Skip to main content Skip to navigation

Your Thesis

In this section

Information about Your Thesis:

  • Regulations
  • Viva Examiners
  • Ethics in research
  • Presentation
  • Plagiarism
  • University-wide resources on plagiarism
  • Other Forms of Cheating

 

Regulations

All of the regulations governing the preparation, submission, and examining of your thesis (for MA by Research, MPhil and PhD) can be found in the ‘Doctoral College's Guide to Examinations for Higher Degrees by Research’ via the link below.

You should pay special attention to Part I: ‘Guidance to Students on Submission and Examination of the Thesis’, and No. 4 ‘Presentation of The Thesis’ (pp. 7-9), which contains vital information about the presentation of your dissertation.

Guide to Examinations for Higher Degrees by Research

Viva Examiners

All candidates for doctoral degrees and for the degree of MPhil are required to attend an oral examination after the first submission of the thesis. In the case of MA by Research degrees, an oral examination shall be held where one or both examiners considers this to be necessary to the examination process, at the discretion of the examiners.

As you get closer to the submission of your finished thesis, your Supervisor will discuss with you the appointment of your Examiners. Two Examiners will be appointed, one an Internal Examiner who is usually a member of staff in the Warwick History Department, and an External Examiner, who will be based at another institution. The Internal Examiner may have been involved in your progress during your studies, for example s/he may have been one of the Assessors for your Upgrade in Year 1, but the External Examiner will not normally have had any involvement in your work previously.

The nomination of your Examiners is ultimately the responsibility of your Supervisor, who makes the recommendation to the University’s Doctoral College. It is the University, not the Department that ultimately appoints your Examiners. The viva voce examination normally takes place within 3 months of the submission of your thesis, but not usually in less than 6 weeks following submission (as Examiners need sufficient time to read and asses what you have written).

From the outset of your studies in Year 1, you should have a clear plan for the completion of your thesis, with a submission date that you are working towards. This plan needs to be regularly reviewed and revised, and must always be realistic and practical.

Ethics in research

In most historical research projects there will be no ethical implications, but in cases where your research involves human participants (perhaps involving interviews and the collection of oral histories), or confidential data (perhaps medical records might be among your sources), prior ethical approval will be required. We ask ALL students to complete an Ethics Review Form, to be submitted as part of the Upgrade process in Year 1.

Any concerns you have about the ethics of your research should be discussed with your Supervisor in the first instance, but you may also seek advice from the Director of PGR Studies.

Presentation

As it is essential that you conform to the presentational requirements set out in the guidelines above when you submit your thesis, it is wise to adopt these practices from the very beginning of your studies. This is particularly important with regard to referencing systems, and the style and order of your bibliography. The choices you make about these presentational issues should be discussed and clarified with your Supervisor. Everything you write while a research student should conform to these guidelines.

Remember, also, that your thesis MUST strictly conform to restrictions on word length. The maximum word-lengths allowed are:

  • MA by Research 40,000 words (excluding appendices, footnotes, tables and bibliography)
  • MPhil 60,000 words (excluding appendices, footnotes, tables and bibliography)
  • PhD 80,000 words (excluding appendices, footnotes, tables and bibliography)

Appendices, if included, should be no more than 5,000 words in total.

Presentation and Referencing Essentials...

Presentation and accurate referencing is an essential part of the historian's craft. An essay that is well written and properly referenced will convey your message efficiently and be more persuasive. Many different formatting conventions are used in scholarly publications and this can be confusing. What we recommend is the best current practice. If you are unsure about any of these guidelines, please ask your essay tutors for clarification.

Why reference?

From reading academic articles and books, you should be familiar with the scholarly practice of making references in the text to other people's work and providing listings of relevant source material at the end of the text.

Why is this done?

To enable someone reading the document to find the material you have referred to or consulted

To demonstrate your width of reading and knowledge about a subject

To support and/or develop points made in the text

To avoid accusations of plagiarism: using somebody else's work without acknowledging the fact

Because you may be required to do so by your department

Academic Referencing

The History department recommends that students follow the MHRA standard for essay writing. MHRA is a footnote style commonly used in the Humanities. Superscript numbers are placed in the body of the text, and corresponding notes are placed at the end of each page to cite the resources used.

MHRA Footnote Style

Examples of good and bad referencing can be found in the Plagiarism section of this handbook:

Examples to avoid plagiarism

Plagiarism

The University of Warwick defines plagiarism as 'presenting someone else's work or ideas as the student's own' (Regulation 11 - see the bottom of this page for links to this and other resources).

Note that this definition includes self-plagiarism. You may not reproduce work that you have already presented for a summative piece or dissertation. Formative work, as long as it is your own, does not fall under this category.

This definition applies to all assessed work, including but not limited to essay plans, essays, exams, podcasts, blogs and other digital formats.

The reproduction of work includes the following:

  • copying, ie. repeating phrases or sentences word-for-word

  • modifying, ie. closely paraphrasing another's work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation
  • borrowing, ie. presenting another person’s ideas or concepts as your own, even if you do so in your own words

Improper acknowledgement includes the failure to:

  • put quote-marks around text that has been quoted verbatim from another source, even if you have cited the source in a footnote or in the bibliography
  • cite the source of quoted text, even if you have put the text in quote-marks
  • cite the source of text that you have closely paraphrased from another source
  • cite the source of ideas or concepts that you have borrowed from another source

Academic Misconduct and Academic Integrity

Plagiarism is one kind of academic misconduct. Other kinds of academic misconduct include, but are not limited to:

  • Contract Cheating. You may not purchase or ask another person to complete assessed work or sit an exam in your place. Always acknowledge any third party assistance (beyond that of your tutor), for example with proofreading or providing references. If you are unclear whether any third-party assistance is acceptable please discuss with your academic or personal tutor in advance of submitting the piece of work.
  • Collusion. If you allow another student to copy some or all of your work, even if you consider this is helping them, you may be considered to have cheated alongside the student who copied the work. Whilst the Department encourages students to work together and read each other’s work, all work submitted should be the student’s own.
  • Deliberate attempts to mask plagiarism. The Department may ask for work to be presented in other formats if it suspects students are deliberately trying to mask one of the forms of plagiarism identified above.

Academic Misconduct vs. Poor Academic Practice

Warwick University distinguishes between academic misconduct and poor academic practice. Academic misconduct is defined as follows:

Academic misconduct are acts or omissions by a student which give or have the potential to give an unfair advantage in an examination or assessment, or might assist someone else to gain an unfair advantage, or an activity likely to undermine the integrity essential to scholarship and research. (Regulation 11)

Academic misconduct requires the intention to obtain an unfair advantage, or knowingly engaging in a behaviour that has the potential to give an unfair advantage, irrespective of whether such advantage is actually obtained. (Regulation 11)

Poor academic practice is less serious than academic misconduct, but should be avoided nonetheless:

Poor academic practice is the failure to observe principles of academic integrity. It typically (but not exclusively) occurs when referencing is inadequate, but not in a way suggesting that the student attempted to gain an unfair advantage. (Regulation 11)

Poor academic practice should be used where the extent of plagiarism or other misconduct is limited. It can be used in particular at earlier stages of a student’s degree, when they might only have an imperfect understanding of the principles of academic integrity. It can be found, e.g., where a student has referenced the material used but not indicated that it is a verbatim quote. (Guidance on Regulation 11)

Note, however, that the example given at the end of this quote is a guide only. An essay that contains multiple or extensive examples of verbatim quotes without quote marks may well be a case of academic misconduct rather than poor academic practice.

Penalties for academic misconduct depend on the severity of the offence and can include the following:

  • reduced or zero mark for the piece of work in which the plagiarism occurred
  • re-submission of the work with revised referencing, for a reduced or capped mark
  • re-submission of a new piece of work for a reduced or capped mark
  • revocation of an academic award or honour to which the work contributed

In the History Department, the great majority of cases of cheating are dealt with in one of the first three ways.

The penalty for poor academic practice, as opposed to academic misconduct, is normally that the piece of work in question receives lower marks in line with the normal marking schedule. There is no fixed number of marks that are deducted for poor academic practice; these marks are simply not earned under the marking criteria. In such cases, the overall mark for the piece of work is determined by the marker using their academic judgment.

Training

All students in History are required to complete the Avoiding Plagiarism Moodle course. This is designed for students in any discipline. Once you have completed the course, please download the certificate and upload it to Tabula so there is a record that you have done the training. The deadline for uploading your certificate to Tabula is 15th October. Please note that the completion of the training and uploading of the certificate constitutes a monitoring point.

In addition, the History department offers the following history-specific resources for understanding plagiarism:

  • interactive examples of plagiarism in a hypothetical History essay
  • plagiarism is covered in the academic writing course that is part of the first-year module Making of the Modern World
  • second-year and final-year students discuss plagiarism in cohort meetings with the Director of Second Year Studies and the Director of Final Year Studies

Procedure in cases of suspected plagiarism

Cases of suspected plagiarism are identified by markers in the first instance, usually with the help of the Turnitin software (see below). The marker may judge that a piece of work counts as poor academic practice, in which case they will mark the work as usual, taking the poor practice into account in their mark and/or feedback.

The marker may instead judge that the case is more serious, in which case they will refer the case to the Academic Conduct Panel, which is made up of staff from the department. Members of the panel examine the case and make an initial judgment about whether it is a) poor academic practice or b) academic misconduct.

If a), the work is returned to the marker, who marks it using their academic judgment, as explained above. If b), the student is notified that they are under investigation for plagiarism, and is asked to meet the Chair of the panel to discuss the case. The Chair then decides which penalty to impose and informs the student of this decision.

University-wide resources on plagiarism

The University’s regulations on plagiarism are contained in University Regulation 11, Academic Integrity.

More detailed guidance on how to implement these regulations is in the Guidance on Regulation 11.

Note that these regulations and guidance were updated in summer 2021, with the updates taking effect from October 4, 2021.

The University also has a Proofreading Policy that sets out what the University considers to be appropriate with regards to proofreading and what checks should be in place when proofreading is undertaken.

Other resources for students are available on the Academic Integrity page.

Other Forms of Cheating

Cheating can take other forms aside from plagiarism:

  • Contract Cheating. You may not purchase or ask another person to complete assessed work or sit an exam in your place. Always acknowledge any third party assistance (beyond that of your tutor), for example with proof reading or providing references. If you are unclear whether any third party assistance is acceptable please discuss with your academic or personal tutor in advance of submitting the piece of work.
  • Collusion. If you allow another student to copy some or all of your work, even if you consider this is helping them, you may be considered to have cheated alongside the student who copied the work. Whilst the Department encourages students to work together and read each other’s work, all work submitted should be the student’s own.
  • Deliberate attempts to mask plagiarism. The Department may ask for work to be presented in other formats if it suspects students are deliberately trying to mask one of the forms of plagiarism identified above.

Further Reading

All students taking History modules are strongly encouraged to read the plagiarism examples mentioned above, as well as the pages on Presentation and Referencing:

Examples to avoid plagiarism

Presentation and Referencing

Students in History will also receive information about plagiarism in workshops and/or lectures in their first year. The University has a range of other resources relating to plagiarism and cheating that are listed below.

The Warwick Library has created a Moodle module called PlagiarWISe that explains what plagiarism is, what the consequences are, and how students can avoid it.

PlagiarWISe Moodle

The University’s regulations on plagiarism and cheating are contained in University Regulation 11B, Procedure to be Adopted in the Event of Suspected Cheating:

University Regulation 11B

The University’s Guidelines and Procedure for Suspected Cheating in a University Test give a more detailed account of what constitutes plagiarism and cheating, and of the procedure to be followed in the case of suspected plagiarism, as well as information for students on formative assignments and the use of source-matching software (Turnitin):

Guidelines for Suspected CheatingProcedure for Suspected Cheating

The University has a Proofreading Policy that sets out what the University considers to be appropriate in regards to proofreading and what checks should be in place when proofreading is undertaken.

Proofreading Policy

Home

Department

Welfare and Support

PhD Activities and Information

Upgrade Examination

Your Thesis and Viva Voce

Personal Development

Help Beyond the Department

Student Voice

Careers and Life beyond PhD