Assessment of Outlines

The outline is assessed by Elective Advisers as follows:

• The form as submitted is assessed, looking at accuracy and completeness, the way it is set out, and the content (see advice on completion of elective outline).
• Students will be interviewed on the level of knowledge displayed in relation to the project proposal, including the background, methodology and expected outcomes. The level of organisation and the consideration given to potential risks in respect, for example, to funding, travel, accommodation, health and violence.
• This assessment is based on comparison of the student’s performance against a series of positive and negative indicators and provides a numerical score that is used in the allocation of travel bursaries that are within the University’s gift to award. A list of bursaries is available under the funding section of the website. If the advisers are concerned about the viability and organisation of your elective report, you may be asked to resubmit a revised form and/or be re-interviewed. In many cases the advisers will provide you with some guidance and suggestions at the first interview and you should approach your local supervisor again for further guidance. Any students who are advised at their interview that they need to resubmit an outline or be re-interviewed, will not be considered for a University allocated bursary.

Failure to submit an elective proposal or submission of persistently unacceptable proposal

Students must be able to satisfy the Advisers as to the suitability of their elective arrangements.    

Interview guidelines for Advisers are detailed below.  Although advisers will ask about ethical approval, accommodation, etc we do understand students may not have these details finalised, but would expect you to have investigated these.

Guidance for Elective Proposal Interviewers

Interviewers should ensure that students have fulfilled these requirements. This should include the full name and contact details of the local and host supervisors. Please be aware that if a student is carrying out the elective locally, the roles of the local and distant supervisor are merged.

Local supervisors and interviewers should look at the content of the proposal. Students are asked to write 450 words that should contain an introduction to the topic, the methods to be employed and the expected outcomes. Specifically, interviewers should ensure the proposed project is:

• Realistic – some tend to be over-ambitious and questions of scale need to be made more specific and focussed.
• Achievable in the context of where it is going to take place. What might be possible where, for example, an up to date IT database is different from where no case notes are kept.
• Of sound design – the project should study something, whatever it is. Control groups are a problem in many instances but the use of published data should be encouraged for comparisons. Some will want to do a distant site with Aberdeen comparisons. Suggest caution on this in that the data from Aberdeen needs to be available before the student goes on the elective as there is no time to gather them on return. Two centre electives in 8 weeks are probably impractical.
• Ethical – students must discuss with their host supervisor whether any ethical issues pertain and, if so, how to meet these requirements.
• Costed – has the student considered costs.
• Travel.
• Accommodation.
• Health and travel or indemnity insurance.
• Visa requirements (health checks, X-rays, vaccinations)
• Fees charged by institutions.
• Health issues, specifically HIV endemic areas. Students should be told to ensure that they have checked with the host supervisor that secondary HIV prophyllaxis is available to them should they need it. There is specific advice about HIV and students’ attention should be drawn to it. They also need to read and sign the “waiver” which will be available at the interview.

Outcomes

• If the student has fulfilled the requirements outlined above, the interviewers should say so.
• If a student has not completed the details on the elective proposal form, or if the form has not been signed by the local supervisor, they may be told to resubmit the form, completed appropriately by a given deadline.
• If a student has no plan or a plan that is of concern, interviewers must decide whether or not to require the student to be re-interviewed. This is a matter of judgement depending on perceived organisation, engagement in the process, distillation of relevant issues, grasp of the literature, for example.
• If a student persistently fails to submit a form or submits incomplete or poorly constructed proposals, they will be at risk of having their class certificate removed and be unable to progress to final year.  Such students who are mercifully rare, should be reminded that the elective is a compulsory part of the degree programme and failure to submit a satisfactory report will preclude graduation.
• Interviewers are asked to score interviews. This should be done on the basis of the submitted proposal form and the student’s performance in relation to their perceived organisation, engagement in the process, distillation of relevant issues, grasp of the literature and enthusiasm. The scores allow the Convenor to allocate bursaries for travel .