Immunology

 

Assignment description

A written scientific abstract (350 words max) – a concise summary of the ELISA experiment and its outcomes, targeted for adult readers who are scientists.

 

A written lay, or non scientific, abstract (350 words max) –  a concise summary of the ELISA experiment and its outcomes, targeted for adult readers who have no science background.

 

Expect to include

an introduction, methods, results* and conclusion, as described below. * feel free to use your own or the model data provided

 

Introduction – some background or context to the study, ideally based on wider reading or well reputed external sources. This might be information about the importance or relevance of the target antigen, organism or antibody being tested and the aim of the experiment. Usually one or two sentences but much longer for a lay abstract (up to roughly half the abstract).

 

Methods –name the method and specifically what it measures or detects. Outline the underlying principal or theory, incorporating relevant technical or scientific terms. Again one or two sentences are expected. For a lay audience explain or describe the method in simple language, including any essential key terms but remove technical detail that is not essential. Neither require fine detail such as wash steps and volumes.

 

Results or findings- summarise the key findings from the results in words, with means, n values and statistical analysis, where possible, to support your assertions. Write these in a way that is easy to read and make sense of, for example by describing the findings in words then putting the values in brackets after. For example IgM peaked earlier than IgG (n=3, day 6 v day 19). You may talk in terms of peak values or how many times higher or lower a value might be compared to another, or describe whether a sample was positive, negative or borderline, depending on the assay design. Include all the key findings.

 

Conclusion – finish with a summary of your overall conclusion for this set of data, not a repeat of the results but rather what they mean. Put it into context, or the wider picture, ideally based on wider reading of well reputed external sources. For example does your data align with other studies, the global picture or that of your home country, or not. Again one or two sentences only.

 

Guidance- check list

• Write in clear short sentences. Write in good written English which has been checked for spelling and grammar, and read through ideally a day after writing, to check in makes sense.

 

• Make sure you include all 4 required sections above, and submit TWO abstracts – one written for a scientist to read and one written for a lay person or non scientific reader.

 

• Write in Word. Put both abstracts in the same document. Use the following method to name your document prior to submission on Blackboard: student number_USSJXQ-15-2_date.

 

• Stick to the word limit. It is 350 words per abstract. Any words over this limit will not be marked, in line with UWE policy. This may mean you get no marks for one or two sections if you overrun.

 

• Address the following key points: what problem did you study and why is it important? What method did you use? What were your key findings? What do you conclude about these results and what are their broader implications.

 

• Clearly state what it is you measured, the specificity of the test, why you tested it and what sort of sample you used. Include units for your data, for example are you talking about time in days, or antibody levels as a concentration (ug/ml), or titre (1:64), or positive/ negative / borderline results compared to controls?

 

• The scientific abstracts have one or two sentences for each section (roughly 60 or so words) and need to make clear the key theoretical basis of the test. The lay abstracts typically have a much larger background (roughly 120 words) and shorter versions of other sections.

 

Support

In addition to the peer and self assessment and formative feedback opportunity (see feedback), there are some excellent resources on how to write a lay abstract and a scientific abstract, such as those linked below:

 

Guidance on writing Lay abstracts: written advice with three top tips

How to write a lay summary in a nutshell advice from a publisher

Guidance on writing Scientific abstracts: advice from a publisher

 

 

Information on Presentation

___________________________________________________________________

 

Submit: ONE word document containing 2 abstracts:- one scientific and one lay abstract

 

Label your submission as follows: student number_USSJXQ-15-2_date (e.g. 12341234_USSJXQ-15-2_020721)

 

Total word count: Please state your total word count for each abstract. You have 350 words maximum for each abstract. Any words after this point will not be marked, in line with UWE policy.

 

Writing style: Use clear written English, with good spelling and grammar, good flow and short direct sentence structure. The Lay abstract should be written so a non-scientist member of the public can understand the key points, like science is reported in the news. It works best when used to tell a story. The scientific abstract should be written for an expert immunologist to read and evaluate, as we do when submitting a journal paper for publication or when applying to present our work at a scientific conference.

 

Document formatting: Write and save in Word (.doc). Use double-line or 1.5 line spacing, with standard margins. Avoid graphs and figures.

 

Font type/size: select a sans-serif font (open, undecorated fonts, like such as Arial, Calibri, Open Sans, Helvetica) and font size 12.

 

Referencing format: no references are required in an abstract. In fact avoid references, abbreviations, or acronyms and too much detail.

 

Presentation Support: There are a large number of resources available in terms of improving the presentation of your abstracts. To determine where and if you need support why not Practice marking a sample piece of work.

 

• How to improve your work before submitting (workbook)
• Top tips checklist (workbook)
• Check your grammar with Grammarly (free) and your spelling with spellcheck in Word.
• Support for those writing in English as a second language (workshops)
• Tips for Time management (study skills)
• How to avoid plagiarism (workbook)

 

Learning Outcomes Addressed

 

 

On successful completion of this module students will be able to:

 

• demonstrate basic knowledge of the cellular and molecular aspects of immunology (components B2)

 

• perform and evaluate important laboratory immunological techniques and demonstrate an understanding of their theoretical bases (components B1 and B2)

 

• manipulate, analyse, interpret and concisely explain results derived from laboratory experiments (component B2).

 

 

Marking Criteria

 

 

Your assignment will be marked in-line with the Faculty of Health and Applied Science’s marking criteria, which are provided on page 7.

 

Note: All grades are provisional until they are ratified by the exam boards, usually in June (sit) and August (resit).

 

 

Provision of Feedback and Marks

___________________________________________________________________________

 

For this coursework there will be a formative feedback opportunity. You have the opportunity to prepare abstracts of the first practical*, to peer and self assess using the Faculty FHEQ level 5 Marking Criteria (pages 7 and 8), and to identify how you could improve your technique prior to writing, submission and marking of your assessed abstracts (CW2), using the Faculty Assessment Action Plan (page 9). *This format is subject to running of the full practical series. Where this is not possible an alternative online opportunity will be provided.

Under usual circumstances your marked assignment will be available, on Blackboard within 20 working days of submission (excludes bank holidays and university closure days) with individual comments and generic feedback.  Where feedback may be unavoidably delayed, such as staff sickness, we will let you know.

If there is something about the mark or feedback you have been given that you are unclear about, please do contact the module team for clarification.

Once you have your feedback, use the Faculty Assessment Action Plan (page 9) to help you identify how you could improve your technique for next time. Keep this somewhere safe and use it to inform your final year UG Project report or L3 Applied Immunology.

Additional Information

___________________________________________________________________________

 

What happens if you fail?

 

If you do not pass this assignment (CW2) you will not be able to achieve the required pass mark (35%) in the CW component overall for this module. If you fail the overall coursework component for this module then you will have the chance to complete a resit CW in early August, which you will not have to pay for. You will have to resit both CW1 and CW2, independent of whether you passed CW1 at the sit.

 

Details of the resit assignment will be posted on Blackboard, usually at the beginning of July, along with all information required to complete and submit this. Please also refer to your Programme Handbook for further details of academic rules and regulations; it is your responsibility to ensure that you are aware of the policies and procedures associated with assignment submission.

 

If you have failed CW2 please read through the Assignment Description, including the check list and support links, which provide excellent ‘how to’ guides. Do also read the Presentation Information.

 

 

Assessment support processes

 

The University operates a fit-to-sit policy whereby you, in submitting or presenting yourself for an assessment, are declaring that you are fit to sit the assessment. You cannot subsequently claim that your performance in this assessment was affected by extenuating factors. If you experience personal difficulties or circumstances that could impact your ability to complete, submit or attend a specific assignment then you should contact an Information Point to be directed to relevant support services, prior to your submission deadline.

 

If you are having difficulties it is important that you let us know, so we can think how best to support you and what measures we could put in place that fit your circumstances. These can be very different for each individual and for each set of circumstances. Do get in touch and we will do what we can to support you where possible and help get you support where it is outside of our scope.

 

Note:  Please be aware that putting your assignment through SafeAssign is not a totally reliable way to check for plagiarism. You must take responsibility for understanding what is meant by plagiarism, and how to avoid it. Excellent guidance on plagiarism can be found at:

https://www1.uwe.ac.uk/students/studysupport/studyskills/readingandwriting/plagiarism.aspx

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marking criteria for this CW

 

 

*FHEQ Level 5                                    Level 2   Module LO’s	0-29% A Limited/Very Limited/ Exceptionally Limited Piece of Work	30-39% Marginal Fail/ Limited piece of work	40-49% Pass	50-59% Good	60-69% Very Good	70-79% Excellent	80-89% Outstanding	90-100% Exceptional
On successful completion of this module students will be able to:   ·         demonstrate basic knowledge of the cellular and molecular aspects of immunology (components B2)   ·         perform and evaluate important laboratory immunological techniques (B1) and demonstrate an understanding of their theoretical bases (component B2)   ·         manipulate, analyse, interpret and concisely explain results derived from laboratory experiments (component B2).	Some material presented but generally unsatisfactory with some irrelevant or incorrect material. Lack of discussion. Likely to show insufficient evidence of reading. Likely to be incomplete. * Significant deficiencies. Likely to have insufficient, irrelevant or incorrect material. Likely to have very poor structure and no discussion. * Insufficient material presented. No evidence of sufficient preparation. Zero is reserved for failure to attempt an answer but where a submission has been made.	Some evidence of understanding but overall not reaching the minimum pass standard due to some key omissions in presentation, argument or structure. Lines of argument need further development. Content not always relevant. Limited evidence of reading. * Some evidence of effort but missing some essential aspects. For example, may be lacking in evidence of understanding, focus and structure. Likely to have limited discussion with some lack of relevance. Presentation may need to be improved. Likely to show insufficient evidence of reading.	Meets the relevant learning outcomes but mostly descriptive. Some basic evaluation but analysis is not very well developed. May be some unsubstantiated assertion. Some misunderstanding of key principles and concepts.  Evidence of some structure but not always well sequenced. Evidence of some reading. Presentation and focus may need improving.	Knowledge base generally sound with some evidence of independent thought. Analysis and discussion usually clear but may need to strengthen focus.  Balance between description and analysis could be improved. Evidence of reading but could have read more widely.	A maturing ability to relate theory and concepts to discussion. Content always relevant and generally well focussed and organised. Attempts critical evaluation but may be limited in-depth discussion. Factually accurate. Some evidence of having drawn on reading from beyond the course material.	Clear and well-presented discussion. Evidence of critical evaluation and analysis; wide and appropriate reading. Evidence of clear understanding of relevant issues and ideas. Sustained and logical development of ideas presented. Evidence of having read widely and appropriately.	Clear and sophisticated argument and evaluation. Evidence of insightful analysis in most areas. Convincing synthesis from a range of appropriate sources. Evidence of use of new sources and approaches.	Exceptional in knowledge, comprehension, and creativity. Original and imaginative argument and critical evaluation. Exemplary.

 

 

Markers Overall Comments and Advice to Student: (please delete italicised font before returning to student) Highlight the qualitative comments in the grid above which best align to the quality of the work submitted – where comments are highlighted across bands ensure overall mark reflects the weighting appropriate. Include positive & areas for improvement. If work is not annotated give examples from within the work to demonstrate generic comments. Read your feedback and amend if tone is not appropriate.       Development Points: In order to improve your work, in future submissions focus on the following: Advise if possible where/which assessments students can/should implement the advice going forward.           Study Skills: A checked box indicates aspects that need development. Interpretation of the question Evidence of appropriate reading Communication and writing style Assignment structure/brief not followed Referencing NA Punctuation, spelling and grammar Analysis and evaluation Word count not included/breached Please use this link to the study skills resource website: http://www.uwe.ac.uk/library/resources/hub/ In addition to the online resources there are study skills workshops and events which you can sign up to.  You will see events categorised according to where they are run, so for Frenchay click on ‘View all study skills events at Frenchay Campus’.  Click on the ones that you are interested in attending and then you can register via Infohub.

 

You are strongly advised to make an appointment with the first marker: If your first marker is not available, then please contact the module leader.
	Agreed Mark   (mark available through MyUWE/Bb if no mark visible here)	Name of First Marker:	Name of Second Marker: (if applicable)
	Students are reminded that marks are PROVISIONAL until ratified by the Field Board.

 

Student Feedback Action Plan

This page is provided to help you make sense of and to take ownership of the feedback you receive and help you plan how to improve your future work. You might use your comments here to help focus a meeting with your marker, module leader, personal tutor.

Date:	Piece of Work:	Mark:
	Things I did that attracted positive feedback:	Things I did that attracted critical feedback:
How I feel about the feedback:	Positive feedback:	Critical feedback:
	Things I can do to build on the positive feedback:	Things I can do to build on the critical feedback:

 

The single most important thing for me to do in the future on the basis of this feedback:

The single most important thing for me to avoid doing in the future on the basis of this feedback:

Notes about any recurring trends regarding the feedback I am receiving: