Ex. 4. Now, in pairs, talk about your dissertation advisors. Use the adjectives from the exercise above and follow the plan. Begin with the question

Ex. 1. Fill in the correct word from the list below. Use the phrases to make sentences.

LANGUAGE TRAINING

Medium-length, unintended, ‘ghost-writing’, bound, meticulous, primary, viable, original.

……………………………….article ……………………………...sources ………………………...contribution …………………………..references

………………………….plagiarism ……………………………agencies ………………………………..copy ……………………………..project

Ex. 3. Which of the adjectives below would you use to characterize your supervisor as a scholar and which to describe him/ her as a person? Give reasons for your choice. What adjectives would you add?

renown respected thoughtful energetic

well-known distinguished passionate charismatic

outstanding prominent enthusiastic open/ closed

famous talented engrossed in his research persuasive

- Who is your dissertation advisor?

• Name, title, position
• Sphere of research and main publications
• Position in the academic community
• When did you meet first?
• How often do you meet to discuss your dissertation?

Ex. 5. Match the classes of assessment for the MA dissertation given in the box to their criteria [60].

uncompensated fail, distinction, compensated fail,merit, plagiarism

……………. (отлично)	70% and above	Work that shows a high level of conceptual sophistication, intelligence and originality. A convincing argument, based on original research and well supported by the evidence. Demonstrates critical engagement with primary sources and independent thought in relation to the historiography.Intelligently structured, incisively argued, lucidly written. Accurate citation of sources and presentation of bibliographical apparatus
……………. (хорошо)	60-69%	Work that demonstrates intelligence and careful thought; well-written with a cogent argument, based on original research and well supported by the evidence, backed up by good understanding of the historiography, as well as critical use of primary sources. Accurate citation of sources and presentation of bibliographical apparatus.
…………… (удовлетворительно)	50-59%	Work that shows diligence and competence; clearly written with a structured argument, based on original research and adequate knowledge of the evidence, backed up by familiarity with the historiography. Satisfactory citation of sources and presentation of bibliographical apparatus.
……………… (неудовлетворительно с правом повторного представления диссертации к защите)	40-49%	Work that shows a limited understanding of the topic. Any attempt to produce an independent argument may be incomplete or flawed. Work in this category may display a basic knowledge of primary sources, and limited or overly derivative understanding of secondary literature. Referencing (including quotations, footnotes and bibliography) is presented with minimal reference to departmental criteria.
……………… (неудовлетворительно с правом повторного представления диссертации к защите)	0-39%	Work shows a scant understanding of the topic and presents a less than competent response. The work displays erroneous knowledge of the primary evidence and/or lacks an adequate knowledge base, and either fails to present an argument or presents one that is incoherent and/or irrelevant to the question. Makes little or no use of secondary or theoretical literature or uses it inappropriately and derivatively; is heavily reliant on material derived from classes without evidence of independent assimilation or understanding of it. Referencing (including quotations, footnotes and bibliography) is poorly presented according to departmental criteria.
……………… (плагиат)		Result in the failure of the dissertation regardless of any merit it may have.

Дата добавления: 2017-02-01