Overview

This module will be largely based on laboratory research in the area of Molecular Medicine with guidance from the supervisor regarding experimental planning and execution.

Its content is mapped against the requirements of the UK research councils, UK charities, industrial & NHS partner, and European funders.

Students report & discuss the outcomes of their hypothesis-driven research

1. in the format of a scientific manuscript written for the NATURE journal Scientific Reports and
2. in an oral presentation at the SMS Research Conference.

Assessment Strategy

-threshold -Pass (C- to C+) (range 50-59%)Primary criteria A threshold student demonstrates knowledge of key areas & principles, and understands the main elements of the subject area, although gaps and weaknesses in the argument are evident. No evidence of background study and wider reading. Answer focussed on question but also with some irrelevant material and weaknesses in structure & argument. Answers have several factual/computational errors. No original interpretation. No links between topics are described. Limited problem solving skills. Some weaknesses in presentation accuracy & delivery.Secondary CriteriaC+ Good within the class - Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria - Strong factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding - Ideas/arguments are limited but are well presented C Mid-level - Matches all primary criteria - Moderate factual knowledge with some weaknesses in understanding - Ideas/arguments are limited presented with weaknesses in logic/presentation C- Meets requirements of class - Matches most but not all primary criteria - Moderate factual knowledge with several weaknesses in understanding - Ideas/arguments are limited presented with weaknesses in logic/presentation -good -Merit (B- to B+) (range 60-69%)Primary criteria Good students demonstrate strong knowledge & understanding of most but not all of the subject area. Limited evidence of background study. The answer is focussed with good structure. Arguments are presented coherently, mostly free of factual/computational errors. Some limited original interpretation. Well know links between topics are described. Problems are addressed by existing methods/approaches. Good presentation with accurate communicationSecondary CriteriaB+ Good - Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria - Command of subject but with gaps in knowledge - Some ideas/arguments originalB Mid-level - Meets all primary criteria - Strong factual knowledge and understanding - Ideas/arguments are well presented by few are originalB- Meets requirements of class - Meets most but not all primary criteria - Strong factual knowledge with minor weaknesses in understanding - Most but not all ideas/arguments are well presented and few are original -excellent -Distinction (A- to A) (range 70-100%)Primary criteria Excellent students demonstrate comprehensive knowledge & detailed understanding of the subject area. Clear evidence of extensive background study & original thinking. Highly focussed answers and well structured. Arguments are logically presented and defended with evidence and examples. No factual/computational errors. Original interpretation of the information with clear evidence of wider reading. New links between topics are developed and new approaches to a problem are presented. Excellent presentation skills with very accurate communication.Secondary Criteria*A Outstanding - Exceeds expectations for most primary criteria - Complete command of subject and other relevantareas - Ideas/arguments are highly originalA+ Excellent - Exceeds expectations for some primary criteria - Complete command of subject - Ideas/arguments are highly originalA Good - Meets all primary criteria - Command of subject but with minor gaps in knowledgeareas - Ideas/arguments are mostly originalA- Meets requirements of Class - Meets most but not all primary criteria - Complete command of subject but with some gaps in knowledge - Ideas/arguments are mostly original

Learning Outcomes

• Apply evidence-based analyis and critical thinking to interpret experimental findings, and draw appropriate conclusions and recommendations for future experimentation and project direction.

• Appraise relevant information technology & statistical tools to analyse and present acquired data appropriately.

• Demonstrate professional citation and literature analysis skills.

• Develop in-depth knowledge and understanding of the peer-reviewed literature and background information associated with their project subject area.

• Develop masters-level scientific writing and presentation skills.

• Review the relevant literature in the context of the research project.