Assessment
For successful completion of the course MRes students must submit the following written work for examination:
1. One essay of not more than 4,000 words ( including footnotes, but excluding tables, appendices, and bibliography), relating to anthropology and social theory chosen by the candidate from a list of questions announced by the Archaeology, Anthropology and Sociology Degree Committee by the division of Michaelmas term.
2. One essay of not more than 4,000 words ( including footnotes, but excluding tables, appendices, and bibliography), relating to professional research practice chosen by the candidate from a list of questions announced by the Archaeology, Anthropology and Sociology Degree Committee by the division of Michaelmas term.
3. One essay of not more than 4,000 words (including footnotes, but excluding tables, appendices, and bibliography), relating to ethnographic research methods. This is the individual report on the extended case study prepared for the Ethnographic Methods course.
The marks awarded for the three essays will together comprise 40 per cent of the overall course mark.
A dissertation of not more than 15,000 words, including footnotes, but excluding tables, appendices, and bibliography, on a subject approved by the Archaeology, Anthropology and Sociology Degree Committee. An oral examination on the dissertation and on the general field of knowledge within which it falls may be held at the discretion of the examiners. The primary aim of the dissertation should be the theoretical analysis of ethnographic material; it may also be a new synthesis of data or a new interpretation of existing material.
The mark awarded for the dissertation will comprise 60 per cent of the total.
Fieldwork Proposal
The fieldwork proposal (7,000 words, including footnotes) is submitted separately. It distills your research training to date and is at the core of your own plans. All students submitting a fieldwork proposal and hoping to proceed to doctoral research will be given a fieldwork clearance interview by the PhD Committee as part of the oral examination. Whichever way you organise your fieldwork proposal and thesis, you must have covered all items specified as elements of the fieldwork proposal.
The formal regulations for the MRes in Social Anthropology can be found in the University’s Statutes and Ordinances.
Style
- The minimum font size for text is 12pt and 10pt for footnotes
- The font should be Times New Roman
- Margins should be 1 inch/ 2.5 cm all round
- Chapters always begin on a new page
- Paragraphs should be indented three spaces, except for the first paragraph of each new section which should be flush with the left-hand margin
- Section headings must be clearly indicated, but not numbered
- Use single spacing, with an extra space between paragraphs
- All figures, tables, illustrations, etc should be clearly numbered and listed in the table of contents.
On this page:
Research ethics and integrity approval
Research ethics and integrity approval
In terms of formal approval procedures, the PhD Committee, consisting of four UTOs in the Department, acts as Ethics Committee for doctoral and MRes students. Ethical clearance is an intrinsic part of the Fieldwork Clearance procedure all PhD students must clear before they begin fieldwork. This body and the Departmental Committee have final responsibility for ethics clearance at the departmental level.
The University of Cambridge Research Integrity website provides extensive ethics and integrity guidelines to support staff and students. The Association of Social Anthropologists also provides extensive ASA ethics guidelines. Please consult these carefully in advance of applying for research clearance from the Department. Also see ESRC framework for research ethics and AAA ethical guidelines. As the statement from the ASA chair usefully points out, the guidelines are not intended to provide ready-made answers or to absolve researchers from ethical responsibilities, but should be a starting point for a concrete reflection on the specific ethical issues which may have to be borne in mind in the case of your specific research:
“Codes of practice and guidelines are of necessity succinct documents, couched in abstract and general terms. They serve as a baseline for starting to think about ethical issues, but cannot of their nature encompass the complexities of concrete situations and the dilemmas of choice and positioning that anthropologists routinely face as they navigate through a variety of intersecting fields of power and responsibility and start to consider how their own work both reflects and affects power relations. If ethics is seen simply as a question of avoiding a lawsuit and our codes are simply a list of restrictions on conduct designed to protect us from interference, our ethical purpose will simply be a matter of self-serving professional interest.” (Statement from the Chair, ASA)
Researchers should also be aware of data protection issues that arise as a result of conducting research. In particular, you should keep in mind that when using cloud-based storage, or programmes such as Evernote, data will be crossing international borders even if your research does not. This means you should be aware of any issues raised concerning not only the security of your own research data, but also the legal issues surrounding data protection of all personal data. Further information on data protection can be found at the following places:
The University of Cambridge Staff and Student Information
Research data Q&A from Jisc Legal
SOAS information on personal data in research which covers some issues of particular interest to anthropologists in more depth.
If, having read these guidelines, you have any questions or would like any advice relating to research ethics, please consult the Department’s research ethics officer.
Submission
Submission deadlines are announced annually in the MRes Diary.
All items submitted for assessment for this course must include a statement of the exact word count of the piece.
You must submit an electronic version in either Word or PDF format to the correct section of your Moodle Course by 12:00 (noon) BST on the day of the deadline.
You are expected to manage your time to meet the deadlines. This includes, for example, preparing a draft well in advance, to allow reasonable time for feedback from your supervisor, and final revisions. Please note that sloppy presentation (bad spelling or grammar, incomplete bibliography etc.) will be penalised by the examiners.
No extensions will be given to the deadlines, with exceptions being made only for certified medical emergencies. Essays and theses submitted after noon on the deadline days will be penalised by 5 marks for the first day, followed by 1 mark for each day of delay thereafter.
If you need to apply for an extension, the request will need to come from your College Tutor, with copies of medical evidence (letter from GP, etc) either sent with the request or as soon as possible afterwards. If you experience personal or other difficulties that interfere with your work, you should contact your College Tutor in good time for advice and assistance. The College Tutor will liaise with the Department. In extreme cases personal problems may require periods of intermission of studies and again, College Tutors will assist students with this process.
Please also note that the word counts for essays and theses are strict. There are upper limits and you must not exceed them. The Department requires an electronic copy of the essay or thesis to verify the word count.
The Haddon Library holds copies of theses produced by past graduate students and also has an online list of these theses.
Assessment
Formally, the MRes is a pass/ fail course. The standard for a pass begins at 60. Internally we note the difference between a pass (60-69) and a high pass (70-74), and a mark above 75 is awarded a distinction. If you wish to proceed to doctoral research you will be expected to achieve a high pass overall.
Assessment descriptors
| Mark | Class | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 75%+ | Distinction | At the upper end this is work which consistently exceeds expectations and challenges received views. At the lower end it indicates work which is excellent in its range and its command of the material, and in the argument and analysis that it brings to bear. |
| 70-74% | High Pass | Work showing evidence of a good, broad-based engagement with and understanding of the relevant material organised in a clearly-argued, well-illustrated and relevant fashion. |
| 60-69% | Pass | At the upper end this includes work which, though competent and broadly relevant, is somewhat lacking in focus, organisation or breadth of reference. At the lower end it indicates work which, while demonstrating some knowledge of the material, is yet deficient in understanding, analysis and breadth of reference. |
| 41-59% | Fail | An answer that shows some knowledge of the broader subject area but displays inadequate evidence of directly relevant knowledge and understanding, and is unable to give a plausible and satisfactory answer to the question. A "marginal fail" mark is at the top of this range, 58-59. |
| 21-40% | Fail | As per 41-59, aggravated by poor organization, poor expression, uncritical approach, serious mistakes, misunderstandings and/or irrelevant material. |
| 1-20% | Fail | An answer of very limited substance. It may be a very brief answer of no more than a single paragraph of conventional paragraph length, and/or an answer which especially at the lower end contains little or nothing relevant to the question. |
| 0% | Fail | No answer provided. |
.