We hope that you find the information below informative.  We welcome suggestions on how to improve the information we provide.  Any suggestions or queries can be addressed to:

Prof Fred Antson - Assessments Officer

Ms Julie Knox  - CIDCATS Administrator

Mr Darren Spillett - CIDCATS Assessments

Please click on the links below to reveal information

Formal assessment details and deadlines

Formal assessment details: Terms 1, 2 and 3 (as presented to, and agreed by, University Teaching Committee)

TERM 1

Joint project, the students will present their chosen aspects of the project via an oral presentation to an audience of active researchers associated with the programme.  A sub-panel of the PEC will provide written feedback on each student’s presentation and lab book. 

TERMS 2 AND 3

1st rotation project, the student will produce a report of the project which will be assessed in the same manner as our current Masters students (double marking, agreed feedback – using established assessment criterion) (NB:  the marks do not form part of the formal assessment and are for feedback purposes).  Additionally, the student will undergo a brief informal viva in order to reinforce / amplify the written feedback and to allow further inquiry into their development and aptitude as a researcher. 

2nd rotation project, the student will produce a short paper (in a standard journal format) and receive critical referees comments (from staff) as per academic peer review.   They will also prepare a poster which they will defend in terms of response to critical comments in a dedicated poster session to which active researchers associated with the programme will be invited.  Nominated assessors will provide more detailed written feedback to individual students. 

2015 cohort deadlines:

Assessment Deadline for submission B/C013 Presentation / Poster Staff marking return deadline
Group Project n/a 10 December 2015 (presentation) On the day
Individual project 1 21 March 2016  22 March 2016 (presentation) 
6 April 2016 (report), Presentation on the day
Individual project 2

20 June 2016

(also deadline for poster submission to Biology Graphics) 

22 June 2016 (poster) 
3 July 2016 (report), Poster on the day

Information for students

TERM 1

Joint project assessment
Student present results in the form of a joint oral presentation.  Individual feedback on the presentation is given by the provider of the term 1 project and at least one other CIDCATS PEC member.  A sub-panel of the PEC provides written feedback on each student's presentation and lab book.  Both elements are marked pass/fail only.

The 2015 entry cohort presented on 10 December 2015

The 2014 entry cohort presented on 11 December 2014


1st rotation project assessment (Term 2)

We advise students to write their project reports in a standard scientific report form. This means you should include a title and abstract and sections for introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, (you may combine Results and Discussion if that is more appropriate) references and acknowledgements.  The report should be no more than 6000 words (references not included), following the same guidelines and marking criteria as Biology final year project reports (guidelines can be found at http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/ugrad/current/common/projectwrite-up.htm)

  • Choose a font which is easy to read, preferably size 12 and line spacing of at least 1.5 lines. 
  • Figures and tables should normally be within the report, not at the end or in an appendix.
  • Figures should be numbered and have informative legends underneath. 
  • Tables should be numbered and have titles above them.
  • Figures and tables should be referred to in the text. 
  • The appendix is for supplementary information not that which is essential to understand the results you present.

Very occasionally the format of a project report may differ from that specified above. However, even where the sections may have different headings, it should still be possible to identify elements that indicate why the work was done (introduction) how the work was done (methods) what the output was (results) and what the output means and if the aims were met (discussion). Please contact the Assessments Officer

(Prof Fred Antson) for approval if you intend to submit a report in a format which differs from that specified.

The student will produce a report of the project which will be assessed in the same manner as Biology PGT students (double marking, agreed feedback – using established assessment criterion) (NB:  the marks do not form part of the formal assessment and are for feedback purposes).  Additionally, students will undergo a brief informal viva in order to reinforce / amplify the written feedback and to allow further inquiry into their development and aptitude as a researcher. 

The available marks assessing the rotation project learning outcomes above are distributed amongst the following elements of the report as follows: abstract (5%); introduction (20%); methodology (20%); results & analysis (25%); discussion & conclusions (25%); references (5%).

The pass mark for each rotation project written report is 50%.

Your submission should be based on your individual work and your attention is drawn to the University’s regulations on academic misconduct (e.g., on collusion and plagiarism) which can be found at: http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/intranet/current-research/miscellaneous/academic-misconduct/

The deadline for hand-in of the project report is 21 March 2016.  Please submit email a soft copy to cidcats@york.ac.uk by 16:30 on the day of the hand-in. 

Presentations will take place on 22 March 2016 

A 30 minute presentation, including 5 minutes for discussion, to members of the supervisor pool and interested colleagues and students.  The presentation should be in the style of a conference presentation, place the research in a wider context, provide details of the research and specify opportunities for future research arising from that work.  Project supervisors will provide feedback on the presentation in an informal meeting with the student.


2nd Rotation project assessment (Term 3)

Students will produce a short paper (in a standard journal format) and receive critical referees comments (from staff) as per academic peer review.   They will also prepare a poster which they will defend in terms of response to critical comments in a dedicated poster session to which active researchers associated with the programme will be invited.  Nominated assessors will provide more detailed written feedback to individual students.

The report should be written in the style and format of an appropriate journal (specified by the supervisor).  Irrespective of the particular journal's requirements, the report may be no longer than six pages including figures and references.  Even if the journal article sections are not explicitly named as per the weighting below, students should structure their write-up in such a way that these elements can be identified by the markers.

  • Figures and tables should normally be within the report, not at the end or in an appendix.
  • Figures should be numbered and have informative legends underneath. 
  • Tables should be numbered and have titles above them.
  • Figures and tables should be referred to in the text. 
  • The appendix is for supplementary information not that which is essential to understand the results you present.

The available marks assessing the rotation project learning outcomes above are distributed amongst the following elements of the report as follows: abstract (5%); introduction (20%); methodology (20%); results & analysis (25%); discussion & conclusions (25%); references (5%).

The pass mark for each rotation project written report is 50%.

 If you are in doubt, or have queries, please contact the Assessments Officer (Prof Fred Antson).

Very occasionally the format of a project report may differ from that specified above. However, even where the sections may have different headings, it should still be possible to identify elements that indicate why the work was done (introduction) how the work was done (methods) what the output was (results) and what the output means and if the aims were met (discussion). Please contact the Assessments Officer

(Prof Fred Antson) for approval if you intend to submit a report in a format which differs from that specified.

Poster assessment

Details of poster format and guidance can be found on the research student webpages at:http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/intranet/current-research/training/y1-posters/   There is also an opportunity for students to attend poster training, please visit the page above for details.

Your submission should be based on your individual work and your attention is drawn to the University’s regulations on academic misconduct (e.g., on collusion and plagiarism) which can be found at: http://www.york.ac.uk/biology/intranet/current-research/miscellaneous/academic-misconduct/

Deadlines

The deadline for hand-in of the project report is 20 June 2016. Please submit email a soft copy to cidcats@york.ac.uk by 16:30 on the day of the hand-in. 

Poster presentations will take place on 22 June 2016 further details will be added shortly.

 

Information for staff

Details of how to propose a rotation project can be found here Choosing a rotation project.

Please see formal assessment details for requirements for each of the rotation projects, and the student information’page for details of the relevant hand-in and presentation dates.

Forms incls marksheets, guidelines and cover sheets

2016 Marking information is copied below (marking forms will be emailed directly to markers):

Report submission deadline 21/03/2016      
Presentation marking on the day (22/03/2016)       
Report marking deadline 06/04/2016    
Student Name Spring: Project Title First Marker Second Marker Seminar Markers
Saxby, Karinna ChemGlycoSEPSIS: Chemical glycobiology for the study and exploitation of Pseudaminic acid sugars in infectious diseases Martin Fascione/Gideon Davies Marek Brzozowski Tony Wilkinson/Marek Brzozowski
Davies, Helen Measuring reactive oxygen species in cold plasmas for new antimicrobial therapies Deborah O'Connell/Marjan Van Der Woude Yvette Hancock Deborah O'Connell/Yvette Hancock
Dey, Shoumit An eco-immunology approach to understanding the transmission of leishmaniaisis Paul Kaye/Jon Pitchford Pegine Walrad Paul Kaye/Pegine Walrad
Thorpe, Stephen Barriers to infection Jenny Southgate/Steve Johnson Jon Pitchford  Steve Johnson/Jon Pitchford
Leaman, Rosie

Computational methods for predictive bacteriotherapy design

Michael Brockhurst/ Leo Caves Christoph Baumann  Leo Caves/Christoph Baumann
         
Report submission deadline 20/06/2016      
Poster marking on the day (22/06/2016)      
Report marking deadline 03/07/2016      
Student Name Summer: Project Title First Marker Second Marker Panel of poster markers:
Saxby, Karinna Functionalisation of Alginate for Pseduomonas aeruginosa specific targeting in CF lung infections Alison Parkin/Ville Friman Leo Caves Jon Pitchford
Davies, Helen An eco-immunology approach to understanding the transmission of leishmaniasis Paul Kaye/Jon Pitchford Charles Lacey Jon Timmis
Dey, Shoumit Memory and Silence Dimitris Lagos/Jon Timmis Michael Plevin Dimitris Lagos
Thorpe, Stephen Metabolic engineering of sialic acid super-consumers: an approach to reduce post-antibiotic  expansion of enteric pathogens. Gavin Thomas/Marika Kullberg James Moir Christoph Baumann
Leaman, Rosie Probing the role of outer membrane micro-domains in antibody-mediated bacterial cell killing Christoph Baumann/Mark Coles  Paul Pryor Gavin Thomas

 

 

Learning outcomes

Term 1 : Group Project

The group project is a heavily supervised and tutored project carried out as a group.  Actual scientific content will vary depending on state of the art, supervisors participating and knowledge base of the particular cohort of students.  Experiments are outlined, practical guidance is given on a daily/hourly basis, and accompanied by at least weekly discussions. The learning outcomes for this activity are:

  • LO 1: Demonstrate understanding of the complexities and challenges of executing wet-lab, biology experiments; data acquisition, and data analysis
  • LO 2: Carry out a series of wet-lab experimental procedures and analyse primary data
  • LO 3: Show an understanding of proper documentation of experimental execution, data acquisition, analysis and conclusion in the form of keeping a lab book.
  • LO 4:  Develop and demonstrate skills required to have an interdisciplinary team work successfully towards a common goal.
  • LO 5:  Demonstrate skills required for effectively presenting to and discussing primary data with a broad audience.
  • LO 6: Begin to identify scientific issues and experimental problems in the field of infection and immunity.

Term 1 : Tutorials

Tutorials are delivered by experts in the field on a wide range of topics, tailored to the needs of the cohort.  This is aimed at providing all students with opportunity to complement their knowledge base. The learning outcomes for this activity are:

  • LO 1: Begin to identify scientific issues and experimental approaches in different disciplines in topics relating to Infectious diseases.
  • LO 2:  Critically evaluate primary research data
  • LO 3: Begin to acquire novel skills and knowledge in specialistic topics as presented during tutorials.
  • LO 4: Demonstrate skills in critically assessing information and disseminating knowledge in small group setting

Terms 2 and 3 : Individual Projects

In two 13 week periods (approximately corresponding to terms 2 & 3), students undertake individual projects with supervisors from the CIDCATS supervisor pool. The students submit a preference for which projects they would like to be allocated to; the allocation is performed by the CIDCATS PEC.  The learning outcomes are that a successful student should be able to:

  • LO 1: demonstrate the ability to productively contribute to research projects
  • LO 2: show understanding of relevant scientific concepts
  • LO 3: demonstrate creativity and an appropriate degree of independence in their approach to research
  • LO 4: clearly communicate their results, both in writing and orally.