School of Language and Global

Studies

Module Information Pack for

EB4712 Methodology in TESOL

2018/19

Module Lead:
Neil Walker

Contents
Page
1. Brief Introduction to EB4712 2
2. Schemes of Work 2
3. Assessment Schedule and Information on 6
Feedback on Assessment
4. Marking Criteria 9
5. Module Descriptor 14
Appendices Important information relating to regulations 14
1. Brief Introduction to EB4712

This module investigates the ‘How’ and some aspects of the ‘What’ of TESOL. We critically
explore influential approaches, methods and techniques in the field of TESOL so participants
can develop their knowledge and awareness of alternative perspectives on effective TESOL
teaching. We use this knowledge and awareness to examine and evaluate the
methodological principles behind classroom practices, both in general approach to teaching
and in relation to teaching specific language and skills.

Overview

 The Scope of TESOL Methodology

 Introduction to the concepts of Critical Pedagogy and Appropriate Methodology
 Overview of Approaches and Methods in TESOL e.g.:
o Traditional Methods (e.g. Grammar Translation)
o Behaviouristic Methods (e.g. Audiolingualism)
o ‘Humanistic’ Methods (e.g. Silent Way)
o Communicative Approach
o The Lexical Approach
o Task-based learning (TBL)
 Classroom Techniques: e.g. Group and pairwork; (PPP) Present Practice Produce,
(ARC) Authentic Use – Restricted Use – Clarification and Focus, (TTT) Test Teach
Test,
 Current approaches to teaching reading, writing, listening, speaking, language forms
(lexis and grammar) and pronunciation
 Methodology in ESP/EAP contexts

1. Schemes of Work

Module syllabus

We work through three key areas in this module (see below).

Throughout the module, I’ll be asking you to reflect on your own teaching and learning
experiences and contexts.

Full references for suggested readings can be found in the Reading list. Additional
readings will be indicated on Blackboard for each week.
Week Learning activities Suggested Readings Discussion Themes
Boards (DBs)

Introduction Richards, J. C. (1996).

1 Introductions
Scope of the module Teachers’ maxims in
(non-assessed) Background to
Key influences on & language teaching. TESOL
issues in TESOL TESOL Quarterly, 30, DB 1 Methodology
281-296.
Introduction to the
module &
assessment Akbari, R. (2007).
Reflections on
reflection: A critical
appraisal of
reflective practices in
L2 teacher education.
System, 35, 192-
207.

45 Years of TESOL: Richards & Rodgers

2 The ‘WHAT’, the (2001). Chapter 1.
‘HOW’ & the ‘WHY’
Waters, A. (2012).
The Concept of Trends and issues in
Methods & ELT methods and
Methodology in methodology. ELT
TESOL Journal, 66, 440-449.

Overview of
approaches &
methods in TESOL
Communicative Richards & Rodgers
3 Language (2001). Chapter 14.
Teaching & ‘Post-
Beaumont, M. &
method’ TESOL Chang, K-S. (2011).
Pedagogy Challenging the
The development of traditional/
CLT from 1970’s to communicative
dichotomy. ELT
the 21st Century
Journal, 65, 291-299.
‘Post-method’ Kumaravadivelu, B.
4 Pedagogy in (2006). TESOL
methods: Changing
TESOL
tracks, challenging
The concepts of Trends. TESOL
Critical Pedagogy, Quarterly, 40, 59-81.
Appropriate
Methodology & Post- Pennycook (1994). Contemporary
Chapter 9. Perspectives in
 Method Pedagogy TESOL
TESOL Methodology

Task-based Richards & Rodgers

5 Learning & (2001). Chapter 18. DB 2
Teaching
Willis (2004).
Task-based Perspectives on Task-
Learning & Teaching based Instruction:
Understanding out
Practices,
Acknowledging
Different Practitioners.

Focus on the Ehrman, M. E., Leaver,

6 Language Learner B. L., & Oxford, R. L.
(2003). A brief overview
Understanding of individual differences
learners & their in second language
learning needs learning. System, 31.
313-330.
Learner variability &
Learner Training
Chen, Y. (2007).
Learning to learn: The
impact of strategy
training. ELT Journal,
61, 20-29.
Culture in Alptekin, C. (2002).
7 Language Towards intercultural
Teaching communicative
competence in ELT.
Cultures of learning ELT Journal, 56, 57-64.
Approaches to
developing TESOL
Baker, W. (2009). The Classroom
intercultural cultures of English as a
competence Practice
lingua franca. TESOL
Quarterly, 43, 567-592.
8 Researching Rainey, I. (2000) Action
Practice in TESOL Research and the DB 3
English as a Foreign
Discussion of Language Practitioner:
Interventions time to take stock.
Introduction to Educational Action
Action Research Research, 8, 65-91.

Mullock, B. (2006). The

pedagogical knowledge
base of four TESOL
teachers. The Modern
Language Journal, 90,
48-66.
9 Classroom Hall (2011). Part 1
Dynamics and Chapters 1 to 3. ‘
Management in Murray, D. E. &
TESOL Christison, M. (2011).
What English language
Classroom dynamics teachers need to know
Framing Classroom II. London; Routledge.
Activities Chapter 3
10 Teaching Schmitt, N. (2008).
Vocabulary & Instructed second
language vocabulary
Meaning
learning. Language
Corpus studies & the Teaching Research,
Lexical Approach 12, 329-363.
Techniques for
Shin, D., & Nation, P.
teaching vocabulary
(2008). Beyond single
& meaning
words: the most
frequent collocations in
spoken English. ELT
Journal, 62, 339-348.
11 Approaches to Batstone, R., & Ellis, R.
Teaching Grammar (2009). Principled DB 4
grammar teaching.
From grammar- System, 37, 194-204.
translation to
consciousness- Spada, N. & Lightbown,
raising P. (2008). Form-
focused Instruction:
Isolated or Integrated?
TESOL Quarterly, 61,
181-207.
12 Content-based Richards and Rodgers
Language (2001). Chapter 17.
Instruction
Chappell, P. (2014).
Engaging learners:
Conversation- or
dialogic-driven
pedagogy? ELT
Journal, 68, 1-11.
2. Assessment
2.1 Assessment Schedule

Assessment Schedule

Assignment 1 Assignment 2
Nature of Coursework 1 – Coursework 2 –
summative
assessment e.g. in Contribution to all three discussion Essay
class exam or test/ boards on your proposed intervention
written
assignment/
presentation/ oral
test
submission date Three posts across the course (see tbc
for assessment timetable)

2.2 Assignment Information

Assignment 1: Discussion Boards

This assignment constitutes 30% of your overall mark for the module.

At three points in the module a question will be posted on the discussion board for you
to engage with. The purpose of these questions is to encourage you to take part in
discussing some of the issues TESOL practitioners discuss at conferences, in journals
and in staffrooms round the world, taking on an evidence-based approach through the
reading you do. They are all questions without ‘right’ answers; you are asked to share
your opinions, beliefs and experiences and report on what you have discovered in your
background reading in order to enrich everybody’s knowledge and ideas.

Discussion boards are open for two weeks. In preparing your contributions it is
essential that you refer to weekly readings, learning activities and materials, as well as
draw on relevant external reading where appropriate. All citations and referencing
should be in APA style. Discussion posts should be a maximum of 400 words per
post before references.
Discussions open on Mondays (day 1 of week 1) and close on Sunday (day 7 of week
2) in accordance with your local time. In the first week you are expected to submit your
initial post by the end of day 7. All initial posts must be submitted first to Turnitin and
then to the discussion board. In the second week of the discussion you should submit
a minimum of three additional posts as a result of interaction with your group.
Additional posts should not be submitted to Turnitin. In total you should have submitted
a minimum of four good quality posts during the two week period.

Additional posts should build on your initial post by:

 Posing relevant and perceptive questions for other participants;

 Contributing responses that cite research literature;

 Reflecting on your own professional experience;

 Developing and extending the discussion in new and/or possibly original

ways;

 Demonstrating critical skills and encouraging analysis of key concepts and

ideas.

Assignment 2: Proposed Intervention

Assessed essay: The Proposed Intervention (weighting 70%)

The aim of this task is to allow you to demonstrate your understanding of action
research as a tool for personal development regarding classroom methodology, and
demonstrate your understanding of key concepts in methodology.

You are going to consider an issue relating to a specific teaching context with which
you are familiar, preferably one from your own teaching experience and ideally one
related to a recent or current teaching post or language learning experience. Based
on an analysis of this context, you will propose an intervention (e.g. a possible
solution to a teaching problem, the introduction of a method or technique, or an
innovative way of presenting new language), as well as setting out why you feel this
intervention is necessary.

The assignment requires you to set out how the intervention could be introduced into
the context which you identified and then evaluated to determine its success. Note:
this exercise is hypothetical; you do not need to carry out the intervention itself.

You must include:

• The context and rationale for the intervention

• The proposed intervention – outline the principles of the chosen technique or

method and also to critically examine

• The proposed means of evaluating the intervention’s success.

This assignment allows you to demonstrate your understanding of both Action
Research and current concepts in EFL methodology. We discuss how you might go
about this assignment in the session on Researching Practice in TESOL but it would
be helpful for you to start keeping a list of potential intervention projects as you work
through the module and reflect on your work life as a teacher.

This should be written up in essay format, using appropriate organisation, academic

style and language and referencing. The first person voice can be used where
relevant.

Remember to read the marking criteria carefully so you know what is expected.

Add a cover sheet (from Blackboard) and submit via Turnitin (on Blackboard). No
paper copy is submitted.

Length Guide: 2,500 words excluding any appendices and the final
reference list
Deadline: tbc
Assessment Criteria: Inclusion of background and rationale for the
intervention.
Critical examination of principles underpinning the
intervention, demonstrating an understanding of key
TESOL concepts.
Appropriate use of literature to support points made.
Balanced discussion of possible drawbacks as well as
advantages.
Overall organisation, use of English, referencing
conventions and presentation.

This assignment constitutes 70% of your overall mark for the module.

2.3 Feedback

Feedback will be provided in accordance with University Academic Regulations

below:

Generic feedback on all summative elements of assessment which contribute to a

module, will be made available to students within 15 working days (3 weeks) of the
scheduled submission or examination date. Generic feedback on end of module
assessment and dissertations will be made available within 15 working days following
the publication of results. (G2.4)

For all assessments, students will be provided with individual feedback (G2.5)

Feedback may be provided in oral, written, audio or digital format as appropriate.

(G2.6)
 3. Assessment Criteria

Assignment 1 - Discussion Board posts

The following table sets out the parameters for the grading of Discussion Boards in all
modules.

The grade awarded from within each grouping (e.g. 62 or 65 or 68) will depend on how many
of the criteria have been fulfilled.

EB4712 Assessment Criteria – Discussion Boards

Exceptional Excellent All these criteria must be met to achieve 100
Distinction  The composition demonstrates exceptional
100 Discussion is directly relevant to critical awareness and analysis
the topic throughout, covers a  There is insightful and convincing
wide range of valid points, and understanding of the subject,
addresses implications and demonstrating significant, in-depth
Very High assumptions in a challenging, independent study.
Distinction authoritative and impressive way.  Structure and organisation of ideas is
94 impressively coherent.
Excellent synthesis of ideas  Citations are consistent and correctly
formatted with an exceptionally wide-
Evidence of very wide reading ranging and accurate Reference List
High around this topic, demonstrating  There are no grammatical or spelling errors
Distinction excellent independent research and the language used reveals a faultless
87 skills command of appropriate lexis and register.
Excellent academic style.
 An exemplary piece of work which achieves
the learning outcome at such a high level
that it is difficult to fault.
Mid Very Good  The composition demonstrates excellent
Distinction critical awareness and analysis
80 Discussion is directly relevant to  There is convincing understanding of the
the topic throughout, and covers a subject.
wide range of valid points and  Structure and organisation of ideas is
addresses implications and rigorous throughout.
assumptions in a sophisticated way  Citations are consistent and correctly
formatted with a wide-ranging and accurate
Low Very good synthesis of ideas Reference List
Distinction  There are no grammatical or spelling errors
74 Evidence of wide reading around and the language used reveals excellent
this topic, demonstrating very good command of the appropriate lexis and
independent research skills register. Very good academic style.
 A very good piece of work which achieves
the learning outcomes at a very high level.
 Good  The composition demonstrates good critical
High Merit awareness and analysis
68 Discussion is directly relevant to  There is confident understanding of the
the topic and covers a range of subject.
valid points, and either  Occasional weaknesses of structure are
Mid Merit implications or assumptions (or apparent, but the text is still largely
65 both) may have been addressed. coherent and logical.
 Citations are consistent and correctly
Good synthesis of ideas formatted with an accurate Reference List
 There are very few grammatical or spelling
Evidence of some reading around errors and the language used reveals a good
Low Merit this topic, demonstrating command of the appropriate lexis and
62 independent research skills register. Academic style is good.
 A good piece of work which achieves the
learning outcomes at a high level.
High Pass Adequate  The composition demonstrates satisfactory
58 critical awareness and analysis
Discussion addresses the topic but  There is appropriate understanding of the
is less focussed at times with some subject.
omissions or inconsistencies  A recognisable structure is apparent
Mid Pass  Citations are largely consistent and mostly
55 accurate with a satisfactory and mostly
Some synthesis of ideas accurate Reference List
 There may be some grammatical, word
Little evidence of reading around choice, or spelling errors but the language
Low Pass this topic used reveals a largely appropriate
52 command of lexis and register. Academic
style is evident but may need improvement.
 An adequate piece of work which achieves
the learning outcomes at an adequate
level.
Fail Weak  The composition is largely descriptive with
(marginal) little evidence of analysis or critical stance
45 Discussion only partially addresses  There is inadequate understanding of the
the topic. subject with little or no independent study.
 An attempt has been made to structure the
Very limited or no other sources composition although this may not be
are cited. completely successful.
 Citations and Reference List are frequently
No synthesis of ideas inaccurate and/ or in consistent
 There may be some significant grammatical
Fail (mid) or spelling errors and these may pose a
40 barrier to the reader and overall the
language used reveals inadequate
command of lexis and register. Academic
style is patchy.
 The assignment fails to demonstrate
achievement of the learning outcomes.
Fail (low) Very weak:
35 Discussion may be incomplete or is
irrelevant to the topic
  There is over-dependence on description
No other sources are cited. rather than analysis. No evidence of critical
stance.
Fail  There is overreliance on ‘received
(severe) information’ going little beyond superficial
25 paraphrasing of what has been gained from
the Learning Activities
 There is factually erroneous or
contradictory information
 There is a lack of any easily discernible
organisation and structure
 Citations and Reference List are largely
Fail (very inappropriate
severe)  Use of English does not reach the standard
10 required. The composition is poorly written
in terms of grammar, lexis and register, and
this poses a barrier to the reader.
Academic style is not evident.
 An unacceptable piece of work which
completely fails to demonstrate
achievement of the learning outcomes
0 No assignment submitted

In preparing your Discussion Board contributions, it is essential that you refer to weekly
readings, learning activities and materials. All citations and referencing should be in APA
style. The first post should be submitted first via the relevant Turnitin link and then to the
relevant Discussion Board. Additional posts as required for group participation should build
on this initial post by:

 posing relevant and perceptive questions for other participants;

 contributing responses that cite research literature and draw on students’ own
experience;
 developing the discussion in new and/or possibly original ways;
 demonstrating critical skills and encouraging learner reflection.

In terms of initial discussion posts, assessment is based primarily on quality, though word-
length requirements and expectations in terms of frequency (or quantity) will also be clearly
specified. For follow-up posts to a discussion topic, where the aim is to develop and extend
the contributions of other learners, the expected frequency range is a minimum of four
posts (one main post and three follow-up posts). Follow-up posts do not need to be
submitted to Turnitin. Learners who post excessively and dominate the group will be
reminded of this expected range, as will students who submit only initial posts with little
contribution to group learning. Masters level work is distinguished from undergraduate level
work in that learners are expected to demonstrate the relevant use of academic citations,
between three and five for each post, through a critical engagement with existing research
and the readings required for each module.
MA Assessment Criteria Essay

Band Numerical General Description Assignment 2 specific criteria

equivalent
%

All these criteria must be met to achieve 100 An exemplary piece of work which achieves the
Exceptional 100 learning outcomes at such a high level that it’s difficult
Distinction  Discussion is directly relevant to the title throughout and addresses its to fault and we would recommend that it is submitted to
implications and assumptions in a challenging and authoritative way. a journal for publication. The report on the intervention
 The essay demonstrates exceptional critical awareness and project provides an extremely comprehensive and
persuasive rationale and justification for the change
analysis proposed. The principles underlying the proposed
 There is insightful and convincing understanding of the subject, intervention are critically examined, demonstrating an
demonstrating significant, in-depth independent study. extremely sophisticated understanding of relevant topics
Very High 94  Structure and organisation of ideas is impressively coherent. in TESOL and their relevance to the specific context.
Distinction  Citations are consistent and correctly formatted with an Critical analysis of the context and proposed
exceptionally substantial, wide-ranging and accurate intervention involves a well-balanced discussion of
Bibliography potential drawbacks as well as advantages of the
intervention. The writer refers appropriately to a wide
 There are no grammatical or spelling errors and the language
range of relevant literature on the topics addressed.
High 87 used reveals a faultless command of an appropriate lexis and
Distinction register.

 Discussion is directly relevant to the title and addresses its
implications and assumptions in a sophisticated way
 The essay demonstrates excellent critical awareness and
analysis
An outstanding piece of work which achieves the
learning outcomes at a very high level The report on the
intervention project provides a comprehensive and
persuasive rationale and justification for the change
  There is convincing understanding of the subject. proposed. The principles underlying the proposed
Mid 80  Structure and organisation of ideas is rigorous throughout. intervention are critically examined, demonstrating a
very sophisticated understanding of relevant topics in
Distinction  Citations are consistent and correctly formatted with a very
TESOL and their relevance to the specific context.
substantial, wide-ranging and accurate Bibliography Critical analysis of the context and proposed
 There are no grammatical or spelling errors and the language intervention involves a well-structured and well-
used reveals excellent command of the appropriate lexis and balanced discussion of potential drawbacks as well as
register. advantages of the intervention. The writer refers
 Discussion is directly relevant to the title and proficiently addresses its appropriately to a range of relevant literature on the
implications and assumptions topics addressed.
 The essay demonstrates very good critical awareness and analysis
 There is convincing understanding of the subject, demonstrating a
high level of independent study
Low 74  A coherent structure and solid organisation of ideas are evident.
Distinction  Citations are consistent and correctly formatted with a substantial,
wide-ranging Bibliography.
 There are no grammatical or spelling errors and the language used
reveals a very good command of the appropriate lexis and register.
  Discussion is directly relevant to the title and covers a wide range of valid A very good piece of work which achieves the
points learning outcomes at a high level through the
High Merit 68  The essay demonstrates good critical awareness and analysis provision of a detailed background to the
 There is confident understanding of the subject. intervention which clearly outlines the rationale
for the proposed change. The principles
 Occasional weaknesses of structure are apparent, but the text is
underlying the proposed intervention are
still largely coherent and logical. critically examined, demonstrating a deep
 Citations are consistent and correctly formatted with a substantial understanding of relevant topics in TESOL and
Mid Merit 65 and accurate Bibliography their application to the specific context. Critical
 There are very few grammatical or spelling errors and the analysis of the context and proposed intervention
language used reveals a good command of the appropriate lexis involves a balanced discussion of potential
and register. drawbacks as well as advantages of the
Low Merit 62 intervention. The writer refers appropriately to
relevant literature on the topics addressed.

 Discussion addresses the title but is less focussed at times with some An average piece of work which satisfactorily
High Pass 58 omissions or inconsistencies achieves all the learning outcomes by providing
 The essay demonstrates satisfactory critical awareness and analysis sufficient evidence of awareness of relevant topics
 There is appropriate understanding of the subject. in TESOL by presenting a clear rationale and
justification for the intervention. This may
 A recognisable structure is apparent
however be more descriptive in places than
Mid Pass 55  Citations are largely consistent and mostly accurate with a analytical or evaluative.
satisfactory and mostly accurate Bibliography
 There may be some grammatical, word choice, or spelling errors
but the language used reveals a largely appropriate command of
Low Pass 52
lexis and register.

 Discussion only partially addresses the title A weak piece of work which does not satisfactorily
Marginal Fail 45  The essay is largely descriptive with little evidence of critical achieve all the learning outcomes. It does not
awareness or analysis provide sufficient evidence of awareness of
relevant topics in TESOL, a clear rationale or
  There is inadequate understanding of the subject with little or no justification for the intervention. There may be a
independent study. tendency to be more descriptive than analytical or
Mid Fail 40  An attempt has been made to structure the essay although this evaluative or quite uncritical or unrealistic.
may not be completely successful.
 Citations and Bibliography are frequently inaccurate and/ or
inconsistent
 The essay is poorly written in terms of grammar, lexis and register,
and this may pose a barrier to the reader at times
 Discussion may be incomplete or is often irrelevant to the title An unacceptable piece of work which fails to
 There is over-dependence on description rather than analysis and demonstrate achievement of the learning
Fail 35 no evidence of critical awareness. outcomes.
Very little evidence of ability to write in academic
 There is overreliance on ‘received information’ going little beyond style.
superficial paraphrasing of what has been heard in class or read in Content very poorly handled with little attempt to
a one or two texts synthesise of discuss ideas or to give relevant
 There is factually erroneous or contradictory information examples.
Fail 25  There is a lack of any easily discernible organisation and structure
 Citations and Bibliography are largely inappropriate
 Use of English does not reach the standard required The essay is
poorly written in terms of grammar, lexis and register, and this
Fail 10 poses a barrier to the reader

Non- 0 No work submitted

submission
4. Module Descriptor

The module descriptor can be found on Blackboard under Module

Information.

School of Language and Global

Studies

Module Information Pack Appendix

Regulations on Attendance, Assessment and Unfair

Means

2017/18
There follows important documentation for your information:

Attendance and Assessment Regulations

You are required to attend all timetabled activities such as lectures, tutorials, classes,
workshops and examinations. You should bring your Student ID card to each
timetabled session so that your attendance can be recorded via the “swipe card”
function outside each classroom.

You should notify your Module Tutor or Course / Subject Leader immediately of illness
or any unavoidable reasons that prevent you from attending classes. Unauthorised
absence is not acceptable: you will be contacted for any unexplained absence and
may be asked to attend an interview with an academic member of staff. Repeated,
unauthorised absences may result in you being withdrawn from your programme of
study.

University of Central Lancashire

SCHOOL OF LANGUAGE AND GLOBAL STUDIES

ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS 2017/18

1. All formal assessed components must be submitted and deadlines for

submission must be adhered to by students. Double submission of the same
work is not allowed.

2. In accordance with Academic Regulation G3 (Late Submissions), where

prescribed deadlines are not met the following will apply:

2.1 Late with good cause

Authorisation of a late submission of work up to 10 working days must be in

writing. The request should be made by the student to the appropriate
Campus Administrative Service (CAS) Hub, clearly stating the reason for the
extension and detailing the module and assessment where an extension is
requested. Extensions may be granted for up to 10 working days and will be
confirmed to the student in writing. Students who submit work after an
authorised extended deadline date will be awarded a mark of 0% for that
element of assessment (G3.2).

Where the nature of the circumstances is such that regulation G3.2 cannot be
applied, students may submit a case for consideration in accordance with the
procedure for Extenuating Circumstances.
2.2 Late without good cause

The University requires students to adhere to submission deadlines for any

form of assessment. A penalty will be applied in relation to unauthorised late
submission of work (G3.1).

The University operates a universal penalty scale for unauthorised late

submission of any form of assessed work. Students who submit work within 5
working days after the published submission date without an authorised
extension will be awarded the minimum pass mark for that element of
assessment. All work submitted later than 5 days after the published
submission date without an authorised extension will be awarded a mark of
0% for that element of assessment. (G3.3).

Unauthorised late submission at resubmission will automatically be awarded

a mark of 0% for that element of assessment (G3.4).

Assignments must be submitted in accordance with the requirements which your

Module Tutor will explain to you.

Extenuating Circumstances

‘Extenuating Circumstances’ is a phrase which refers to exceptional factors outside

your control which may have an adverse effect on your performance within your
programme of study. These factors may prevent you from attending classes or
examinations or cause you to miss assessment submission dates. Further details of
the Extenuating Circumstances process, together with details of the application
procedure, can be found on the Student Support pages of the Student Portal.

Unfair Means
As stated in section G7 of the University’s Academic Regulations (“Unfair Means to
Enhance Performance”), the University regards with particular severity any use of
unfair means in an attempt to enhance performance or to influence the standard of
award obtained. It is a serious matter. At best, the piece of work will be failed; you
could even fail the entire module. At worst, you could be expelled from the University
for it, so be careful.

Material submitted for assessment through open book examination, coursework (such
as essays or portfolios), project or dissertation must be the student’s own efforts and
must be his/her own work. Students are required to sign a declaration indicating that
individual work submitted for assessment is their own.

In the event of a single offence of unfair means in an undergraduate or postgraduate

assessment, the appropriate penalty will be 0% for that element of assessment, and
an overall fail for the module (whether or not the resulting numeric average mark is
above or below the minimum pass mark). The affected elements of the assessment
must be resubmitted to the required standard. The mark for the module following
resubmission will be restricted to the minimum pass mark.

Where unfair means is detected for the first time on a reassessment for an already
failed module, no further reassessment for the module will be permitted, and the
appropriate fail grade will be awarded.

In the event of a repeat offence of unfair means (irrespective of whether the repeat
offence involves the same form of unfair means) on the same or any other module
within the course, the appropriate penalty will be 0% for the module with no opportunity
for re-assessment. This penalty does not preclude the student being permitted to
retake the module in a subsequent year.
Below is an explanation of the different forms of Unfair Means

Cheating

It is considered to be cheating if you

 take notes, ‘crib sheets’ or texts books into an examination/test, unless this is
specifically permitted. (If you are unsure, check with your tutor.)
 copy from another student
 communicate with another student during the examination/test
 gain access to the examination/test questions ahead of the assessment,
unless this is specifically permitted. (If you are unsure, check with your tutor.)
 swap your in-examination/test work with other work that you have brought
with you
 make unauthorised use of reference material either electronic or paper-based
e.g. refer to notes that you have made previously
 make use of a communication devise such as a mobile ‘phone during the
examination/test
 make a deliberate attempt to deceive

Plagiarism

This is the ‘borrowing’ or, in plain terms, ‘copying’ of bits of other people’s writing and
passing them off as your own by not acknowledging the source. Thus, if you quote
extensively from a text or magazine without making it clear that these are somebody
else’s words, this is plagiarism. An extreme case would be getting somebody else to
write your assignment for you, which is clearly not allowed.

Students sometimes fall victim to inadvertent plagiarism in their written assignments,

i.e. without deliberately seeking to pass off another’s work as their own, they have
over-used certain texts and have failed to cite the origin of passages. To avoid this
problem, always cite your sources. Of course you are encouraged to draw on the work
of specialists, but use short and well-directed quotations with care, or quote indirectly
otherwise known as paraphrasing (namely, putting what the author has said into your
own words). Both need citing appropriately so check a citation (referencing) guide.
(E.g. the causes of World War One were fundamentally down to financial concerns
(Smith 2010). (If you are unsure, check with your tutor.)

Re-presentation of work
You are not allowed to submit the same work twice for different credit-bearing
assessments. Even if/though the work is your own, it is considered to be a case of
Unfair Means if you try to gain credit more than once for the same content, unless
this is specifically permitted. (If you are unsure, check with your tutor.)

Collusion

The most common form of collusion is when you copy from another student’s work or
imitate what they have done without them knowing. However, it also includes cases
in which two or more students work together to produce an assignment, closely
following or imitating each other’s responses.

Do ensure that you produce work to be handed in independently. In addition, keep

your work safe so that others do not have the chance to copy it.

The above regulation is not intended to stop you learning from each other, sharing
ideas. However, work to be assessed must be all your own.

It is not collusion if you work together on a group assessment. (If you are unsure,
check with your tutor.)

Detection of Unfair Means

Students’ work may be submitted electronically to TurnitinUK which is a web based

system that provides comprehensive checking of submitted work for matching text on
web pages, electronic journals and previously submitted student work. TurnitinUK
generates an Originality Report to facilitate the identification of potential plagiarism
cases. The Originality Report can be used as evidence and supports the related
decision making process regarding plagiarism.

Checking Your Work

It is possible to upload your work via the Turnitin Checker to obtain a report on the
extent to which your assignment matches with other texts. This Checker is separated
from the overall Turnitin system and will not affect your subsequent submission via
Turnitin in your module space.

To access the Turnitin Checker go to the School of Language and Global Studies
Student Office area on Blackboard. Within this area the Turnitin Checker is listed on
the left hand side. Click on this and you will find all the information that you need in
relation to uploading your work and understanding the Turnitin report.

Please see the following page for a summary of the procedure which the School has
established for dealing with cases of suspected Unfair Means to Enhance
Performance:
 School of Language and Global Studies

Unfair Means to Enhance Performance: cheating, plagiarism, collusion and re-

presentation

If a tutor has concerns that a student has taken Unfair Means to Enhance
Performance, (s)he will take the following steps:

Investigate the concerns – check the Turnitin report (all modules should use Turnitin
via Blackboard) and if appropriate explore hard, or on-line, copy of books/journal via
Google etc.

Discuss the concerns with the Module’s internal Moderator and agree whether or not
the student appears to have used Unfair Means

If further action is agreed, a meeting of the Unfair Means Panel will be called. A copy
of the Student’s work will be provided, together with any evidence (which will usually
be the Turnitin report)

The student will be contacted and invited to attend the meeting. They will be given
seven days’ notice. A copy of the Turnitin report or other evidence will be sent to the
student.

The Unfair Means panel meeting will consist of the Chair, a minute taker, the student
and representative (which may be a SU representative or friend), and the member of
staff (or nominee) who discovered the alleged ‘Unfair Means’.

At the meeting the standard agenda will be followed and the member of academic
staff will first present their concerns regarding the assessment, and then the student
will be asked to respond to the allegations.

Normally the student will be notified of the outcome of the Panel’s deliberations at the
meeting and the implications for the module.

If the case is proven, the student will be notified of their right of appeal.

The student will receive, by post and email, a written record of the meeting and a
formal letter indicating the outcome.