that the most

vital bit has been left out.

12

While conducting your research and collecting the data it is essential that you make frequent

back-ups of all your data and any work you have written and keep these in a safe place. If

possible keep a copy at home and one with your supervisor. In one recent situation, a student

had her laptop stolen from her car and it contained her whole project. Having a backup

would have turned a disaster into a nuisance.

Formulating hypotheses, aims, ideas, models

The hypothesis (aim, idea, model) is central to all good experimentation. It is a statement of

what you could logically expect to find based on existing knowledge in the field when you

carry out an experiment, survey or economic study. To create a strong hypothesis / aim you

need to find out a lot about the field in which you will be working. This means that it will

take you some time to set up your hypotheses / aims. But when you have developed a robust

set of hypotheses / aims, you will have the basis for a top-class Research Project.

You should try to frame your own initial hypotheses / aims and then seek feedback from your

supervisor/s. You should also get the widest possible comments on your hypotheses / aims

and the experimental design or analytical framework needed to test them. This process is so

critical that you will present a seminar within your School at this stage of your project to

explain how you developed your hypotheses / aims and how you will test or achieve them.

Some would argue that not all projects require hypotheses. All projects, however, have ideas

you want to test and problems you wish to test. It is for you, in consultation with your

supervisor/s, to identify methods to be used to investigate your ideas on how to resolve the

problem that you are investigating.

Planning

There is no substitute for proper planning. Research time is short and you need to make the

most of that valuable time. Lack of planning will compromise results, or even prohibit data

from being collected, preventing strong conclusions from being made. Poor planning will

require that experiments be repeated, but this might be impossible for logistical reasons or

lack of time. One strategy for proper planning is to carefully construct the hypothesis / aim

that is to be tested, followed by thorough consideration of how the hypothesis /aim will be

tested and the development of a detailed experimental plan. Such an approach will allow you

to identify any specialised equipment, supplies or permissions that are needed, and allow

enough time for those items to be acquired or organised. Many projects come to grief because

a vital item or permission is needed, but it takes too long for it to be put into place. Thorough

forward planning can identify issues and allow thinking time to solve any problems.

Statistics

Statistics is the branch of science concerned with collecting and analysing data to make

comparisons and see patterns in research results. Whatever your experimental design or

analytical framework, it is important that you analyse your data statistically where

appropriate. It is assumed that with your previous training and the guidance of your

supervisor you are able to develop a robust experimental design and to statistically analyse

your own data. You should discuss the methods of analysis with your supervisor before you

begin your project, as this will provide valuable information about how you should design

and carry out your experiments. You should also work closely with your supervisor when you

are analysing your results to make sure you draw the strongest conclusions justified by your

data.

13

Occasionally you may need help from a professional statistician and there are several in the

Faculty. However, the expertise of these staff is in great demand. Please approach them

through your supervisor; that is, ask your supervisor to ask them for input. In that way we

can be sure that you have the best support for solving your statistical problem. You might

also consider doing courses offered by the UWA statistics consulting group

http://scg.maths.uwa.edu.au/

Resources

Research is expensive, in both time and money. Most funding for projects comes from the

research funds of supervisors. These funds are generally hard-won grants awarded to the

supervisor in a highly competitive process outside the University. If there are insufficient

funds for your project, then you will need to obtain additional funds to carry out the research.

Each School has a policy and procedure on creating budgets for research projects, so you

should check with your supervisor about creating the budget for your project. S/he may point

you to the relevant school policy for accessing and spending funds, as each school has a

different management process. If you ever use personal funds for your project you must

keep receipts in order to be reimbursed.

You have access to a wide range of facilities at UWA such as the Shenton Park Field Station

and other state-of-the-art facilities and equipment that will allow you to do a wide variety of

technical and diagnostic work. The Faculty also has a fleet of vehicles, including boats,

which may be used for fieldwork. Schools will often provide access to vehicles for you to

complete your research project. However, despite the resources available on campus, it may

be necessary to collaborate with scientists from other organizations if UWA does not have the

equipment you need. Speak to your supervisor and School Manager about how best to access

the resources you need.

Some Schools provide short courses in laboratory safety and analytical methods that you

must attend if you intend to do laboratory work. You may also be required to get ethics

approval or other permissions, perform a risk assessment, take first aid training, or 4-wheel

drive training to gain access to the resources and equipment you need. All fieldwork off

campus requires a risk assessment that this approved by your supervisor and Head of School

before work can begin.

UWA and the Faculty have extensive computing facilities, including licenses for a large

number of software packages. These packages, including Microsoft Office and the reference

software EndNote, are available free to all students within the university. There are training

workshops offered periodically by the Library and other groups to help you to use these

powerful tools effectively.

Conducting the research

One of the benefits of doing your own project is learning to solve practical problems as they

arise. To gain the maximum benefit, you will be conducting all your research yourself.

Initially, you will need training in new methods and experimental design. Your supervisor

will guide you or organize the training. During your project, there may be times when help is

necessary perhaps when you must make a large number of field measurements in a limited

time. At these times, you may be aided by technicians, other Research Project students, and

postgraduate students.

A key learning outcome of the Research Project is independence of thought and action. The

Research Project is also an apprenticeship in scientific investigation and reporting, and

collaboration with supervisors and others is encouraged. Collaboration does not jeopardise

14

the achievements of an independent research project. Conversely, low-quality work will not

be rated highly because of a high-level of independence. Rather, it may be seen as a lack of

initiative by the student to consult adequately with more experienced colleagues.

Leave time for writing

Writing is an integral part of the research process. It is absolutely essential to communicate

your results with the wider scientific community, as research that is not reported is as good as

not having been done. In learning to become an effective scientist, writing also helps to

crystallize ideas and understanding. Many students find writing to be the most challenging

part of the Research Project and often do not leave themselves enough time to do themselves

justice. Plan your time carefully. The quality of your written Literature Review and

Research Article will largely determine your final mark. Avoid errors such as spelling or

grammatical mistakes or errors of fact. As highlighted above, keep thorough notes during

your research so that you do not forget important observations that will help you interpret

your results and reach strong conclusions.

For a high-quality Literature Review and Research Article give the first version to others

(especially your supervisor/s) to read and comment upon so that you can produce a polished

final version for submission. Normally your supervisors will read and give you feedback on

two versions. So it is in your interest to give them a well-polished document, not something

compiled in a few hours. When you complete a version, you might find it helpful to set it

aside for a few days before revising it. A fresh look may allow you to make considerable

improvements to your work even before receiving feedback from others.

Give people plenty of time to read and think about your written work. You should aim

to submit a complete version at least one month before the relevant due date to give

time for comments and reworking. Refer to Table 2 for due dates of complete versions.

It is recommended that you do not make changes to your work after you have handed it over

to your supervisor/s for comment: wait for their feedback before making more changes or you

may find that the comments you receive no longer apply because you have changed the text.

To make the most efficient use of time, you may decide to give your supervisor/s versions of

individual sections (i.e. Introduction, Results). This will allow you to work on other sections

while you are waiting for the comments.

You will receive lots of comments on the early versions. Remember it is a valuable part of

research to have critical comment on its progress; so do not despair over criticism. This is

part of the peer review process – an essential component of scientific communication. A

thoughtful researcher is grateful that colleagues take time to review their work. Think

carefully about all comments from others, and have good reasons for rejecting a comment.

Ultimately, you are responsible for the work that you present.

All work must be submitted on time. Late submission attracts academic penalties (see

Table 2).

A Note to Supervisors

In most circumstances the Heads of School assign students to assessors from within their own

School. However, as some projects cross multiple disciplines, it may be appropriate for an

assessor from outside the School to be nominated. Please inform the Administrative

Coordinator if you think there is a person outside of your School who would be particularly

well suited to assessing a particular Research Project.

15

REGISTRATION FORM

Please complete the Registration Form on-line using WebCT („Assessments‟ tab), indicating

your project title/topic, supervisor/s and other project information required by the due date

(Table 2). It is your responsibility to provide the correct details, including email addresses, of

your supervisor/s, so pay close attention when completing the survey.

Submit your Registration Form using the submission box in WebCT.

Submitted forms cannot be edited. If you make a mistake, submit another form.

Make sure you notify the Administrative Unit Coordinator and your supervisor/s of any

changes in contact details that occur during the year and update your details using

Student Connect.

SUPERVISOR CONTACT SHEET

Please complete the „Supervisor Contact Sheet‟ attached to the back of this Guide and return

it to the Administrative Unit Coordinator (Faculty reception) by the due date (Table 2).

Make sure you notify the Administrative Unit Coordinator of any changes in your

supervision (e.g. a new supervisor).

PROJECT OUTLINE

You will submit a one to two page Project Outline through WebCT by the due date (Table 2).

The Project Outline will likely form the basis of your Project Proposal. The Project Outline

should include background information leading to the hypotheses / aims that you are planning

to test, the methodology you propose to use to test these hypotheses / aims, and a plan for

completion for your research project including a timeline. All research projects evolve, so it

is likely that the research you propose here will be somewhat different than the work that

appears in the Research Article.

The Project Outline should have the following structure:

Title

Investigator (your name)

Introductory statement

o What is the important problem you are addressing?

o What is the small part of that problem that you are addressing?

What is your hypothesis / goal?

16

Aims (and objectives)

o Based on your background knowledge, formulate a concise set of aims that

indicates what the proposed research will achieve. This should be more refined

and more detailed then the statement of the overall goal in the introductory

statement.

Background (Current knowledge)

o Statement of justification explaining why the topic is significant

o Background information that summarises the current knowledge found in the

literature relating to the field of study.

o Conclude this section with a clearly expressed statement of the knowledge gap

that you used to derive your hypotheses. This section may include a rewording

of your hypothesis or aim.

Significance and outcomes

o This section contains statements of how the anticipated results fit into the

bigger picture and how this project will contribute to the overall advancement

of the discipline.

Methodology

o A logical outline of how the aims will be achieved which will be derived from

the hypotheses and aims statements. This is a very important part of the

outline as it will reflect the realism of the project in relation to the resources

such as budget.

Budget

o A table with anticipated expenditure that relates to the method section. The

easiest way is to go step by step through the proposed method and assess how

much each step will cost. The budget need not be an itemised list of items, but

rather categories of items (consumables, travel, assays).

Time table

o The timing of the project can be conveniently summarized in a table where the

tasks needed to reach the Aims are listed in the left-hand column and periods

of time (e.g. months) are listed across the column headings. An „x‟ can be used

to indicate a month in which an activity will be done.

Formatting instructions

Text: use Times New Roman, 12 point, 1.5 line spacing

Pages: double-sided A4 pages. Number the pages.

Margins: Left side 3 cm, Right side 2 cm, Top 2 cm, Bottom 3 cm (including page number).

Use the „mirror margins‟ setting to achieve this on double-sided printouts.

Page limit: Maximum of 2 pages of text and references. Assessors will not read text beyond

the page limit. The budget and timetable are outside these limits. Each of these sections

must not exceed one-half page.

Submission Prepare an electronic version of your typed Project Outline and submit:

a) A copy to your supervisor

b) A PDF version to WebCT

The Project Outline is not marked; however, you will submit an updated version of your

Project Outline within your Research Proposal (see Table 2). The modified Project Outline is

17

called the Project Proposal and should be integrated with the Literature Review to form one

cohesive document, the Research Proposal. The Research Proposal will be assessed and has a

value of 20% of the marks of the unit.

Email the complete Project Outline to your supervisor as an MSWord document by the

due date (refer Table 2). In addition, you must upload a PDF version to WebCT.

PROPOSAL SEMINAR

You will present your project proposal in a 15 minute seminar followed by 5 minutes for

questions. This seminar is compulsory, although it is not formally assessed. The Schools

will organise the proposal seminars and advise students of the schedule.

This seminar will provide your supervisor/s and members of your school with the opportunity

to participate and provide constructive comments on your proposed research project. In your

talk you should outline the problem that you propose to investigate, the hypotheses / aims you

will be testing and the methods you intend to use.

The spirit of these seminars is one of active interchange between participants. You should be

well prepared for them. The feedback from the seminars can be very helpful in focusing your

thinking. These seminars are the best opportunity to get constructive comments on your

ideas from experienced minds.

Most students will elect to use a Powerpoint presentation to illustrate their seminar. However,

this is not a requirement. Those choosing not to use Powerpoint must discuss their

presentation with their supervisor/s and the Administrative Coordinator at least 3 WEEKS

before the date of the seminar.

Further information will be posted on the WebCT closer to the date.

18

Student:_____________________________ Assessor:________________________________

Assessment Sheet for Proposal Seminar

Assessment Guidelines Maximum Allocated

Mark Mark

Attributes of the speaker 10

Voice: Volume - can speaker be heard at the back of the room?

Speed - neither too slow nor too fast

Appearance & Stance: Relaxed, not nervous or agitated

Confident and apparently knows subject Comments:

Audience contact 10

Eye Contact: General rather than selective eye contact for certain people

or no eye contact (i.e. looking at ceiling or notes only)

Voice Contact: Minimal use of “Umm” and other distracting habits

Involving the audience by the use of “You”

Timing to allow audience to absorb important messages

Comments:

Structure and Content of the talk 50

Opening - setting the scene by describing the content, but particularly the main message of the seminar

Logical development with clear and frequent summaries of the material

Knowledge of the topic

Conclusion and summing up to relate to the opening

The student keeps to time Comments:

19

Use and quality of visual aids 20

Effective use of "dead time" (when audience is absorbed in the overhead)

Smooth transition from text to screen and back

Clear indication of the parts of the screen to which the speaker is referring

Timing of visual aids and length of time that they are visible

Annoying distractions like unwanted shadows, poor centering, overly busy

Clarity and size (can they easily be seen from the back of the room?)

Quantity of material to be absorbed

Did they complement the talk? Comments:

Questions 10

Clarity and correctness of answers

Confidence in answering

Ability to say "no" or "I don't know" without losing face Comments:

TOTAL 100

Other comments:

PERCENTILE: Of all similar work you have assessed at this level, what percentile is this work? (tick box)

□ 90-100 Outstanding □ 80-90 Excellent □ 70-80 Good

□ 60-70 Average □ 50-60 Below average □< 50 Poor

20

RESEARCH PROPOSAL A Research Proposal identifies a gap in knowledge that must be filled and then proposes a

series of aims and objectives to be accomplished using appropriate method that will fill the

gap in knowledge. Your Research Proposal will be made up of two parts, the Literature

Review and the Project Proposal. In the Literature Review, you will explore the current

understanding in your area of research, highlighting the important gaps in knowledge. In your

Project Proposal, you will propose how you will fill one or a few of these gaps in knowledge.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Your Literature Review should be focused on the literature relevant to your project. It is not

to be a comprehensive background review to the subject, but rather a critical analysis of the

literature to demonstrate your understanding of central concepts in your field of study,

establish the relevance for your study and identify gaps in current knowledge. It should be a

critical synthesis of the literature, not a catalogue of what you have read. The Literature

Review should lead smoothing into your Project Proposal by explaining how the proposed

research will contribute to an increased understanding of, or solution to, unresolved problems

or gaps in knowledge.

The best literature reviews uncover things in the literature that the original authors

overlooked or could not see because of the state of knowledge when the literature was

written. This is being "critical" and commands a high grade. No review is satisfactory unless

it interprets the literature, draws conclusions, and provides a framework for the experimental

work that follows. To explain why you subsequently did what you did is most important.

In reviewing the literature, or writing anything else, be honest and transparent. Plagiarism

(the taking of another person's ideas or data and calling them your own) is a serious offence

in the Faculty and the University. Acknowledge the ideas and workings of others by citing

references in the text. If you must lift phrases from another source (avoid at all possible

cost), place them in quotation marks and give the page number in your citation.

To get a good idea about what it takes to write a literature review, read one or two literature

reviews from previous years. Past literature reviews that are of a high quality will be

available on WebCT and copies of past Research Articles are available in your School.

Many websites provide advice on how to write a Literature Review but the book by David R.

Lindsay (1994) “A guide to scientific writing”(Melbourne: Longman, 1995) is by far the

most useful resource to undertake this task. Guidelines developed by the FNAS Teaching and

Learning Committee have also been posted on WebCT.

Submission

The Final Research Proposal includes:

1) Literature Review

2) Project Proposal. Your Project Proposal has the same structure as the Project Outline,

and is likely to be an updated version of your Project Outline. As your literature review

evolves, you should make changes to your original Project Outline so that the

Project Proposal is an integral part of the final Research Proposal. This means that

you will have one reference list for the entire document.

21






Page limit:

1)Literature Review - a minimum of 12 pages and a maximum of 14 pages of text

(including the abstract).

2)Project Proposal - maximum of 2 pages of text. The budget and timetable are outside

these limits. Each of these sections must not exceed one-half page.

Appendices, references, cover page, table of contents, figures and tables are additional

to the page limit. Assessors will not read text beyond the page limit.

Research topics differ in the amount of prior research that has been performed and therefore

the amount of literature available to each student. For this reason a flexible page limit has

been set.

Refer to the Research Proposal Guidelines and Marking Scale below for more detail about

organization, expectations and assessment of this assignment. You will also find a copy of

the assessment sheets for the Literature Review and the Project Proposal.

Submission 1 Research Proposal for Supervisor Comment

It is very important to get good feedback on your literature review and project proposal. This

is most easily done by submitting a completed version to your supervisor with reasonable

time for comment before the submission date.

Email the complete version to your supervisor as an MSWord document by the due date

(see Table 2). In addition, you must upload a PDF version to WebCT by the due date.

Submission 2 Final Research Proposal

Prepare

a) Two printed and stapled copies (stapled in the upper left-hand corner only, not bound)

and

b) An electronic version (PDF file) of your typed Literature Review.

Submit two printed copies of the Research Proposal (Literature Review plus Project

Proposal) - by the due date (see Table 2) to the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural

Sciences reception, Ground Floor, Agriculture Central Wing. (A FNAS assignment cover

sheet must be attached to the top of each copy.)

AND

Upload the electronic PDF version of the Research Proposal (Literature Review plus

Project Proposal) onto WebCT.

22

The Research Proposal will be resubmitted with the Research Article for future reference.

The Research Proposal will not be assessed again. However, it is strongly recommended

that any errors be corrected for the final permanent record held by the University.

We aim to return written feedback on your Research Proposal approximately four weeks after

you submit it. Feedback sheets and annotated copies of the proposals will be available to

collect from the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences office, Ground Floor

Agriculture Central Wing. The Administrative Unit Coordinator will notify you when the

feedback sheets are ready for collection. Please note that hard copies of the Research

Proposal will be returned only if assessors have made comments on the printed copies of your

work.

Assessors will use the following assessment criteria, with a weighting of 90% for content and

10% for presentation.

Assessment criteria for the Literature Review

1. Establishment of relevance for the study

2. Demonstration of understanding of central concepts in the field of study

3. Integration and synthesis of information, emphasis on important points and critical evaluation of

the literature

4. Documented support for the approach or framework of the proposed study

5. Identification of gaps in current knowledge

6. Accurate referencing and citations which follow content and format expectations for publication

7. Clear and logical presentation of text

8. Self explanatory and appropriately referenced figures and tables

9. General writing style to be free of formatting, spelling and grammatical errors

23


Assessment Sheet for Literature Review


Mark Mark

General: 10

Logical, clear and concise style of writing

Free of typographical and spelling mistakes

Free of colloquial expressions and jargon

No unsupported assertions of fact beyond broad common knowledge

Text is rewritten, not plagiarised

Formatting instructions (e.g. page length) adhered to

Comments:

Abstract: 5

Clear, concise and logical in organisation

Summarises the content of the body of the literature review

No citations or extra information

Maximum 200-250 words

Comments:

Introduction: 20

Establishes relevance of the topic by providing a brief contextual

backdrop

Identification of the scientific, technical or social needs of the topic

Outline structure of the paper - signal to the reader the issues/topics

that you WILL cover in your paper, this will also help keep you focused

in writing up the literature review

Comments:

24

Body 40

Demonstration of understanding of central concepts in the field of

study

Integration and synthesis of information and emphasis on important

points

Identification of gaps in current knowledge

Logical development of the ideas to be tested based on these gaps

Documented support for the approach or framework of the proposed

study

Figures and tables to be self explanatory and well referenced

Evidence of critical evaluation of the literature

Comments:

Concluding section: 15

Clear summary of the major points raised in the literature review

Formulation of hypotheses or approach based on current knowledge

May include discussion of implications

No new factual information

Comments:

References: 10

Complete, up-to-date, accurate, and relevant

Sourced from the primary peer-reviewed literature or published reports Without substantial reliance on web-based references Consistently formatted as found in the peer-reviewed scientific journal

of choice

All in-text citation included in the reference list and vice versa

Comments:

TOTAL 100

Other comments:




25

Marking Scale for the Literature Review

The Literature Review (20% overall mark) will be assigned to one of the groupings below.

Descriptors in the groupings are written as generically as possible to cover variations in style

that might be reasonably expected in the breadth of possible research topics.

90–100: An outstanding document, demonstrating excellence in terms of conceptualisation,

theoretical framework or coverage of previous experimental research leading to derivation of

hypotheses or aims of the research project. Integrated presentation of the literature describing

the core concepts in the field of research in a concise yet comprehensive manner with critical

assessment of the methodology, framework or outcomes of previous work, and articulating

gaps in knowledge. Alignment of the research topic to at least one knowledge gap and

appropriate supporting documentation of the methodology/approach to be followed in the

research project. Excellent written expression, organisation and format.

80-89: As for 90-100 but with some trivial weakness, such as in the presentation or structure,

or some minor inconsistency or oversight in the arguments, or research aims or hypotheses

that do not fully exploit the links with theory or previous empirical research.

70-79: For a document showing excellence in one or two aspects of conceptualization,

coverage of concepts, hypothesis development, supporting documentation for proposed

methodology, which offset some weaknesses or flaws. Very good written expression,

organisation and format.

65-69: For a good piece of work with reasonably comprehensive and concise coverage of

concepts and gaps leading to structured development of hypotheses or aims with appropriate

methodology, but lacking excellence in any of the parts.

60-64: For a generally sound document with minor misconceptions, inconsistencies or

omissions in one or more areas, or poor organisation or incorrect interpretation of one

element of the literature, or an inability to recognise the limitations of the approach.

50 –59: For an adequate document but one that contains a number of misconceptions,

inconsistencies or omissions, or lack of integration with theoretical or empirical framework,

or inadequate coverage of core concepts. Poorly organized.

<50: For a document with major problems in conceptualisation or content coverage, and

inability to present information coherently and with clarity. Does not demonstrate a clear,

concise writing style.

26


Assessment Sheet for Project Proposal


Mark Mark

Introductory statement

Identifies an important problem that the research will contribute to.

Clearly specifies the problem that will be addressed.

Concisely and explicitly states hypothesis or aim. 10

Comments:

Aims and Objectives

A concise set of aims clearly indicating what the proposed research will

achieve

A natural extension of the background information presented in the

Literature Review

A more refined and more detailed statement of the overall goal than in

the introductory statement. 25

Comments:

Background (Current knowledge)

Statement of justification explaining why the topic is significant

Summary of the current knowledge using evidence from the literature

Clearly expression of the knowledge gap that is being addressed 10

Comments:

Significance and Outcomes

Clearly articulates the anticipated outcomes and how these will fit into

the bigger picture.

Demonstrates that the research will contribute to the overall

advancement of the discipline. 25

Comments:

27

Methodology

Outlines the methods that will be used to achieve the aims.

The methods suggested are reasonable given the hypotheses and aims. 10

Comments:

Time table

A reasonable estimate of the time needed to accomplish tasks. 5

Comments:

Budget

Indicates reasonable anticipated expenditure in relation to the

Methodology section 5

Comments:

Presentation

Clear, concise and correct language

Times New Roman 12 pt

Two pages (excluding Timeline and Budget) 10

Comments:

TOTAL 100

Additional Comments:

Of all similar work you have assessed at this level, what percentile is this work? (tick box below)



28

RESEARCH ARTICLE The final assignment for your Research Project is the submission of a Research Article. The

Research Article should demonstrate your ability to prepare an article comparable in content,

context and style to those found in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. See “Guidelines for

Scientific Writing” on WebCT („Resources‟ folder) for advice on how to write the Research

Article.

The purpose of the Research Article

1. Present the problem in a logical way in relation to background information.

2. Present a research plan that will address the problem.

3. Present the methodology and methods that were used in such a way that the research

can be reproduced.

4. Demonstrate an ability to research the literature, produce and analyse data and

interpret results.

5. Summarise results and place them within the context of other work, future studies,

policy and management as appropriate.

Order of Elements

1. Title page: include the title of the Research Project, your full name, names of the

supervisor/s, the name of the journal used for formatting and the statement:

“This thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a

Bachelor of Science (Agriculture) (Geology and Resource Economics) etc.

Research Project SCIE4501- 4504

Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences

The University of Western Australia.”

Include the month & year of submission. Do not include a picture on the title page.

2. Abstract.

3. Table of contents.

4. Acknowledgments: e.g. thank those who have assisted you with financial support, in your

fieldwork, statistical analyses etc.

5. Research Article: this document should be written to stand alone as a research article

prepared in a format similar to that required for submission to a journal in the relevant

discipline. Journals in different disciplines will have slight variations in structure. Seek

advice from your supervisor about which journal would be most appropriate for you to

follow. There is no single 'correct' structure; students should identify a structure that best

accommodates their research and is easy to read.

A typical structure for a Natural Science article:

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

References

29

A typical structure for a Social Sciences or Economics article:

Introduction

Theoretical framework

Methodology and methods

Results and discussion

Conclusion

References

Format your article according to a journal that is relevant to your discipline. You must

specify on the title page of your Research Article which journal you have used for formatting.

The web links below may be useful in selecting an appropriate journal.

CSIRO publishing

http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/17.htm

Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics

http://www.wiley.com/bw/journal.asp?ref=1364-985x

Geographical Research

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/submit.asp?ref=1745-5863&site=1

Urban Policy and Research

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/journal.asp?issn=0811-1146&linktype=44

Figures and tables are typically included in a Research Article. Each figure and table should

be numbered separately and should be placed after it is referred to in the text. Tables and

figures should have a legend and be self-supporting, so that they can be interpreted without a

need to refer back to the text.

Figures are usually in a sans serif font, e.g. Arial or similar. Generally journals require black

and white figures but some accept colour images so you may choose. If you choose to

include colour images, you will need to organize to have these printed in colour as most

schools will not print colour images.

5. Literature review.

6. Appendices – generally not required. Experimental data and other bulky information may

be contained in appendices.


The Literature Review and the Research Article are to be formatted as a single document.





Page limit: Maximum of 25 pages of text for the Research Article; figures, tables and

references are additional. Assessors will not read text beyond the page limit.

Refer to the Research Article Guidelines and Marking Scale below for more detail about

organization, expectations and assessment of this assignment. You will also find a copy of

the feedback sheet template.

30

Submission 1 Research Article for Supervisor Comment

It is very important to get good feedback on your research article. This is most easily done by

submitting a completed version to your supervisor with reasonable time for comment.

Email the complete version to your supervisor as an MS Word document by the due

date (refer Table 2). In addition, you must upload a PDF version of this document on to

WebCT.

Submission 2

Final Research Article

Prepare

a) two printed and bound copies (spiral binding, clear plastic cover)

and

b) an electronic version (PDF file) of your typed Research Article.

Schools will allow you to access facilities to print your Research Article. Please find out

individual School arrangements from your supervisor(s).

Submit the two printed and bound copies of the Research Article by the due date (see

Table 2) to the Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences reception, Ground Floor

Agriculture Central Wing. (The Research Proposal must be attached at the back as an

appendix and a FNAS assignment cover sheet must be attached to the top of each copy.)

AND

Upload the electronic PDF version of the Research Article (with the Research Proposal

attached at the back) onto WebCT.

Students are required to submit all data to their supervisor and to retain a copy of their

data for one year after completing their course.

The assessment guide for the Research Article that you will receive following assessment can

be found on the following pages. Your final mark and written feedback on the Research

Article will not be released until after final unit marks are officially released by the

University.

31


Assessment Sheet for Research Articles (except Social Science/ Economics)


Mark Mark

Presentation: 10

Logical, clear and concise style of writing

Free of typographical and spelling mistakes, colloquial expressions and

jargon

Statements beyond broad common knowledge supported by evidence

(references)

Text is rewritten, not plagiarised


Adequate acknowledgement of intellectual, physical and financial

assistance

Title is informative without verbosity

Journal followed for style is indicated as a byline or footnote to the title Comments:

Abstract: 5

Covers the purpose of the investigation, its methods, results and

implications in a clear and concise manner

Comments:

Introduction: 20

A concise background to the problem with well-chosen literature to

support the development of the aims and hypotheses

A clear statement of the purpose (ideas, hypotheses) of the investigation

which follows (concludes) logically from the background

Identification of the scientific, technical or social needs of the

investigation

A plan and anticipated outcomes of the investigation Comments:

32

Materials and Methods: 15

Fully documented and referenced

Clearly described such that the method can be followed by another

investigator

Methods used are appropriate to test the hypotheses

Clear description of the statistical tools used and how they were used (if

appropriate)

Comments:

Results: 20

Cover the information anticipated from the introduction and methods

Logical order of presentation of results

Best choice of alternatives for depiction of results (figures and tables)

Figures and tables can be interpreted (read) on their own without

reference to text

Emphasis on important findings

High quality figures and tables (e.g. easy to view, include all necessary

elements)

Figures and tables formatted consistently throughout and free of errors

Non-repetitive methods of presentation (e.g. does not repeat in words

what is already shown in good Figures or Tables, but describes results

quantitatively)

Adequate level of expertise in techniques (chemical, physical, biological,

environmental), data gathering instruments (e.g. surveys) and numerical

and statistical analyses

Presents but does not discuss results; prepares for discussion of results Comments:

Discussion: 25

Interprets results presented in the previous section in relation to the

stated hypotheses or aims

Does not repeat results but may give reference to the results

Integrates new findings with existing information

Makes strong statements and conclusions

Recognises the limitations of the investigation

Addresses the management implications, relevance of the work to

industry or the scientific community

May make suggestion for further research

Comments:

33

References: 5

Complete and up-to-date, accurate, relevant

Sourced from the primary peer-reviewed literature or published reports

Without substantial reliance on web-based references

Consistently formatted as found in the peer-reviewed scientific journal

of choice


Comments:

TOTAL 100

Other comments:




34


Assessment Sheet for Research Articles (Social Science/ Economics)


Mark Mark

Presentation: 10

Title is informative without verbosity

Logical, clear, concise and balanced style of writing

Free of typographical, grammatical and spelling mistakes

Free of jargon and colloquial expressions

Statements beyond broad common knowledge supported by evidence

(references)

Proper acknowledgement and citation of sources (no plagiarism)


Adequate acknowledgement of intellectual, physical and financial

assistance

Journal followed for style is indicated as a byline or footnote to the title Comments:

Abstract: 5

Covers the purpose of the investigation, its methods, results and

implications in a clear and concise manner

Comments:

Introduction: 20

A concise background to the problem with well-chosen literature to

support the development of the aims and hypothesis of the research

A clear statement of the purpose (ideas, hypotheses) of the investigation

which follows logically from the background

Identification of the scientific, technical or social significance of the

investigation

A plan and anticipated outcomes of the investigation Comments:

35

Theoretical Framework or Economic Model, Methodology & Methods 15

Demonstration of an adequate understanding of the theoretical

background or framework

A review of alternative approaches to addressing the issue being

investigated

A justification and detailed development of the model/methodology of

the approach taken

A clear statement of the resources used, including secondary and

primary data collected

Clear description so that the method can be followed and results

replicated by another investigator

Methods used should be appropriate for the hypotheses being tested

Fully documented and referenced Comments:

Results: 20

Presents a clear description of the statistical tools used and how they

were used (if appropriate)

Follows a logical order of presentation of results, in particular if there

are multiple components to model development

Demonstrates an adequate level of expertise in data gathering (e.g.

surveys), analysis and interpretation

Employs best choice of alternatives for depiction of results (figures and

tables)

Includes figures and tables that can be interpreted (read) on their own

without reference to text, that are properly numbered and captioned and

are of a high standard (e.g. easy to view, including legends and all other

necessary elements) and are formatted consistently throughout and free of

errors

Follows a non-repetitive method of presentation and does not repeat in

words what is already shown in good Figures or Tables but complements

the figures and tables by describing, and possibly quantifying, the results.

Comments:

36

Discussion and Conclusion: 25

Covers the information anticipated from the introduction and methods

Presents alternative analyses of a particular issue, including sensitivity

analysis when appropriate

Emphasis on important findings

Interprets results with reference to the stated hypotheses or aims

Integrates new findings with existing information

Recognises the limitations of the investigation

Makes appropriate and strong statements and conclusions that are

supported by the analysis

Addresses the management or policy implications of the findings and

interpretations, and identifies relevance of the work to industry, the

scientific community or society

Identifies any limitations of current study and makes suggestion for

further research Comments:

References: 5

Complete, up-to-date, accurate, and relevant

Sourced from the primary peer-reviewed literature or published reports

Without substantial reliance on web-based references

Consistently formatted as found in the peer-reviewed scientific journal

of choice


Comments:

TOTAL 100 Other comments:




37

Marking Scale for the Research Article

The Research Article (70% overall mark) will be assigned to one of the groupings below.

90–100: An outstanding document demonstrating excellence in terms of conceptualisation,

theoretical framework or previous experimental research leading to derivation of hypotheses

as described in the introduction, the use of rigorous or innovative methodology, a mastery of

statistical methods and presentation of results, the capacity to discuss the results in an

analytic manner, skilful treatment of unexpected or inconsistent results, or a recognition of

some limitation of the methodology, and integration of the findings within the theoretical

framework or empirical background outlined in the introduction or an alternative framework

if appropriate. Excellent written expression, organisation and format.

80-89: As for 90-100 but with some trivial weakness, such as in the presentation or structure,

or some minor inconsistency or oversight in the arguments, or a discussion that does not fully

exploit the findings or links with theory or previous empirical research.

70-79: For a document showing excellence in one or two aspects of conceptualization,

hypothesis development, methodology, statistical analysis or discussion, but no particular

strengths elsewhere, or for a generally good document with some weaknesses or flaws which

are offset by some excellent features. Very good written expression, organisation and format.

65-69: For a good piece of work with structured arguments leading to the development of

hypotheses, appropriate methodology and statistical treatments and an accurate interpretation

of the results, but lacking excellence in any of the parts.

60-64: For a generally sound document with minor misconceptions, inconsistencies or

omissions in one or more areas, or poor organisation or incorrect interpretation of the results,

or an inability to recognise the limitations of the methodology, or limited evidence of

independent thought or execution.

50 –59: For an adequate document but one that contains a number of misconceptions,

inconsistencies or omissions, or unrecognised deficiencies in methodology, misinterpretation

of the statistical analysis, lack of integration with theoretical or empirical framework, or

inadequate evidence of independent thought or effort. Poorly organized.

<50: For a document with major problems in conceptualisation or execution, or inability to

present arguments coherently and with clarity. Clear evidence of plagiarism in written

content.

38

RESEARCH PROJECT

Supervisor Statement This statement shall be provided to each assessor of the Research Article. If there are multiple supervisors, then this form should be filled out by the Coordinating UWA supervisor in consultation with the other supervisors. Please DO NOT include comments about the mark or grade you believe the student ought to receive for their work. Any statements that include such comments will be returned to the supervisor for revision. Student: As the supervisor(s) of the above student I/we make the following comments about the:

1. Student’s level of independence including data analysis


□ 60-70 Average □ 50-60 Below average □ < 50 Poor

2. Any external factors hampering progress (illness, equipment failure, supervisor availability, etc.)

Additional comments Coordinating Supervisor Name: Coordinating Supervisor Signature: Name of Co-Supervisor: Name of Co-Supervisor:

All supervisors were consulted in the preparation of this statement. □Yes □ No

If not, please explain.

39

RESEARCH SEMINAR

You will present a research talk in the FNAS Research Conference, which will be held

towards the end of the semester in which you complete your project (see Table 2). You must

submit two items prior to the conference: an Abstract and a Powerpoint file. It is extremely

important that these items are submitted on time as they are required for the research

conference. The Powerpoint file is due no later than 10am the day before the conference. It is

imperative that this file is not submitted late.

Submission of Abstract

Prior to the conference, you will submit an abstract on to WebCT by the due date (see Table

2). Refer to the example on the next page and others posted on WebCT.

The Abstract will be printed in the FNAS Research Conference Programme.

Upload your electronic version of the Abstract on to WebCT.


Text: use Times New Roman, 12 point, single spacing.

Margins: Left side 3 cm, Right side 2 cm, Top 2 cm, Bottom 3 cm.

Use the following headings:

Presentation title

Authors (presenting author should be in bold)

Abstract (350 words maximum)

Keywords (list up to six keywords)

Select from the list of research areas (remove items from the list that are NOT applicable)

Save the document as “yourlastnameabstract.doc” and upload it on to WebCT

(e.g. Stewart.doc)

Submission of Power Point

You will also need to upload your PowerPoint files on to WebCT no later than 10 am the

day before the conference (see Table 2). It is imperative that this file is not submitted late.

The version of your Powerpoint presentation that you submit to WebCT is the version

you will use during your seminar. Students are not allowed to bring their own

Powerpoint on the day of the conference.

Like all aspects of the Research Project, you should get feedback from your supervisors about

your Powerpoint slides. Show your supervisor your Powerpoint slides at least a week before

the conference, so that you will have time to apply the feedback they give you.

40

Research Seminar

The research seminars will be 15 minutes in length with an additional 5 minutes for questions

and discussion. These talks will be assessed. The presentation is worth 10% of the overall

mark for the project unit. Students are expected to outline their research results including

adequate background for the audience to be able to judge the significance of the results. The

students must clearly indicate whether the results support or do not support their hypotheses

or whether they do or do not satisfy their aims. The assessment criteria can be found on the

following pages. The Assessment Sheets will be returned to the students as feedback.

41

FNAS RESEARCH CONFERENCE

EXAMPLE OF ABSTRACT SUBMISSION

Presentation title: Using remote sensing to find lost lambs

Authors (presenting author should be in bold): Bo Peep, Boy Blue, and Mary Contrary

Affiliation (School):

Abstract (350 word limit):

One of the critical problems in sheep production is the retention of young lambs in the flock.

Young lambs wander from their mothers and become lost. We used remote sensing to locate

lost lambs. Through the use of this technique we were able to recover 90% of lost lambs and

successfully reunite them with their mothers. The remains of the other lambs were also

located by remote sensing. While the cause of death was not confirmed, it is suspected that

predators such as foxes were responsible.

Keywords (list up to six keywords): for example- Merino sheep, GIS, lamb survival, maternal

care, animal production

Select from the following list of research areas (remove items from the list that are NOT

applicable)

Crop production

Animal production

Crop protection and pest

management

Plant breeding and crop

selection

Pasture improvement

Wildlife management

Conservation biology of plants

Conservation biology of

animals

Soil properties and processes

Mining resources

Geology

Geography

Urban and regional planning

Environmental health

Minesite rehabilitation

Land and water management

Agricultural economics

Economic geology

Animal physiology

Animal behaviour

Plant physiology

Marine science

Evolutionary biology

42

Assessment Sheet for Research Seminar


Mark Mark

Attributes of the speaker 10

Voice: Volume - can they be heard at the back of the room?

Speed - neither too slow nor too fast

Appearance & Stance: Relaxed, not nervous or agitated

Confident and apparently knows subject

Audience contact 10

Eye Contact: General rather than selective eye contact for certain people

or no eye contact (i.e. looking at ceiling or notes only)

Voice Contact: Minimal use of “Umm” and other distracting habits

Involving the audience by the use of “You”

Timing to allow audience to absorb important messages

Structure and Content of the talk 50

Opening - setting the scene by describing the content, but particularly the main message of the seminar

Logical development with clear and frequent summaries of the material

Knowledge of the topic

Conclusion and summing up to relate to the opening

The student keeps to time

Use and quality of visual aids 20

Effective use of "dead time" (when audience is absorbed in the overhead)

Smooth transition from text to screen and back

Clear indication of the parts of the screen to which the speaker is referring

Timing of visual aids and length of time that they are visible

Annoying distractions like unwanted shadows, poor centering, overly busy

Clarity and size (can they easily be seen from the back of the room?)

Quantity of material to be absorbed

Did they complement the talk?

Questions 10

Clarity and correctness of answers

Confidence in answering

Ability to say "no" or "I don't know" without losing face

TOTAL 100

43

FACULTY POLICY ON PLAGIARISM

Cooperation in the creation and pursuit of knowledge is encouraged and often necessary.

However, cooperation must be distinguished from plagiarism. Plagiarism is taking someone

else‟s thought, writing or invention and claiming it as your own. The work of people in the

university is the creation and pursuit of knowledge. Therefore, plagiarism is the theft of

someone else‟s work.

Plagiarism is viewed as serious misconduct by this university and this document should be

read with other university guidelines and policies. The policy of the Faculty of Natural and

Agricultural Sciences is to ensure that students and staff are aware of the nature of plagiarism,

of how to prevent it, and of the penalties that can result from acts of plagiarism.

All forms of cheating, plagiarism and copying are condemned by the University as

unacceptable behaviour. The Faculty‟s policy is to ensure that no student profits from such

behaviour. Generally a failure will be recorded for the subject in which the cheating has

occurred. Serious cases shall be referred to the University‟s Board of Discipline. All students

should note that cases of copying are automatically reported to the Dean and documentary

evidence along with associated correspondence is placed on the student‟s permanent record

Examples of Plagiarism

Examples of the most common types of plagiarism follow. These are examples only, not

regulations. Nor are these examples an exhaustive list and other types of plagiarism may

occur and must be dealt with.

General

1. Failing to cite published or unpublished work of other people.

2. Copying text verbatim without quoting the original work and attributing the work to its

rightful author.

Students

3. Two or more students cooperating to complete an exercise or assignment but then

handing in identical answers, unless the exercise or assignment is a group project.

4. One student copying another student‟s assignment.

5. Using the ideas of a supervisor or peer without proper acknowledgment.

6. Omitting supervisors as co-authors in publications arising from your supervised study

where supervisors have contributed in a substantial way to the conception, execution or

interpretation of the work.

Supervisors and Academic Staff

7. Publishing the essay or thesis of a student except as a co-author.

8. Publishing the ideas, methods, data or writings of peers without either obtaining their

permission or including them as co-authors.

9. Being an “honorary author” of an article without contributing in a substantial way to the

conception, execution or interpretation of the work.

44

Remedies

Plagiarism by students will be penalised under University Statute 17 Section 2(2)g which

defines misconduct as acting dishonestly or unfairly on examinations and test, or in the

preparation and presentation of a thesis, essay, exercise or other work. Section 9(1)c

empowers the Dean of the Faculty to deprive a student of credit if he or she acts dishonestly

or unfairly. In practice, the Dean will delegate responsibility to instructors who must detect

and penalise plagiarism.

1. Plagiarism by students and staff in a publication will be taken up directly with the

Editor of the book or article in question.

2. Two or more students who hand in identical assignments will have the mark split

between them. For example, if three students hand in identical assignments, the

assignment will be marked and each student will receive one third of the marks.

3. A student who copies another student‟s assignment will receive a mark of zero. Further

infractions by the student will result in disciplinary action by the Dean.

4. A student who fails to give proper credit to other work will receive lower marks at the

discretion of the instructor.

5. Honorary authors may be deleted from a published work, even after publication.

Likewise, omitted authors may be included.

Appeals against academic assessment

Full regulations governing appeals procedures are available in the University Handbook,

available online at http://www.publishing.uwa.edu.au/handbooks/interfaculty/PFAAAA.html

Charter of student rights

See: http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/info/student_help/student_rights/charter.shtml

Guild student centre contact details

See: http://www.guild.uwa.edu.au/info/student_help/contact/index.shtml

45

APPENDIX 1 STUDENTS WHO TAKE SCIE4501 – 4504

Students enrolled in

- Concurrent Honours

- End-on honours

- Graduate Diploma in Science

- Master of Science

o Dissertation (24 points)

- Higher degree prelim

o If it includes a 24 point research project

46

APPENDIX 2 CALCULATION OF THE HONOURS MARK

Calculation of Honours

The Honours calculation is based on the student's mark in the relevant research project

therefore the student's weighted average over the relevant research project (24 points) and the

highest scoring Level 3 or 4 units (24 points) for a total of 48 points. Given that the granting

of Honours is designed to reflect proficiency in a large research project, the overall Honours

grade cannot be higher than the grade achieved for the 24 point research project.

Classification of honours

Honours are awarded as follows:

CLASSIFICATION WEIGHTED AVERAGE

IN UNITS

MINIMUM MARK FOR

RESEARCH PROJECT

H1 80% to 100% 80%

2A 70% to 79% 70%

2B 65% to 69% 65%

47

SUPERVISOR CONTACT SHEET

This form is to be completed by staff members and handed back to the student. If you agree to supervise the student, please sign the form at the bottom. For enquiries, contact the Administrative Unit Coordinator, Madeleine Bergmeier on 6488 7741.

Student name: ____________________________________________________________________ Student ID number: ______________________________

Date Details of staff member approached

Agreement to supervision of proposed project

CONTACT (i.e. email/phone) Name

(tick one and state reason)

Yes No Reason

Signature of supervisor agreeing to supervise:________________________________________________________ Date: _____________________

Name of supervisor agreeing to supervise (please print):_____________________________________________

FNAS Research Projects - science.uwa.edu.au · The Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science...

Documents

Transcript of FNAS Research Projects - science.uwa.edu.au · The Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Science...