Student projects: plagiarism and assessment

Within the Information Technology degree programme of the University of Reading, the students undertake a major project in their final year. The module is both a hurdle to an honours degree and significant in terms of assessment weighting. The two year history so far has shown that bad citation and plagiarism are issues, and in one case called for the due referral of a project report. In the light of experience to date, we are focusing firstly on plagiarism prevention, giving generic advice on report writing and citation practice, and secondly on detection. In the longer term, I believe we need to reflect on what capabilities we should be creating in our undergraduates and therefore what and how we should be assessing them.

Doctoral supervision of colleagues: peeling off the veneer of satisfaction and competence

The nexus of teaching, administration and research activities engaged in by academic staff in higher education means that each individual plays a multitude of roles in relation to colleagues, producing inevitable tensions. One role relationship that epitomizes this extraordinary juggling task is that of doctoral supervisor/supervisee, when both are academic staff in the same institution. The last 10 years has seen an upsurge of research interest in doctoral research students, and government and funding bodies have imposed ever more stringent requirements on supervisors. However, staff pairings have been ignored in this literature and research. This article reports on an exploration that seeks to redress this omission by giving voice to the participants (colleague supervisor or research student), allowing them to articulate constructs about what may be unique in the interaction, thus highlighting factors that support or impede success in the enterprise.

Student-teachers' perspectives on positive and negative social processes in schools

In recent years, the Standards for Qualified Teacher Status in England have placed new emphasis on student-teachers' ability to become integrated into the 'corporate life of the school' and to work with other professionals. Little research, however, has been carried out into how student-teachers perceive the social processes and interactions that are central to such integration during their initial teacher education school placements. This study aims to shed light on these perceptions. The data, gathered from 23 student-teachers through interviews and reflective writing, illustrate the extent to which the participants perceived such social processes as supporting or obstructing their development as teachers. Signals of inclusion, the degree of match or mismatch in students' and school colleagues' role expectations, and the social awareness of both school and student-teacher emerged as crucial factors in this respect. The student-teachers' accounts show their social interactions with school staff to be meaningful in developing their 'teacher self' and to be profoundly emotionally charged. The implications for mentor and student-teacher role preparation are discussed in this article.

Student perceptions of their IEP targets

The 2001 Code of Practice for Special Educational Needs (DfES, 2001) explicitly states that students with IEPs should have an active role in the writing and implementing of them. A research project was conducted in which 19 Year 8 students in three schools were interviewed, with the findings cross-referenced against an examination of their individual education plans (IEPs) and interviews with the SENCos. Very few students were able to communicate a clear understanding of IEPs. Students' stated targets mostly reflected mainstream target-setting: very few stated targets matched with those in their IEPs. Consistent with these findings is literature which argues that meaningfully involving students in the IEP process takes considerable time and effort, which would appear to imply that the number of students with IEPs in any one school must be limited. Against this are pressures, particularly from OFSTED but also from examination boards, to have IEPs available as evidence that students' needs are being met. The article concludes by suggesting that SENCos look to limit the number of IEPs issued, alongside a robust defence of the school's special educational needs policy within the school evaluation form to ensure that students' needs are met and also are seen to be met.