P a g e 1 INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE HERITAGE MSc DaSCH Module BENV0117: Dissertation (60 credits) COURSEWORK: DISSERTATION 1. ASSIGNMENT BRIEF The MSc Dissertation should provide a scientific report as well as a non-technical summary of your MSc research project, as agreed with the Course Director and the Assistant Course Director. You need to select an academic peer-reviewed journal and prepare your dissertation as a submission to this journal. You can use the DaSCH LaTeX template or the template provided by the journal if applicable. The Dissertation should consist of the following: ? Title page as available on Moodle ? Table of Contents ? Summary (<700 words) this should be written in non-technical language for end-users, heritage managers andor policy makers, outlining the breakthroughs of your research, as well conclusions that are wider interest. section additionally contain potential impacts pathways to achieve impact. at end summary, please clarify what journal you would consider submitting research to, explain why. ? main body dissertation a scientific paper, with appropriate headings. must succinct, scientific, provide only necessary detail results support discussion conclusions. level enable independent validation by other researchers. style, refer module 3 teaching materials on communication. headings content might (use different if appropriate): abstract (200-400 introduction: present state-of-the-art, questions justify methods: details (experimental) methods p g e 2 discussion: interpret discuss findings, use tables, figures images (<700 words): breakthroughs, evidence, outline benefits suggestions future work acknowledgements literature appendices these all data, any format, e.g. graphs, format was used arguments dissertation, but isnt important enough presented thesis, which its own without appendices. may data files could submitted publication supporting files. can also separate carrier. note will evaluated, not their content. example, using offer raw code is correct, them needed text not. word limit (12,000 words though many papers typically shorter) inclusive body, captions, footnotes, while count 150 words. exclusive title page, table contents, list tables embedded (even have chosen asks submit files). referencing system considered considering paper to. submission date monday 30th august, 3pm, via moodle. case large, separately per prior agreement course director assistant director. 2. criteria assessment element coursework planning (20%) subject clear? need clearly argued? who benefit from how? contextualised within state-of-the-art? (30%) sources reliable? new contribution science has been made? part collaborative project, assessed? suitably statistically evaluated? analysis explained repeated? number references reasonable? interpretation critically interpreted light argument clear, logical focussed missing encyclopaedic descriptive? critical, original independent? relevant available, either appendices? communication (10%) structured formatting clear grammatical spelling errors? does narrative flow well, linking between chapters subjects? bibliography complete consistent? do referred text? units properly abbreviated (si system)? non-textual elements they omitted? correctly cited original? conclusion based research? answer set out introduction? further 4 3. marking mark numerical a+ 90-100 distinction immediately publishable. an science, excellent elements. powerful conclusions, well-identified outcomes benefits. 80-89 a+, few minor corrections (style, data). a- 70-79 corrections. b+ 67-69 pass potentially publishable, needed. there clear. predominantly analytical. require work, relevant. search extensive, beyond required reading. data) b 64-66 b+, major (missing unclear interpretation). b- 60-63 c+ 57-59 possibly research. descriptive. non-text redundant. errors. state-of-the-art well. lacks clarity stronger. c 54-56 c+, several substantial (including experiments). c- 50-53 d-f 0-49 fail publishable even after aims unclear, redundant, intelligible, unclear. mainly repeats already known literature. descriptive, no contribution. numerous superficial, evidence effort reading.

Attachments:

dissertation-....pdf