Overview » Guidelines for Examination
Each student will have (at least) two examiners. Examiner 1 will be nominated by the supervisor for approval by the Honours Committee. Examiner 2 will be appointed/confirmed by the Honours Committee from amongst the cohort of primary supervisors or from the SoMS academic staff.
Examiners with readily identifiable conflicts of interest should not be nominated. Examiners are asked to declare that they have no conflict of interest with the candidate, supervisor, or the project. Potential examiners who should be excluded include those: (i) have a current collaboration with the supervisor on the research area of the project or have published in the last 3 years or currently hold a grant with the supervisor on the research area of the project, or (ii) have substantial direct involvement in the student’s work or (iii) have a current or previous personal relationship with the supervisor or student. Those potential examiners who have collaborations/publication/grants with the supervisor in a different area of research to that of the student’s project may be an examiner; however, they are asked to declare this conflict. No reciprocal examiners are allowed (e.g. research group A and research group B cannot examine each other’s students and the examiner must be from outside the research group). The appropriateness of the examiner will then be assessed by the Honours Committee.
Examiners who are new to the SoMS Honours program are expected to attend the examiners’ workshop held in early S1-2017 (date to be confirmed).
Examiners should attend the Introductory Seminars (6-10 June) and Final Seminars (7-11 November) of the students they agreed to examine (the specific time and date for each student’s presentation/interview will be posted on the SoMS website). Note: Examiners who are unable to attend these seminars should provide two questions and the answers such that the session chair can ask those questions.
Examiners are required to fill out the assessment forms, on each occasion of providing their grades, for the Literature Review and Project Manuscript, and for the Introductory and Final Seminars. Dedicated examiners are required to have assessed the Project Manuscript prior to attending the Final Seminar. Feedback regarding the Literature Review should be provided for the student to use in their writing of the Project Manuscript.
To try to standardise marking, examiners are asked to grade students using the rubric assessment tables available in the course outline and on the SoMS website. A completed example will be circulated to examiners along with the assessment rubrics. Please circle or mark the relevant levels attained for each criteria and base your score (/10) on these levels. Please provide feedback for the Literature Review and Project Manuscript by giving specific comments on strengths, weaknesses and suggestions for improvement.