This course aims to:

1	develop student competence in the understanding and analysis of contemporary scientific research, through reading and analysis of the current scientific literature, and the written and oral communication of current methodological and experimental practices;
2	demonstrate the integrated nature of scientific thinking & scientific research;
3	demonstrate the importance of scientific process and critical thinking;
4	develop a deepening understanding of the importance of science communication and an appreciation of the ways in which scientists interact with each other and the wider community.

Course-related material is available through MyUni. We use it often. Students should regularly check the MyUni website for important course-related announcements

The course consists of four tutorials conducted in small group settings (academic researcher and anywhere from 2-12 students) and a research review project (one-on-one project with a research/teaching mentor).

This table presents an estimate of your workload in terms of non-contact time

Assessment task	Activity	Time	Total noncontact time
Tutorials	Pre-tutorial session literature reading (4 topics)	4 hours per tutorial topic	16
	Post-tutorial session: additional reading/analysis	4 hours per tutorial topic	16
	Writing tutorial reports (4)	6 hours per tutorial	24
Research review	Research review notebook	2 hours per meeting, 6 meetings	18
	Research, reading analysis for research review topic	Estimate 25 hours	25
	Symposium talk preparation	Estimate 20 hours	20

Each tutorial or research review project meeting, unless otherwise arranged by your tutor or your academic supervisor, will take place between 4-6pm Monday of the week. Tutors/academic supervisors may choose to use the timetabled space or he/she may email you with a different location.

Marks are based on the following:

Assessment task	% of total assessment	Approximate Timing	Lerning Outcome being Assessed
Critical Review Report #1	15%	due week 4
Critical Review Report #2	15%	due week 6
Critical Review Report #3	17.5	due week 8
Critical Review Report #4	17.5	due week 10
Research review notebook	10%
Oral presentation content	20%
Oral presentation delivery	5%

Critical Reviews of Tutorial Topics: (65%)

A written review and critical analysis of the research material presented in each tutorial. Individual academic tutors may assign specific questions to be addressed by the written review. Task length – 1800 - 2000 words. Submission will vary between electronic and hardcopy, depending upon the tutor’s choice.

Research Review Notebook/journal: (10%)

This will be a collection of the student’s own notes and collected primary and secondary reference sources connected with the development of the final symposium talk. The notebook should be a record of the student’s progress in understanding their chosen research topic and becoming a critical thinker. It should include: printed copies of the key scientific literature (the student may prefer to keep only electronic copies of secondary papers, though they must demonstrate that an organised electronic collection exists), a system of notes/commentaries distilling their collected literature, a written record of their mentor talks, and written evidence of the development and evolution of their symposium talk. This is due at the time of the oral presentations, in week 12 or 13.

Oral presentation—Content: (20%) and Delivery (5%)

The final oral presentations will be assessed in two distinct parts.

1) The student’s talk will be assessed on whether they have developed a coherent and understandable research-based topic, have understood and effectively marshalled the experimental data which underlies their topic, have accurately portrayed the current scientific literature and cited appropriated sources, and a number of other “objective” criteria that measure the student’s success at the task of condensing a large body of data into a short talk understandable by a scientifically literate audience. Also,
where appropriate, students should explore the implications of the research/data presented in their talk, the possible models/theories that have built, and the deficiencies, weaknesses and/or gaps in these models. In addition, students may also detail the possible approaches for pursuing further research in their chosen area. All academics who have participated in tutorials
and who have served as academic mentors for the attachments would be expected to be present. Marking sheets would be filled in by all academics present for the talks.



2) The student’s talks will also be assessed for their effectiveness in the delivery of their presentation. Marking topics would include: organization of talk (intro/aims/data/analysis/conclusion), effectiveness at communicating complex scientific ideas and theories (use of figures/diagrams, use of metaphors), oral delivery (is speech clear, coherent; has talk been rehearsed), etc.

Late submission of assessments

If an extension is not applied for, or not granted then a penalty for late submission will apply. A penalty of 10% of the value of the assignment for each calendar day that is late (i.e. weekends count as 2 days), up to a maximum of 50% of the available marks will be applied. This means that an assignment that is 5 days or more late without an approved extension can only receive a maximum of 50% of the mark.