代做VT6000CEM、代写 c++，java 程序-代写Java编程

联系方式

QQ：821613408
邮箱：[email protected]
工作时间：8:00-23:00
微信：horysk8

您当前位置：首页 >> Java编程Java编程

代做VT6000CEM、代写 c++，java 程序

日期：2024-03-16 12:41

Faculty of Engineering, Environment and Computer Coventry University

VT6000CEM Individual Project Preparation &

VT6001CEM Individual Project

Study Guide for Students

2023-24

INTRODUCTION 3

1. INDIVIDUAL PROJECT -THE BASICS 4

1.1 What is it? 4

1.2 Project support sessions & milestones 4

1.3 Elements of a project 7

2. CHOOSING A SUITABLE PROJECT 8

2.1 Seven golden rules 7

3. PROJECT DELIVERABLES 12

3.1 Project proposal 12

3.2 Prototype 12

3.3 Progress milestones 13

3.4 Final product 13

3.5 Project report 13

4. THE SUPERVISOR'S ROLE 17

5. DOING THE PROJECT 18

6. ASSESSMENT 19

7. PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION 20

8. CITATIONS AND REFERENCES 20

9. DEMONSTRATION 20

10. THE FINAL REPORT 21

11. SUBMIT YOUR REPORT 21

APPENDIX A: MODULE SPECIFICATIONS 22 APPENDIX B: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE AND MARKING CRITERIA 31 APPENDIX C : FINALREPORT MARKING CRITERIA & GRADING NOTES 37 APPENDIX D : UARC ETHICS APPROVAL LOW RISK PROJECTS 40 APPENDIX E : DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY 48 APPENDIX F: RECORD OF SUPERVISOR MEETING 49

Introduction

The purpose of this study guide is to provide you with a set of guidelines to direct and support work from topic selection through to completion of an Information Technology or related Individual Project. This guide will cover the contents which include 10 credits module “Individual Project Preparation” in semester 1 and 20 credits module “Individual Project” in the following semesters and the consecutive workload of these two modules contributes around quarter of your study workload over the academic year. Hence, it will have a dominant influence on your final degree classification. Please take your own time to read the guide carefully.

Besides often being deterministic to the classification of your degree, the project is your opportunity to showcase your skills to potential employers. Many graduates of this programme shared their experience that at job interviews their interviewers would most probably ask them to elaborate the major achievements in their final year project. Therefore, the project is one of the best ways for you to:

i) Provide evidence of your ability to do a substantial piece of work in IT or related field.

ii) Demonstrate your self-management skills, initiative, and relevant technical skills.

Having a good project can often be a great advantage in an interview. Hence you should make every endeavour to perform well in your project as it can often make a fortune to your future job prospects.

1. Individual Project - The Basics 1.1 What is it?

The aim of this module is to allow students to conduct primary research (with secondary research support) in a topic area relevant to their degree title. Students are expected to design, implement and critically evaluate a functional or simulated system, object or concept and to acquire further knowledge of a specialist technical area. To this end, students will undertake a substantial project which will exercise the in-depth technical, problem-solving, creative and other skills required of a professional practitioner. Students will be required to ensure that their work conforms to appropriate codes of practice and meets the ethical requirements of the University. Successful completion of the project will require methodical planning, record keeping and self-management and effective communication, execution and delivery of an agreed artefact.

Support and guidance will be provided by a project supervisor who will be the primary point of contact for a student on this module. The topic of the individual project will be agreed between you, your supervisor and the co-marker. Suitable topics may stem from staff, you and occasionally other outside organisations. You can also refer to Appendix A for details of module descriptions.

1.2 Project Support Sessions & milestones

Project consultation sessions will be held throughout your study to support your project work. These sessions cover different aspects of the work you will beexpected to carry out, demonstrate and report on. You are strongly recommended to attend these sessions to ensure that you are aware of the details of the submission requirements stipulated in the scheduled milestones.

1.2.1 Full Time Students Project Schedule

26 Oct-9 Nov

Students and supervisors meet and work out a draft project specification (multipage)

Dates Milestones Details

4 Sep 2023

Individual Project Preparation

Semester 1 starts, and students are assigned supervisors

12 Oct

1) Project Summary (1 pageA4) - project preference/proposal - project statement

Propose project by supervisor or students – submit project summary electronically thru email or on e- platform (e.g. moodle)

23Nov -7 Dec

2) Project proposalPresentation

students present proposal with PowerPoints

14 Dec (by 6:00pm)

3) Submit Project Proposal and Plan (45%), Mini Literature Review (1,500 word limit) (45%), SHAPE Ethics Process (10%)

Individual Project preparation assessments (soft copy submitted electronically)

late Jan

20 Jan

15 Mar 19 Apr 3 May

7) 8)

9) 10)

Review and comments on specification (Marks given to each student for the proposal)

Interim project progress review

First draft of final report

Brief presentation on report draft & software/hardware deliverables Second draft of report

Brief presentation on report draft & software/hardware deliverables

Feedback and Formal Mark back by supervisor to student for project specification

Students arrange to meet supervisors to review & present the project progress

Students submit and present first draft of final report for supervisor’s comments & review

Students submit and present second draft of report for supervisor’s comments & review Students submit and present final draft of report for supervisor’s comments &review

11 Jan 2024

Implementation of Individual Project

Semester 2 starts (Tentative)

25 Jan – 8 Mar

6) Literature review, primary & secondary research results summary & analysis, design prototype and implementation

Students report the progress by drafting and presenting the first few chapters of the report for comments

11) Final draft of report

12) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardwaredeliverables

17 May

14) Demonstrations/oral presentations

Students give oral presentations and demonstrations of their projects

24 May

13) Project deliverablessubmission

Submit project outcome/deliverables (2 copies of associated documents)

17 June

15) Overall project marks

Overall project marks to be submitted and project reports to be returned by supervisors and second markers

1.2.2 Part Time Students Project Schedule

Dates Milestones Details

30 August 2023

Individual Project Preparation

Project brainstorming before discussion with supervisors

20 Sep

Meeting and Discussing details with Project Supervisor

Meet with different project supervisors to confirm the interest topics and confirm the project

supervision

20 Sept – 11 Oct

Feasibility Study

Find our the project and confirmation of project supervisors’ assignment

29 Oct

1) Project Summary (1 pageA4) - project preference/proposal - project statement

submit project summary electronically thru Moodle

1 Oct-16 Dec

Students and supervisors meet and work out a draft project specification (multipage)

Feedback and Formal Mark back by supervisor to student for project specification

Students arrange to meet supervisors to review & present the project progress

Students submit and present first draft of final report for supervisor’s comments &review

Students submit and present second draft of report for supervisor’s comments & review

Finalize the reports and system and keep communicate with project supervisor

17 Dec

2) Project proposalPresentation

students present proposals with PowerPoint

31 Dec (by mid-night)

3) Submit Project Proposal and Plan (45%), Mini Literature Review (1,500 word limit) (45%), SHAPE Ethics Process (10%)

Individual Project preparation assessments (soft copy submitted electronically)

late Jan

25 Jan

31 Mar 29 Apr

19 May - 22 Jul

4) Review and comments on specification (Marks given to each student for the proposal)

5) Interim project progress review

9) First draft of the final report

10) Brief presentation on report draft &

software/hardwaredeliverables 11) Second draft of the report

12) Brief presentation on report draft & software/hardware deliverables

2 Jan 2023

Implementation of Individual Project

Semester 2 starts

Jan – early Mar

6) Literature review, primary & secondary research results summary & analysis, design prototype and implementation

Students report the progress by drafting and presenting the first few chapters of the report for comments

18 May

13) Final draft of the report

14) Progress presentation on report draft

60-70% completed project demonstration& software/hardware deliverables

15) Progress report

Students submit and present final draft of report for supervisor’s comments & review

Progress report demonstration

22-26 July

16) Demonstrations/oral presentations

Students give oral presentations and demonstrations of their projects

17 Aug

13) Project deliverablessubmission

Submit project outcome/deliverables

17 Sep

15) Overall project marks

Overall project marks to be submitted and project reports to be returned by supervisors and second markers

Remarks: The schedule will be updated according to the learning pace and environment. Please refer to the updated FT & PT schedule provided by the programme coordinator.

1.3 Elements of a Project report

Students are required to write a thesis which tells people about the research you have done. This can be structured in whatever sensible way you prefer, but it needs to have the following parts:

• An introduction. What's your hypothesis? Why is your work interesting? What are your trying to achieve?

• A literature survey. What have other people done? What new knowledge will your work add? What is the current state of the art missing and how are you going to address that?

• Your methodology. How did you go about validating / disproving your hypothesis? Why is your method sound? Why should anyone trust your results?

• Your results. What did you do? How?

• Your analysis of your results. What do your results mean? Why are they interesting?

Did you validate your hypothesis or disprove it?

• A reflection on the management of your project and the social, legal or ethical issues that you needed to consider. Your first supervisor may have a very good idea of how well you tackled your project - however second supervisors may not have any idea. For this reason, you need to include an account of the conduct of the project. What problems you encountered, how you overcame them, how diligently you worked, how you sought advice.

• Conclusions. What did your work contribute and how could it be continued by others?

2. Choosing a Suitable Project

A critical part of the success or failure of any project is the initial choice of what to work on. This is a surprisingly difficult part of any project, in some ways the most difficult part, and it's something that we see students struggle with year on year.

2.1 Seven golden rules:

When deciding on the project topic you wish to work on the first key to success i s :

Know yourself - Do something you are interested in

A final year project is a six month, single person project and in most Universities in the UK. Students will have to study several other modules concurrently. This is a long time to be working on a single piece of coursework, so it is important to choose a project which will hold your attention for that length of time. Moreover, you will be working on other things at the same time, so ideally you need to choose a project that is compelling enough that you want to work on it, in preference to doing other things.

Secondly:

Choose a small but difficult project

A "difficult" project is likely to be looked upon favourably because it will be a bigger step away from what you have already been taught, you will need to be reading more academic literature, you will be showing more independent learning, and so on. These are some of the most important factors in getting a good grade, and far outweigh factors such as finishing every part of your practical work.

Thirdly:

Have a research question

A project proposal should pose a problem, not a solution to a problem. Ideally, it is best to phrase this as a research question, such as the following:

• Is algorithm X more efficient than algorithm Y?

• Is it possible to implement product Z on the cloud?

• Can feature L be added to programming language P?

• Can theorem T be proven?

• Can algorithm Z be adapted to be used in conditions D?

... and so on. There are several advantages to this. One is that this is a standard form of writing in academia, and your project will be marked against academic criteria. Secondly, if the aim of your project is to answer a question then you leave the issue of how to answer that question reasonably open ended. It may be that you have a very clear idea, at the start of the project, what you are going to do. That's fine, but as you progress through the project you may well find literature that enlightens your views on how your question can be answered. Thirdly, your answer to the question may not be what you expect. That's fine, it's OK to find out that actually, your algorithm isn't as efficient as you thought, or the theorem cannot be proved, so long as you give solid, convincing evidence for your answer.

Fourthly:

Do something practical

If you are working in the sciences, it really is important that you do something practical as part of your work. For these purposes "practical" can mean experimental work or mathematical work - it's OK to prove a theorem, for example, as the main part of the "practical" content of your work. What you should avoid though, is vague, nebulous, ‘thought-pieces’, which have no clear results and cannot be evaluated. Avoid anything with a title like "an investigation into X" or "a dissertation on Y". These sorts of writing are well accepted in the humanities (BA courses), but for a scientific (BSc Courses) piece of work

you need to propose a question and find some answer to it. Equally, a literature review is not really a project in itself; it needs some research question and evaluation with it to form a complete project.

Fifthly:

Focus on evaluation from the start

Evaluating your work will likely be the last practical work you complete before finishing your project writing. However, you should know from the start of your project how you plan to do this. As with unit-testing, or usability testing, it is best to have designed you evaluation in as much detail as possible before you start you practical work. That way, you know that what you are aiming for is something that can be evaluated in the manner in which you have planned. Remember, the purpose here is to determine whether your project has answered your original research question.

In general, your evaluation will fall into one of the following categories:

• Performance evaluation: either testing the speed, memory footprint, scalability, load- balancing, or other aspect of the performance of a program or system. This is often the easiest form of evaluation -- it can be performed by a program and so automated, the results can be analysed and presented using a statistics and you will not be reliant on users. Work in programming languages, networking, operating systems, databases, and hardware tend to suit this sort of evaluation well.

• User-acceptance testing and usability: if your project involves creating a product for end-users to test, especially if you have an industrial client, then it is essential that you perform some sort of user acceptance testing. Good options for this are the talk-aloud protocol or semi-structured interviews. NEVER, EVER, EVER think that a "heuristic" evaluation is sufficient. Heuristic methods only catch basic errors; they tell you nothing about how your users will actually experience your product.

• Formal or semi-formal methods: such as proving a theorem, using a model checker (such as SPIN), using a formal method such as B or Z to show that your work is free of particular types of errors.

Sixthly:

Take (academic) advantage of your supervisor

Every student will have at least one supervisor, who will usually be actively involved in research, consultancy or something similar. This sort of work can provide a wealth of good ideas for projects and has several advantages. Firstly, your supervisor will propose projects that have the right scope and difficulty for your degree course. Secondly, if your supervisor has an interest in what you are doing, they will have a vested interest in seeing you succeed and of course will have a lot of relevant expertise with which they can advise you. Lastly, it is likely that your work will be used by other members of a research group which will give you access to feedback on what you have done.

Seventhly:

Be flexible (within reason)

Remember that a project is a marathon, not a sprint. It may well be that you get part way along the journey and find out that what you had first set out to do is actually impossible, or impossible within the scope of the project. Or it may be that you find some other way of answering your research question, or you uncover some literature which shows that the question can actually be answered very simply. In this case, you should speak with your supervisor and find a way to reword or even completely change your original research question. This is quite a reasonable thing to do and happens often in "real" research projects, so you should not be worried about it. Your final project does not have to match the original proposal exactly, but you should be able to explain why the changes you made were necessary.

Summary

• DO choose a project that will hold your interest for the duration of the project.

• DO NOT choose a project that is the same size or scope as a coursework, or

something that is very similar to work you have been set in a module.

• DO propose a "difficult" problem -- it is easier to pass a challenging project than an

"easy" one!

• DO propose a research question, and an idea for solving it.

• DO propose a project with some sort of practical or mathematical component, DO NOT

set out to write a commentary on a topic.

• DO have a very clear plan for how you will evaluate your project. This should clearly

state how you will determine whether or not you have answered your research

question.

• DO NOT evaluate an end-user product with only heuristic methods. 11

• DO test end-user products with real users.

• DO take advantage of the expertise of your project supervisor and their research

interests.

• DO be flexible if you find that your original research question cannot be answered, or if

you find that a more "interesting" research question emerges during your project.

3. Project Deliverables

3.1 Project Proposal

The detailed project proposal aims to help you refine your general research question to a well- focused and achievable piece of practical research work.

The first section: “Defining your research project” focuses on your research question and the plan for conducting your primary method. The second section: “Abstract and Literature Review” is to help you identify current academic sources of literature that are highly relevant to your project and to help you get a head-start in producing your literature review.

Your detailed project proposal will be graded in the second semester. However, it is highly recommended that you submit it as soon as possible to obtain detailed supervisor feedback on your project.

The detailed proposal (Submitted by 31 December 2023) has no suggested word length – although 2000 words would be in order.

3.2 Prototype

The Prototype is intended to be a rough outline of your proposed final product. It is not expected to be complete or perfect.

However, it should demonstrate that you are making satisfactory progress towards your final project aim and final product.

Prototypes will typically be software, but for some projects may take other forms.

You will be required to demonstrate your prototype to your supervisor and second marker as part of the assessment for the module. During the demonstration, you will also be expected to discuss the motivation for the main features of the prototype and answer questions relating to the proposed design of your final product.

3.3 Progress Milestones

Progress milestones should be set and presented along with your Project Proposal.

As with any project, you may need to review your progress and adapt your plans to meet your final deadline.

Your progress concerning the milestones you have set will be assessed during meetings with your supervisor and form a continual assessment of your project management skills.

You must demonstrate to your supervisor that you are making satisfactory progress and can complete the project in the remaining time.

3.4 Final Product

Your Final Product will be demonstrated during the final meeting with your supervisor and second marker.

Ideally, you will be able to provide a fully completed product, however, the nature of a project such as the one you are undertaking is unpredictable. If your product is incomplete, it should be clear which parts are finished, which are still at a prototype stage and which are yet to be undertaken. Again, during the demonstration, you will be expected to discuss the development and testing of the product and answer questions relating to the project.

3.5 Individual Project Report (Not less than 10,000 words)

The appropriate structure of the Report varies according to the scientific, engineering, or business research method you have used, the features you have chosen to emphasise, and the degree title you are pursuing. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are clear about where your project's contribution (‘novel contribution to knowledge’) lies and that all work is explained clearly and in the correct format.

The following Report structure should therefore be seen as a guide only. It is probably the case that few Reports will stick to it rigidly. It is your responsibility to consult with your supervisor and adapt to suit your project. Types of problem-solving project other than software development projects are likely to need a different structure.

1. Title page (Mandatory), including title, author, student ID, degree title, name of Supervisor, name of institution ('Coventry University, Faulty of Engineering, Environment and Computing, Department of Computing, Mathematics and Data Science’) and Date of Submission.

2. Statement of Originality. (Mandatory) – This is a one-page, signed statement. Pro- forma will be provided. It is your signed statement that you have not plagiarised the work in part or full. JPG

3. Preamble, including (a) Table of Contents; (b) Abstract (suggested length: half a page); (c) Acknowledgements.

4. Abstract should be a succinct and self-standing summary of the project's basis, context and achievements. Minimally an abstract does three things: (1) It states the problem that you set out to solve, (2) It describes your solution and method, and (3) It states a conclusion about the success of the solution. Be straightforward and factual and avoid vague statements, confusing details and "hype". Do not be tempted to use acronyms or jargon to keep within the half-page limit. Consider that search engines, librarians and non-computer scientists wishing to classify your Report rely on the abstract. You may, if you wish, provide a short list of keywords (2-6 is reasonable) at the end of the abstract.

5. Introduction. In this section, you should describe the problem you set out to solve with the project. An introduction might, for example, begin by stating, "The work described in this report aimed to provide a software tool with which people can arrange meetings." Avoid starting a Report with an irrelevant history of information technology. For example, the following would not be a good introductory sentence, "Since Bill Gates launched Outlook, people have been using technology to arrange meetings."

Explain whatever background the reader will need to understand the problem. The background might refer to previous work in the academic literature that provides evidence that the problem is a real and significant problem worth solving. The background may identify a community, organisation or set of users that will benefit from your research. Include a clear and detailed statement of the project aims and provide an overview of the structure of the solution.

CRITICAL! Use the introduction to define any terms or jargon you will use throughout the rest of the report. Why? Because people define and understand terms differently

from one another. Your definition of ‘cloud computing’ may differ from your supervisor’s definition of ‘cloud computing’. By stating your definition clearly, you can avoid misunderstandings about your work.

Conventionally, the last part of the introduction outlines the remainder of the Report, explaining what comes in each section – keep this brief.

6. Literature Review (Mandatory). Please read Chapter 4 of ‘Awesome Projects’. A lecture will be given on literature reviews.

7. Method: This chapter should describe what you did to answer your research question (or to support your thesis, if you think of it that way) and how you went about it (essentially your research design). You should describe your research design sufficiently so that another researcher can recreate your work to check your results.

8. Evaluation / Results: In this chapter, you should evaluate what you have done and say what answer (to your research question) you have arrived at. It may be that you describe some experiments in your method, and this section records your results and analysis of those results. This is an important section -- most students gain or lose marks in their literature review or evaluation. The key to producing a convincing evaluation is to plan what information or results you will need to write this section very early in the project.

9. Discussion. Here you will summarise your achievements and also the deficiencies of your project. You can also say what you would or could have done, if you had had more time or if things had worked out differently. It is important to be completely honest about the deficiencies and inadequacies of your work, such as they are. Part of your aim is to demonstrate your ability to recognise problems that remain.

10. A reflection on the management of your project and the social, legal or ethical issues that you needed to consider, including your response to feedback from your presentation (Mandatory). Your first supervisor may have a very good idea of how well you tackled your project - however second supervisors may not have any idea. For this reason, you need to include an account of the conduct of the project. What problems you encountered, how you overcame them, how diligently you worked, how you sought advice, how you responded to feedback. This chapter will be evidence

driven – which is why you need to keep a log or diary of your project, maybe a project management timeline with milestones, keep evidence of each supervision meeting (signed off by your supervisor), Keep notes of supervisor feedback to your presentation and reflect on them in this chapter.

11. Conclusion. Give a brief statement of how the solution that you have provided addresses the problem stated in the introduction. Provide an evaluative statement based on the results. You should not introduce new material.

12. References For your Final Year project, you must cite and reference work to which you owe an intellectual debt. It is required that you cite and reference work that provides supporting evidence. You must cite and reference work so that the reader can find the sources that have been quoted. (Remember that we use the APA referencing system of ‘in-text citations’ and a list of references at the back of the report. There will be a lecture on this)

13. Appendices. (More on these later)

A List of elements suggest to be included with your report

• Statement of Originality

• Certificate of Ethical Approval

• Meeting records (appendix)

Feedback notes from your presentation (appendix)

Reference:

https://www.coventry.ac.uk/globalassets/media/global/writing-a-report.pdf

4. The Supervisor's Role

You will be assigned a supervisor who will meet regularly with you and other students as a group to help plan and manage the work. It is your responsibility to research material and techniques appropriate to the subject of the project. The responsibilities of the supervisor are primarily to provide guidance on the management of the project, the standard of work required, what can realistically be achieved in the available time and to give feedback on work done (including the writing of the report).

Wherever possible you will be assigned a supervisor with an interest in the project topic but this cannot be guaranteed.

In the initial stages of the project, you and your supervisor will discuss objectives that must be achieved and appropriate scope for the project. The relative importance of the various aspects of the project will be defined by negotiation between the two of you. Projects develop unpredictably, the initial objectives are only intended as a guide to the level expected and details may change. One learning objective is concerned with you coming to terms with creatively and proactively managing the scope of the project.

You and your supervisor will meet regularly throughout the duration of the project. Your progress will be reviewed and assessed in these sessions and will include milestone assessment, where simple milestone tasks must have been completed, i.e. prioritised requirements or research questions. You should stay in contact with and make use of your peers for support, guidance, and review.

As well as providing guidance, your supervisor will mark your work with the support of a second marker. You will be expected to attend demonstration sessions as timetabled or make alternative arrangements to show and explain your work to your assessors.

The Project Report should be submitted for marking by your supervisor and co-marker, accompanied by supporting material in the form of software and documentation; hardware design and build; and any other relevant documentation and materials.

5. Doing the Project

I. Plan and get start as early as possible.

II. Attend the project consultation Sessions regularly and record the progress and

discussion with supervisor (Appendix F)

III. Think of a project topic and discuss it with your supervisor.

IV. Prepare a proposal and discuss the ethical issues with your supervisor (refer to Appendix B & D).

V. Conduct a literature survey and study similar systems related to your project/research focus. Submit your proposal and literature review and complete the SHAPE Ethical approval checklist before the end of semester 1(refer to Appendix B & D).

VI. Follow your project plan to gather user specifications, design and implement your systems and evaluate the outcomes.

VII. Start drafting your report early; that way, you will be more relaxed about how much you write.

VIII. Let your supervisor see drafts early on. If you need help with your writing style and appropriateness of technical content, you need to know about it when you have written the first few chapters, not when you have written the whole report.

IX. Keep going!! You need more time to complete the project. Keep pace with your project plan and review project progress regularly.

X. Stay away from one phase - if the primary research is going slowly, see if you can make progress with secondary research or a literature survey. Try and meet the milestones in your project plan.

XI. If it becomes clear you have chosen a project so difficult that we may not finish it in time or you think your project may be too simple and lacking challenge, negotiate revised aims with your supervisor before it is too late.

6. Assessment

Your supervisor and a second- marker will independently mark your project. In case of disagreement between markers, the module leader will arrange f o r a third opinion.

A detailed set of criteria that are used by markers to establish the classification of your project are included in Appendices B and C.

These criteria guide the level of achievement we expect you to have reached to obtain a given class of project.

Be aware, however, that all criteria are somewhat subjective (rather than objective) and are subject to interpretation by markers.

Your project will be marked under the following headings. Weightings indicate the approximate proportion of the total time available for the project that we expect you to spend on each section and the relative value of each area and outcomes (Refer to Appendix A: Module specifications for details).

Modules Assessments

Individual Project Preparation (10 credits)

Project Proposal and Plan (45%) (1,000 word limit). Mini Literature Review (45%) (1,500 word limit). SHAPE Ethics Process (10%)

Individual Project (20 credits)

individual written project report (10,000 word limit).

You can also refer to Appendix B & C for details of working template and marking criteria.

Plagiarism and Collusion

You must submit an electronic copy of your project by the deadline. This will be used for checking plagiarism and collusion. Software tools will be used to check for similarity with other literature in the academic database or written by AI. In addition, all markers routinely check work for signs of assessment cheating. Supervisors and co-markers are very good at detecting these academic misconducts! The penalties range from getting 0% and having to rework and resubmit the project (capped at 40%) to failing your degree Programme.

You are also required to declare the originality of your project (Appendix E)

Citations and References

If you are using anyone else's work in any way, you must reference it. The standard referencing system used at Coventry/SHAPE is following the standard stipulated in the “APA 7th Ed referencing format’' and it is expected that you will use this style when writing your references.

You can follow this link to see more details:

https://libguides.coventry.ac.uk/referencing

9. Demonstration

You will be required to attend a demonstration/presentation session. The purpose of this session is to allow your markers to see and discuss what you have done. The demonstration/presentation will consist of around 20 minutes sessions with your supervisor and co-marker in a laboratory. You are expected to prepare a PowerPoint for the presentation, though you may also wish to demonstrate your final deliverables. Hence, you need to plan and manage the flow of your presentation yourself through prior rehearsals and practices. You may arrange a demonstration with your supervisor and co-marker in an earlier session by appointment in advance.

10.The Final Report / Dissertation 10.1 What is it?

Your Individual Project Report will describe in detail the research you undertook in support of your project. The Final Report of not less than 10,000 words covers everything else you did for the project: what you did, why you did it, how you did it, what your achievements are, any room for improvements, etc.

You can have a quick reference for report format and structure in section 3.5 of this study guide or refer to Coventry University Academic writing resources for report writing style, referencing, report writing skills and procedures in the following link:

http://www.coventry.ac.uk/study-at-coventry/student-support/academic- support/centre-for-academic-writing/support-for-students/academic-writing- resources/

11.Submitting your Project

• Submit your Project reports to Moodle. You are also required to submit an electronic copy of the report in Word (.doc/.docx) format.

• Refrain from including lengthy printed program listings. All source codes should be packed well and submitted the Moodle.

Details of how to submit the electronic copy will be given nearer the time.

Noted to part-time students: Electronic copy through Moodle is fine. If the overall size of your digital copy of the project is over 2Gb, you need to store it in a media and submit to SHAPE office)

Appendix A – Module Specifications

Individual Project Preparation VT6000CEM

1. MODULE SUMMARY

Aims and Summary

The Level 6 project, taken in the final year of BSc degrees, allows students to conduct an in-depth investigation on a topic in the domain of computing. This will usually involve the technical development of a tool / product / algorithm or piece of software and its evaluation.

The aim of this first module is to prepare students for the primary research to take place in 6001CEM: including topic selection, supervisor allocation, project planning, literature review and completion of the Coventry University Ethics process.

Module credits and availability

Assessment / CATS Credits

10.0

ECTS credits 15.0 Learning credits 10.0

Open/Restricted Open

Availability on/off campus

Total student study hours

SHAPE 100

Number of weeks 13

Faculty responsible

Academic Year 2021–2022

Faculty of Engineering, Environment and Computing

Entry Requirements (pre-requisites and co-requisites)

None

Excluded Combinations

None

Pass requirements

Coursework must be at least 40% and Module Mark must be at least 40%.

Special Features

During the module, project supervisors are allocated and work with students to develop their project proposals. A series of workshops are provided to be undertaken by supervisor and student together, to help orient students in the preparation of their proposal.

Course stages for which this module is mandatory

• BSc Stage 3 Computing at SHAPE

Course stages for which this module is a core option

N/A

2. TEACHING, LEARNING AND ASSESSMENT

Intended Module Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this module a student should be able to:

1. Identify and refine a project topic of interest (which is in the domain of their degree title) into an achievable primary research question.

2. Critically summarise the state of the art in an area through an initial literature review using a variety of sources.

3. Scope and produce a detailed and achievable plan for the project using professional methodologies.

4. Consider and critically reflect upon the impact of social, legal and ethical dimensions of their proposed research.

Indicative Content

The indicative content will vary widely depending on each student’s choice of project topic.

But in addition to self-study and supervisor meetings on the topic of the individual project there will be a series of lectures and self-study exercises provided by the module leader. These covers topics including the following:

• What is research? • Research Design

• How to write a Literature Review

• Surveys and Data Analysis

• Coventry University Ethics System

• Report Structure

• Project management

• How to read academic articles

• Avoiding Plagiarism

Teaching and Learning

Learning will be facilitated through a variety of methods which may include lectures, seminars, lab, workshops, online activities and group work. Students are expected to engage in both class and online activities and discussions. This module also requires students to participate in additional guided reading and self-directed study to reinforce the learning gained from timetabled sessions. Formative assessment will be used to prepare students for summative assessment and give students an early indication of their progress towards the course intended learning outcomes.

As part of this module, you are required to submit an online ethics application and to obtain ethical approval for the research project that you are proposing to undertake. At SHAPE, formal ethical approval must be obtained before any data is collected for a research project. Failure to submit your ethics application and to gain appropriate ethical approval for the research you will undertake by the relevant deadlines (and before any data is collected) may result in disciplinary action and will be subject to the Ethics Misconduct process which is outlined in the General Regulations, Appendix 1. Penalties can include zero for your work and possible exclusion for Non-compliance with the ethics process.

Assessment Components

Component Component Type (Core (P/F) Credits for this

Learning Outcomes Assessed

1, 2, 3 and 4

/ Applied Core (%)) Cw Applied Core

component 10

Method Of Assessment (normally assessed as follows)

The Cw component consists of:

Project Proposal and Plan (45%) assessing learning outcomes 1, 3 and 4 (1,000 word limit).

Mini Literature Review (45%) assessing learning outcome 2 (1,500 word limit).

SHAPE Ethics Process (10%) assessing learning outcome 4.

Re-assessment is by new coursework.

3. MODULE RESOURCES

Essential Reading

Every, P. and Mount, S. (2016) Awesome Projects in Computing. Self-

published: available from Module Moodle Page.

Recommended Reading

Dawson, C.W. (2015) The Essence of Computing Projects: A Student's Guide, Prentice Hall, Prentice Hall,The essence of computing series, 3rd Edition.

Required Equipment

Specific to subject area of project

4. MODULE ORGANISATION

Module leader (Full Time)

Name

Telephone number E-mail

(Part Time)

Name

Telephone number E-mail

Dr FUNG kai tat 2256-7330 [email protected]

WONG, Hang-chit 2595-8113 [email protected]

Length and month of examination

None

Common Exam(s)

None

Exam Equipment Required

None

Expected teaching timetable slots

Please refer to CU-SHAPE Student Handbook

Subject Quality and Approval information

Board of Study

Shortened title

Date of approval by BoS May 2021

Computing, Electronics and Mathematics

Appendix B – Proposal Template and Marking Criteria

VT6000CEM Detailed Project Proposal

SECTION ONE: DEFINING YOUR RESEARCH PROJECT

1.1 Detailed research question

Help: Your detailed research question is the statement of a problem within the computing domain which you will address in your project. Refining the research question involves narrowing down an initial question until it is answerable using a primary research method(s) that you will conduct during the time of your project. The refined research question must not be so general that it is answerable with a yes or no answer. It must not be so broad that you would be unable to achieve a solution during your project. The key to this is BEING SPECIFIC: Narrow down the method or technology you will use, narrow down the group that the question refers to (localize a general question) If the project is still ‘too big’, can you think of a way to work on a part of the problem? Avoid using words that cannot be measured, by you, without a huge research budget e.g. 'effects on society', 'effects on business'. Example: The initial question "Does cloud computing effect business" needs narrowing down (for a start the answer is yes) What is meant by cloud computing? Or 'effect'? Or 'business', in this question? Refining this first question will involve narrowing it down to something you, personally, can measure. A refined version of this question might be: "Does implementing a cloud based voting system improve the speed of decision making in a small company in Coventry?" This refined question is implementable: You can now identify a small company to work with, document their current decision making processes, implement a cloud based voting system, compare decision making speeds over a limited time period (say 1 month) and evaluate your findings. A small piece of genuinely new knowledge is produced.

1.2 Keywords

Help: Include up to 6 keywords separated by a semi-colon; what keywords are appropriate to describe your project in an online database like Google Scholar? Keywords should include the general research area and the specific technologies you will be working with. Example. A project that proposes a novel way of visualising large amounts of twitter feed data may have the keywords: Data visualisation; twitter; hashtags; database design; graphics libraries. For further help, take a look at the ACM keywords list http://www.computer.org/portal/web/publications/acmtaxonomy

1.3 Project title

Help: The project title is a statement based on your detailed research question. For example, the research question 'to

what extent does a mobile application reduce the number of errors made in class registers at Coventry University in

NOTE: This form is only for reference, you should write with your

own document style

First Name:

Last Name:

Student Number:

Supervisor:

comparison to current paper based registers' may be stated in the project title: "A Wi-Fi driven mobile application for large group registers using iBeacons".

1.4 Client, Audience and Motivation:

Help: Why is this project important? To whom is this project important? A research project must address a research question that generates a small piece of new knowledge. This new knowledge must be important to a named group or to a specific client (such as a company, an academic audience, policy makers, people with disabilities) to make it worthwhile carrying out. This is the motivation for your project. In this section you should address who will benefit from your findings and how they will benefit. Example: If you intend to demonstrate that a mobile application that automates class registers at Coventry University will be more efficient than paper based registers - the group who would be interested in knowing/applying these findings would be both academic and administrative staff at Coventry University and they would benefit by time saved and a reduction in their administrative workload. If you are making a business case for an organization explain how the organisation will benefit from your findings.

1.5 Primary Research Plan

Help: This is the plan as to how you will go about answering your detailed research question - It must include a primary research method (an extended literature review is not an acceptable primary method). Think and plan logically. Primary methods may include experiments, applications or software demonstrators, process models, surveys, analysis of generated data ...

Example: In the class register example above "to what extent does a mobile application reduce the number of errors made in class registers at Coventry University in comparison to current paper based registers" - the research plan may involve: 1) Collecting and analysing paper based registers in a given class on five occasions. 2) Identifying the error rate average on these occasions 3) Designing and implementing a mobile application that automatically records attendance in class. 4) Deploying the application in the class on five occasions. 5) Identifying the error rate average of the mobile application on these occasions. 6) Comparison of data and summary of findings.

( 1000 words limit)

This is the end of section one.

SECTION TWO: ABSTRACT AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Abstract

Help: An abstract is a short summary of a research project that enables other researchers to know if your report or research paper is relevant to them without reading the whole report. It is usually written retrospectively so that it can include findings and results. It is fully expected that you will rewrite your abstract when you come to write your final paper. For now, you should write an abstract of about 250 words that define the project described in section one. Before writing your abstract you MUST read some abstracts from conference or journal papers on Google Scholar or from portal.acm.org (to understand their style) and then provide your own abstract that outlines what your question is and what you 'did' to answer it.

2.2 Initial/Mini Literature Review ( 1500 words limit) Help:

• compare and contrast different authors' views on an issue

• criticise aspects of methodology, note areas in which authors are in disagreement • highlight exemplary studies

• highlight gaps in research

• show how your study relates to previous studies

2.3 Bibliography (key texts for your literature review)

Help: Please provide references, in correct APA style, for at least three key texts that have informed your literature review. If you are implementing an application, select texts which demonstrate how other researchers have tackled similar implementations? The references should be recent and sufficiently technical or academic. Your markers will be looking for you to identify technical reports, conference papers, journal papers, and recent text books. Avoid Wikipedia entries, newspaper reports that do not cite sources, and general or introductory texts.

THIS IS THE END OF SECTION TWO

A literature review is a select analysis of current existing research which is relevant to your topic, showing how it

relates to your investigation. It explains and justifies how your investigation may help answer some of the questions or

gaps in this area of research. A literature review is not a straightforward summary of everything you have read on the

topic and it is not a chronological description of what was discovered in your field. Use your literature review to:

DETAILED PROJECT PROPOSAL GRADING FORM

The grade sheets for marking the VT6001CEM Detailed project proposal are attached on the next page.

Grading Notes:

The proposal is marked out of 100 divided into 45 marks for the quality, achievability and level of challenge demonstrated by the student's research question and proposed primary method of solution generation and thoroughness of the proposal; 45% for literature review and 10% for SHAPE Ethics Process .

Modal grading: In awarding marks please consider the following modal template:

Research question and primary research method in Thoroughness of the proposal. relation to learning outcomes

>70%

A well-considered project proposal that fully satisfies the Learning outcomes for which there is a succinct and focused aim with an associated project

A question or hypothesis that is well above norm for final-year undergraduate project level (approaching Masters level for >80%);

The project involves improving or developing a complex programme, tool, application or the enhancement of a theory or methodology or their application in a new context.

The project demonstrates a high degree of innovation and creativity

All fields completed demonstrating a clear blueprint for the research process and includes the necessary information with respect to the research question.

Research methods are well-considered with clear reasoning for choice of those methods over others;

A clear justification of the need for the project in relation to client or audience.

Projects proposals involving 'business case' reports clearly identify the organisation involved and consider how the case will be evaluated.

A sound grasp of the means of evidence by which the conduct and management of the project may be judged.

Threshold (40%)

A proposal that identifies an activity with some consideration of a broader context.

A research question which lacks enough substance, context and scope to allow for depth of analysis, but which is marginally acceptable against a threshold for final year undergraduate projects;

A primary method(s) which only just relates to the production of an appropriate solution to the research question.

Completion of sections is cursory or minimal with some cohesiveness and contextualisation.

Sections demonstrate some understanding of the research process involved which loosely links with idea outlined (key question, method, audience);

Research methods are discussed but demonstrate little consideration as to whether they are the most appropriate and lack refinement and further detail.

Identification of some methods of evidence for conduct and management of the project but unclear thinking about planning for reflection or accounting for conduct.

Commentary and feedback:

Please provide the student with commentary and feedback in the three critical areas that will help them to improve the quality, relevance and scientific validity of their project,

Detailed Project Proposal Grading and Feedback Commentary

Section One: Numerical Grade

Research question and primary research method & Thoroughness of the proposal and plan (1,000 word limit). Outcomes 1,3,4

Student name:

Supervisor

Project title:

In awarding a grade please consider:

• That the research question is well formed and achievable

• That the research question is specific and free from untestable generalisation

• That the proposed project represents an appropriate level of challenge to a

third year undergraduate

• That the primary method(s) proposed are appropriate and achievable and

demonstrate application of a sound methodology

• That the student has thought through the potential impact and audience for the project

• That initial references are appropriate, up to date and academic

• That the student has a clear idea of how time and activities will be managed

• That, taken as a whole, the proposal is clear and complete.

/45

Literature review (1,500 word limit). Outcome 2

SHAPE Ethics Process. Outcome 4

Total /100

Section Two: supervisor Feedback and commentary

1: Research Question. Please comment on the level of challenge, achievability and refinement of the research question. Please provide a few suggestions for narrowing down and making specific

In awarding a grade please consider:

• Relevance of reference materials

• Scope and depth of selected reference

• Understanding and analysis of reference materials

• Summary of findings and discuss how the reference materials relate to the project

/45

In awarding a grade please consider:

• Communication with supervisor

• Completion of ethical approval checklist

/10

the research question or identifying terms that require more specific definition.

2: Primary Method. Please comment on how well the primary research method proposed fits the research question. Please provide a few suggestions for improving the research plan to make it scientifically rigorous, appropriate and achievable.

3: Relevance of project and Conduct. Please comment on the student's identification of audience or user group for this research. Suggest improvements. Please comment on the student's plan for evidencing the management and conduct of the project. Suggest improvements.

Any other comments

Appendix C – Finalreport Marking Criteria & Grading Notes

Final Project Report Grading and Feedback

COMPONENT Grades

OVERALL MEETING OF OBJECTIVES IN RELATION TO RESEARCH QUESTION

/20

/40

Student name:

Supervisor / Second Marker / Final Agreed Grading

Project Title:

Feedback. Please comment on:

The appropriateness of the project to the degree programme – the scope and level of challenge of the project – The degree to which the project answers the research question and meets its objectives – The degree of originality and creativity – The overall academic rigour of the project execution.

Comments:

RESEARCH METHODS & LITERATURE REVIEW WITH DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Feedback. Please comment on:

• The suitability of the Primary Research Method(s) chosen. The execution of the primary research

method.

• Literature review. The comprehensive of sources and materials used - The range, relevance and

recentness of sourcing correctly cited - The level of critical appraisal of literature – The explanation

of the key concepts and appropriate conclusions in relation to the project.

• Analysis of findings. The extrapolation of facts and/or statistics – The appropriateness of conclusions

drawn from both primary and secondary methods. The development of novel insights or outputs.

The presentation of information in a clear and comprehensive manner.

• Research – Demonstration of a wide range of reading and research for the project through analytical

and reflective discussion in the dissertation. This should be supported by a varied use of in-text citation (APA Referencing format).

Comments:

CONDUCT OF PROJECT, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, DEGREE OF REFLECTION AND RESPONSE TO

SUPERVISION, CONSIDERATION OF SOCIAL LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL ISSUES. REFLECTION ON /30 PRESENTATION

Feedback. Please comment on:

• The student’s critical evaluation of project conduct – The appropriateness of methods employed to

manage the project with lessons learnt and effectiveness of the experience - Evidence of project management (meeting logs / diary) – Evidence of planning and time management - The consideration of social, professional, legal and ethical issues in relation to the project.

• Evidence of a project management methodology as well as approach to the development of any website/application etc...for example: Scrum, Iterative Project Lifecycle.

• Evidence of presentation of progress to supervisor (during last two weeks of spring term) Evidence that feedback at the presentation has been captured by the student and that the report responds to and reflects on this feedback.

Comments

REPORT STRUCTURE AND CLARITY OF COMMUNICATION

/10

Feedback. Please comment on:

• The clarity, conciseness and ease of use of the project report. Overall spelling, grammar, use of APA

citation and referencing. Logical selection and ordering of chapters. The completeness and presentation of the report, appropriate use of diagrams, charts, figures etc.

Comments

Total

/100

VT6001CEM Project Report Grading Notes

The project report is marked out of 100. First and Second supervisors should mark the report independently. First and Second supervisors should then discuss the grading and agree a final mark. In cases where there is a significant difference of grades (over or under a grade boundary or >=10 marks – whichever is smaller), and agreement cannot be made, please contact Peter Every for allocation of a third marker.

A final grade sheet should be prepared by the Project Supervisor including the relevant feedback from both first and second markers and the agreed final grade. This copy should be uploaded to Moodle as feedback to the student. Please also enter the final report grade (/100) in the grade field on Moodle before saving. In all cases, feedback should clearly justify the grade awarded. Extensions (for students who have been granted) will be input on Moodle – so their work will still be available from the Moodle link on the due date.

Please zip all three Marksheets (studentname.zip) and upload to https://goo.gl/eG5Ssz (this is a onedrive link) for archive and moderation. In awarding marks please consider the following modal guidance:

Academic quality of the project

Conduct of the project process

>70%

A report which could be, with minor modifications, suitable for publication – or form the basis for a postgraduate project.

A project that correctly matches research methods with a well-chosen research question.

A project which contains original insight or develops novel methods for the solution of the research problem.

A project which has challenged the student to extend the boundaries of their own knowledge and acquire skills that they did not already possess.

A report that is complete and very effectively communicates both the process of the project and delivers mature and pertinent conclusions.

Very clear evidence of project management, time management, and consideration of social, legal, professional and ethical issues.

Reflection on process is mature and pertinent.

Strong evidence of reflection upon and response to supervision.

Original use of recording and tracking methods to monitor project progress, including accounts of meetings and decision making.

Threshold (40%)

A Project with little originality that does not provide the student with sufficient challenge to demonstrate academic skills appropriate to a final year BSc degree.

A project that does not demonstrate clarity of thinking.

A report that suggests project conduct was chaotic, with poor project management.

Completion of the report is cursory or minimal with some cohesiveness and contextualisation.

Some account of project management and conduct but with little reflection or insight.

Evidence that the project is rushed through some incomplete sections.

Appendix D – UARC Ethics Approval Low Risk Projects

Low Risk Research Ethics Approval

Read this first

You should only use this checklist if you are carrying out a low risk research project through PSB Academy : This normally applies to:

• Undergraduate students.

• Taught postgraduate students.

• Members of staff evaluating service-level quality e.g. reviewing course delivery. The term “project” applies to all research projects within PSB Academy .

Introduction to research ethics

Respect

One of the important qualities of a good researcher is to respect the people and their opinions that may form part of your research project. People who contribute their views to your research need to feel comfortable about what will happen to the information they give you, especially if your project is looking at an area which is confidential. As a general rule all research data should be treated confidentially and should not be discussed with colleagues, or participants referred to by name or in a demeaning manner.

Respect also implies that you have taken the time to think through the research, to ensure you have good internal and external validity for the questions, and that the information you ask for will fulfil your research objectives. Are you are asking the right people the right questions?

Risk

You need to consider your personal safety during the research project and the safety of any other people involved in it. The ethical approval process is intended to help you identify risks to you and others. For example, would the research you are carrying out:

• Endanger you by requiring data to be collected in unsafe places or by giving away personal data about yourself?

• Upset participants with research material that they may find distasteful?

• Damage the participants’ job prospects by confidential data about them becoming known to others because your research makes it easy for them to be identify or because you accidently leaking information about them?

• Be reported and presented in a way that protects you and your participants from potential criminal or legal action?

Most risks can be minimised by taking sensible precautions. For example, if you are meeting people who you do not already know, you should always do so in a public place and let your Supervisor or a friend know who you are meeting, where you are and when you will return. Similarly, if you need to tell your participants how they can communicate with you, use your University email address, not your personal one. Is there is a risk to the participant in taking part in the research. For example, are you are distracting participants from doing their normal job, when their employer expects them to be doing something more important? You have to limit the risk for the participant, by making sure they will not experience any come back from their employer because they helped you with your project.

It is also not normal practice to post up a questionnaire on the Internet. One reason why this is not a good idea is the fact that you may not know who is replying to your questionnaire, or whether their responses are valid or reliable. You are not allowed to send e-mail requests to staff, students or other people to participate in your research unless they have made a specific request.

Rights

As researchers we need to let those involved in our research understand what is expected of them, their rights including the right to withdraw from the research, and our obligations towards them and towards the data we collect about them. The responsibility for acceptable behaviour in this area lies with you and not with the University. Indeed, it is a disciplinary offence to misuse research data or to fail to abide by the University’s Ethics policy.

This means that you must have ethical approval before you start your research project. If you do 40

not do this, there will be disciplinary consequences for you and the research will be declared invalid. Special additional conditions may also apply to research carried out in your Faculty so check that you have followed those too.

Routes

The questions in the following checklist offers a guided pathway through the various issues surrounding your research that need to be addressed and researcher behaviour that would be expected from all of our students and staff. You will need to complete the checklist and receive approval before you begin to collect any data. It is not acceptable to produce it after you have collected your data or finished your project and you will be penalised if this occurs.

No living participants

The following diagram gives an overview of the routes through ethical approval. If there are no living participants involved in the research, then you are likely to be able to complete the Low Risk Research Ethics Approval Checklist and use Principal Investigator Certification (PIC) to state that there is no need for ethical approval. You still need to go through the checklist and answer the questions but the likely outcome is you can use the PIC declaration.

Routes

Living Participants

No Living Participants

Secondary Data Only

Other

? PIC ? PIC PIC

Living participants

If you intend to use living participants in your research, then you need to complete the Low Risk Research Ethics Approval Checklist and there is no guarantee that you will be able to use the PIC declaration.

Most projects, especially at undergraduate level, will involve using data that has already been collected which is called secondary data. In these cases, completion of the questionnaire is very straightforward.

Some projects might use a survey to collect anonymous data, i.e. data that cannot be traced back to named or identified individuals either from other students or from other groups of people. In this case, a participant information leaflet about the project needs to be prepared and offered to all participants in the study even though you will not take their contact details. The participant information leaflet needs to be pre-approved by the research Supervisor or the Faculty Research Leader before any data is collected and will need to be included in the dissertation or report. Some projects might ask individuals to be interviewed to provide data. In these cases, the interviewees will need to provide what is called "informed consent". The researcher will need to make sure that all interviewees have completed informed consent forms before being interviewed and they will also need to be given participant information leaflets at the time when informed consent is requested.

It is not normal practice to collect data for undergraduate or master level research projects from children under 18 years of age, the mentally ill or participants under medical supervision. There are special regulations and legal requirements about these groups which must be followed. If you are planning to use any of these groups as a source of data in your research then this must be specially cleared with your Supervisor and with your Faculty as participants from these groups cannot themselves give informed consent.

Personal Data Other

Secondary Data Only

This means more work because these two leaflets have to be drafted and approved by research Supervisors or the Department Research Leader before any contact is made and therefore before any data is collected so this method of research requires a long development time and very good advance planning. Data collected in this way has to be stored securely. Again, a conversation with your Supervisor or the Department Research Leader may be necessary to cover this. It also needs to be destroyed after the research is completed and again this will need to be confirmed. You will need to convince interviewees that the information that they share with you will be treated confidentially and show to us that this is the case. Finally, the findings from research conducted in this way are normally shared with research participants in two ways:

• Interview transcripts may be sent to interviewees for confirmation.

• Summary findings of the research project should be offered to all participants.

Record keeping

It is also not acceptable to record interviews without getting permission or consent from the interviewees (so this might form part of your informed consent form). You need to provide details of how the information collected is confidential or not, how it will be used, stored and the disposal method. It is not a good idea to interview without seeking the prior informed consent of participants and having evidence of that consent. It is also not good practice to collect data and not “verify” by sending back transcripts of interviews to participants. Finally, the issue about the destruction of the data once the project is completed needs to be clarified.

All of this is intended to protect you. For example, if someone later says that they did not agree to being recorded or suggests that you have leaked confidential information about them. You need to be able to show that you have protected yourself and looked after any material very carefully.

In all cases the survey that will be used and the interview questionnaire or protocol needs to be signed off by Supervisors before they are used. It is also good practice to test them, not least to find out where the problems might be. In addition, when you write up your research, you can talk about the testing process as a demonstration of good practice, which for students may count towards your marks.

Remember

Record Keeping

Respect

Good Ethical Research Practice

Risk

Frequently Asked Questions

Routes

Rights

Can I begin work before the project is ethically approved?

No. Primary data collection cannot begin until you have established that your project does not need ethical approval using this checklist or you have received written approval from your Faculty Research Ethics Leader, Chair of the Research Degrees Sub-Committee or University Applied Research Committee.

What will happen if I proceed without approval or falsely self-certify research ethics approval?

Collecting primary data in the absence of ethical approval or falsely self-certifying the level of risk associated with a project will constitute a disciplinary offence.

• For Students – this means disciplinary action resulting in immediate failure in any module or project associated with the research and potentially dismissal from the University.

• For Staff – This means disciplinary action, which may potentially lead to dismissal.

If you do not have ethical approval, the University’s insurers will not cover you for legal action or claims for injury. In addition, you may be debarred from membership of some professional or statutory bodies and excluded from applying for some types of employment or research funding opportunities.

What happens if the project changes after approval?

If after receiving ethical approval your project changes such that the information provided in this checklist is no longer accurate, then the ethical approval is automatically suspended. You must re- apply for ethical approval immediately and stop research based on the suspended ethical approval.

What about multi-stage projects?

If you are working on a project which involves multi-stage research, such as a focus group that informs the design of a questionnaire, you need to describe the process and focus on what you know and the most risky elements. If the focus group radically changes the method you are using then you need to re-apply for the ethical approval.

What is Principal Investigator Certification (PIC)?

If you answer No to all the questions in the low risk ethical approval checklist then it is likely that your project has a low ethical risk. You may sign the Principal Investigator Certification part of the checklist and proceed with your project using good ethical practices. If you are a student, your Supervisor needs to countersign to show they agree with your judgment. They may require some restrictions or changes to your project to reduce the ethical or other risks, which would be recorded on the PIC declaration.

What do I do with the completed checklist?

Students should discuss the checklist as it relates to the project with your Supervisor. Once s/he countersigns the PIC declaration at the end to say that this is a low risk project then you may begin your project. However, you must keep hold of the checklist and associated documents, as you need to bind it in to your final project report.

Staff should complete the checklist. If all your questions have “No” responses, then you need to sign the PIC declaration and you can proceed with your project. If you were unable to answer all the questions with a No, then you need to talk to your Faculty Research Ethics Leader. This may result in changes to your project or research design to maintain it as low risk. If this is the not the case then you may have to complete either seek approval through the Medium-High or NHS- Medical ethical approval routes before begin your project.

If you have any questions about the checklist or the questions on it, please consult your:

• Research Supervisor (Students)

• Faculty Research Ethics Leader (Staff).

Who are the Faculty Research Ethics Leaders?

Check the Registry Research Unit Intranet site for the most up to date list of Faculty Research Ethics Leaders.

Low Risk Research Ethics Approval Checklist Applicant Details

Name : Department : Course :

Project Details

Risk to Participants

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

E-mail :

Date :

Title of Project :

Summary of the project in jargon-free language and in not more than 120 words:

• Research Objectives

• Research Design (e.g. Experimental, Desk-based, Theoretical etc)

• Methods of Data Collection

Will the project involve human patients/clients, health professionals, and/or Y patient (client) data and/or health professional data? e

s Will any invasive physical procedure, including collecting tissue or other Y

samples, be used in the research? e s

N o

Y e s Y e s

Is there a risk of physical discomfort to those taking part?

Is there a risk of psychological or emotional distress to those taking part?

N o

Y e s Y e s

Is there a risk of challenging the deeply held beliefs of those taking part? Y e s

Is there a risk that previous, current or proposed criminal or illegal acts will be revealed by those taking part?

Will the project involve giving any form of professional, medical or legal advice, either directly or indirectly to those taking part?

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project. If you are a student, please discuss your project with your Supervisor.

N o

•

Risk to Researcher

8. Will this project put you or others at risk of physical harm, injury or death?

9. Will project put you or others at risk of abduction, physical, mental or sexual abuse?

10. Will this project involve participating in acts that may cause psychological or emotional distress to you or to others?

11. Will this project involve observing acts which may cause psychological or emotional distress to you or to others?

14. Will this project involve you in unsupervised private discussion with people who are not already known to you?

15. Will this project potentially place you in the situation where you may receive unwelcome media attention?

16. Could the topic or results of this project be seen as illegal or attract the attention of the security services or other agencies?

17. Could the topic or results of this project be viewed as controversial by anyone?

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes No

Yes No

12. Will this project involve reading about, listening to or viewing materials that may cause psychological or emotional distress to you or to others?

Yes

13. Will this project involve you disclosing personal data to the participants other than your name and the University as your contact and e-mail address?

Yes

• •

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this is not a low risk project. Please: If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.

If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval route.

Informed Consent of the Participant

18. Are any of the participants under the age of 18?

19. Are any of the participants unable mentally or physically to give consent?

Yes No Yes No

20. Do you intend to observe the activities of individuals or groups without their knowledge and/or informed consent from each participant (or from his or her parent or guardian)?

Yes

• •

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project. Please: If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.

If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval route.

Participant Confidentiality and Data Protection

21. Will the project involve collecting data and information from human participants who will be identifiable in the final report?

23. Do you intend to record, photograph or film individuals or groups without their knowledge or informed consent?

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this may not be a low risk project: • If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.

Yes No

22. Will information not already in the public domain about specific individuals or institutions be identifiable through data published or otherwise made available?

Yes

24. Do you intend to use the confidential information, knowledge or trade secrets gathered for any purpose other than this research project?

Yes

• If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval or NHS or Medical Approval routes.

Gatekeeper Risk

25. Will this project involve collecting data outside University buildings?

26. Do you intend to collect data in shopping centres or other public places?

27. Do you intend to gather data within nurseries, schools or colleges?

28. Do you intend to gather data within National Health Service premises?

Yes No

If you answered Yes to any of these questions, this is not a low risk project. Please:

• If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.

• If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics Leader or use the Medium to High Risk Ethical Approval or NHS or Medical Approval routes.

Other Ethical Issues

29. Is there any other risk or issue not covered above that may pose a risk to you or any of the participants?

30. Will any activity associated with this project put you or the participants at an ethical, moral or legal risk?

Yes No Yes No

If you answered Yes to these questions, this may not be a low risk project. Please:

• If you are a student, discuss your project with your Supervisor.

• If you are a member of staff, discuss your project with your Faculty Research Ethics Leader.

Principal Investigator Certification

If you answered No to all of the above questions, then you have described a low risk project. Please complete the following declaration to certify your project and keep a copy for your record as you may be asked for this at any time.

• •

Agreed restrictions to project to allow Principal Investigator Certification

Please identify any restrictions to the project, agreed with your Supervisor or Faculty Research Ethics Leader to allow you to sign the Principal Investigator Certification declaration.

Participant Information Leaflet attached. Informed Consent Forms attached.

Principal Investigator’s Declaration

Please ensure that you:

Tick all the boxes below and sign this checklist.

Students must get their Supervisor to countersign this declaration.

I believe that this project does not require research ethics approval. I have completed the checklist and kept a copy for my own records. I realise I may be asked to provide a copy of this checklist at any time.

I confirm that I have answered all relevant questions in this checklist honestly.

I confirm that I will carry out the project in the ways described in this checklist. I will immediately suspend research and request a new ethical approval if the project subsequently changes the information I have given in this checklist.

Signatures

If you submit this checklist and any attachments by e-mail, you should type your name in the signature space. An email attachment sent from your University inbox will be assumed to have been signed electronically.

Principal Investigator

Signed : .........................................................................................(Principal Investigator or Student)

Date : ....................................................................................

Students storing this checklist electronically must append to it an email from your Supervisor confirming that they are prepared to make the declaration above and to countersign this checklist. This-email will be taken as an electronic countersignature.

Student’s Supervisor

Countersigned : ................................................................................................................(Supervisor)

Date : ......................................................................................................................

I have read this checklist and confirm that it covers all the ethical issues raised by this project fully and frankly. I also confirm that these issues have been discussed with the student and will continue to be reviewed in the course of supervision.

Appendix E – Declaration of originality VT6001CEM Declaration of originality

I Declare that This project is all my own work and has not been copied in part or in whole from any other source except where duly acknowledged. As such, all use of previously published work (from books, journals, magazines, internet etc.) has been acknowledged by citation within the main report to an item in the References or Bibliography lists. I also agree that an electronic copy of this project may be stored and used for the purposes of plagiarism prevention and detection.

Statement of copyright

I acknowledge that the copyright of this project report, and any product developed as part of the project, belong to Coventry University.

Statement of ethical engagement

I declare that a proposal for this project has been submitted to the Coventry University ethics monitoring website (https://ethics.coventry.ac.uk/) and that the application number is listed below (Note: Projects without an ethical application number will be rejected for marking)

Signed: Date: Please complete all fields.

This form must be completed and included with your project submission to Turnitin. Failure to append these declarations may result in your project being rejected for marking.

Support, including funding, is available to

commercialise products and services developed by staff and students. Any revenue that is generated is split with the inventor/s of the product or service. For further information

please see www.coventry.ac.uk/ipr

or contact [email protected].

First Name:

Last Name:

Student ID number

1st Supervisor Name

2nd Supervisor Name

Appendix F– VT6000CEM/VT6001CEM Record of supervisor meeting VT6000CEM /VT6001CEM Record of supervisor

meeting

Supervisor:

Student: _________________________________________ Date of meeting: __________________________________

Record of individual actions completed + notes: