Skip to main content Skip to navigation

3: Assessment and Examinations

In this section of the Handbook, we will provide information about the assessment methods used throughout the Degree programme, as well as the various policies and procedures that are in place. You can find details of all policies relating to Assessment and Feedback on the Department's Assessment and Feedback webpagesLink opens in a new window. In particular, here you will find a link to the Department's Assessment Strategy.

You will experience a range of assessment methods, including mid-term tests, problem sets, presentations, essays and year-end exams during your Diploma. Any work that contributes towards the final module mark is known as summative assessment. However, for work during the year, you will also receive comments on it and this is part of the formative feedback that we provide.


These rules and procedures relate to all undergraduate courses taught by the Department of Economics. You must pay particular attention to the paragraphs Referencing (3.1.7) and Plagiarism (3.1.8) and are strongly advised to read Regulation 11Link opens in a new window in the University of Warwick Calendar: opens in a new window.

Marking criteria

Performance is classified into five broad categories of: First; Upper Second (2.1); Lower Second (2.2); Third; Fail. There is a range of marks for each of the classes and the marking criteria are provided in the table below:

Class (Marks)ComprehensionAnalysisCritiquePresentation
FirstDemonstrates command of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents a tightly-focused, relevant and well-structured answer with full and accurate development of concepts/theories, and excellent use of evidence.Understands and evaluates relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations in a manner that demonstrates a developed capacity for independent thought. This may amount to an extension of existing arguments, debates and /or interpretations.Provides a thorough and consistent deployment of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
2:1Demonstrates good appreciation of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents a coherent and closely-argued answer with good structure, accurate use of concepts/theories, and good use of evidence.Understands and evaluates relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations in a manner that demonstrates a capacity for independent thought.Provides a good deployment of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
2:2Demonstrates an understanding of core aspects of the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Presents an answer to the question taking into account appropriate structure, development of concepts/theories and reasonable use of evidence.Understands and reproduces relevant arguments, debates and/or interpretations.Acknowledges and employs techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
ThirdDemonstrates some familiarity with the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship issues.Shows an understanding of the question with some structure, knowledge of concepts/theories and use of evidence.Demonstrates some awareness of relevant arguments, debates, and/or interpretations.Shows awareness of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.
FailDemonstrates little evidence of familiarity with the subject matter including, where appropriate, methodological, technical and scholarship skills.Demonstrates a poor grasp of the question with loose structure, little knowledge of concepts/theories and inadequate use of evidence.Demonstrates little awareness of relevant arguments, debates, and/or interpretations.Provides a poor demonstration of techniques of academic writing with particular reference to structure, referencing/sourcing and spelling/grammar.

The 20-point scale

The 20-point scale is a university-wide marking scale that maps the five broad class categories into a 20-point marking scale, as set out in the table below.

These procedures do not apply to quantitative problems or short-answer questions, which are marked using the whole range of marks between zero and 100. The 20-point marking scale applies to essay-type questions (both coursework and examination).

For example, an essay which is deemed to be an Upper Second class piece of work may be awarded only the mark of 62 or 65 or 68 within the range 60 to 69, according to whether the work is judged to be of low, medium or high worth, respectively, within the corresponding class. One of the motivations for the scale is to encourage essay markers to use higher marks within the first class range and lower marks in the fail range.

For those modules in which the examination paper is made up of a combination of essay-type questions and quantitative problems or short-answer questions, the 20-point scale is relevant only for the essay elements. The final mark will continue to emerge as an aggregation of individual marks, where these individual marks have been obtained in different ways. Note that this means that the aggregate mark itself is not constrained to be one of the 20 marks on the scale.

FirstExcellent 1st100
Exceptional work of the highest quality, demonstrating excellent knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills. At Final Year level: work may achieve or be close to publishable standard.
High 1st88

Very high quality work demonstrating excellent knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills. Work which may extend existing debates or interpretations.

Upper Mid 1st82
Lower Mid 1st78
Low 1st74
Upper Second (2.1)High 2:168

High quality work demonstrating good knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.

Mid 2:165
Low 2:162
Lower SecondHigh 2:258

Competent work, demonstrating reasonable knowledge and understanding, analysis, organisation, accuracy, relevance, presentation and appropriate skills.

Mid 2:255
Low 2:252
ThirdHigh 3rd48

Work of limited quality, demonstrating some relevant knowledge and understanding.

Mid 3rd45
Low 3rd


FailHigh Fail (sub Honours)38Work does not meet standards required for the appropriate stage of an Honours degree. Evidence of study and demonstrates some knowledge and some basic understanding of relevant concepts and techniques, but subject to significant omissions and errors.
Fail32Work is significantly below the standard required for the appropriate stage of an Honours degree. Some evidence of study and some knowledge and evidence of understanding but subject to very serious omissions and errors.
25Poor quality work well below the standards required for the appropriate stage of an Honours Degree.
Low Fail12
ZeroZero0Work of no merit OR Absent; work not submitted; penalty in some misconduct cases.

Methods of submission

Please note that most modules will require submission of assessment by e-submission and this is done via Tabula. No modules will require a paper copy to be submitted. It is your responsibility to make sure you check the module webpage and/or with the module leader about the submission arrangements for each module.


A large amount of your coursework will be submitted and marked electronically and the Department uses Tabula for e-submissions, for recording your marks, and for providing you with feedback. If you are granted an extension it will also appear on Tabula. You are asked to read the guidance on the e-submission system carefully before using it.

It is your responsibility to check that you are submitting the correct document to the correct module assignment and you are asked to check your assignment before finally submitting. If you do submit the wrong assignment, you are able to re-submit the correct one, but you will receive the normal late submission penalty if the correct assignment is submitted after the deadline. This applies to both individual work and group work, where penalties will be applied to all group members, even if the group designated one person as responsible for submission.

You can submit your work electronically up until 14:00 (GMT) on the deadline day and all work is date- and time-coded. Penalties will be applied to work submitted after this time. You are strongly encouraged to complete e-submission prior to 13:00 (GMT) on the day of the deadline in order that you can inform us of any problems that may arise. The system can become very busy just before a deadline and neither this, nor computer difficulties will be accepted as a justification for late submission.

If you are submitting assessed coursework to another department, you should familiarise yourself with that department’s particular submission deadlines and methods, as these may differ to those in the Department of Economics.

All electronically submitted work is marked online and feedback on this assessed work will also be provided via Tabula. You will receive a notification when your feedback is available to download on Tabula.

e-submission guidance

As most of your work will be submitted electronically, there are some key points to follow to ensure you don't make a mistake:

  1. You should ensure that your document includes your student I.D. number, but not your name, as all marking is done anonymously. You must also include the final word count.
  2. The assignment must be a 100% electronic submission and so any graphs, figures, or equations will have to be incorporated into your electronic document.
  3. To submit your document online, once you have produced your final electronic file as e.g., a Word document, you will need to create a PDF document from that Word document. To create a PDF document you can download a copy of the free software PDF converter from ITS ( opens in a new window) and follow the instructions.
  4. Name the resultant PDF file as follows: module code-assignment number.pdf. For example, ec208-a1.pdf would be the name for your first assignment for EC208-Industrial Economics 1. ec307-a2.pdf would be the name for your second assignment for EC307- Macroeconomic Policy in the UK.
  5. Check the final document before uploading to ensure it has been converted accurately, including checking graphs and equations.
  6. Double check you are submitting the correct document and that you are submitting it to the correct module/assessment.
  7. If you submit more than one document for your assignment these must be submitted simultaneously (holding down the Ctrl key while selecting your files allows you to select multiple files).
  8. Upload the PDF document via Tabula. If you have a technical problem with your submission then you should print off the error page and then email the PDF submission and error page to opens in a new window. However, given that you should have left enough time to resolve any difficulties, this will not be accepted as an excuse for a late submission.


Each piece of work for your Economics modules must be submitted by 14:00 (2.00 pm) (GMT) on a particular date, as set by the UG Office and approved by the module leader. You will be given notice of these deadlines through Tabula. The University’s guidance to markers specifies a minimum of four term-time weeks’ notice of deadlines. If you are taking a module in another Department, you should check with that Department to find out the submission deadline and method.

It is your responsibility to arrange your own schedule and manage your time accordingly. We advise you always to leave a safety margin in case of last-minute difficulties in obtaining books, printing files, computer issues, and so on. Aim to submit the piece of work a day or more before the final deadline. If it is a piece of group work, double check with your group members that it has been submitted. No reduction in late penalties will be made if you find you cannot upload the material before the deadline or if you thought that another member of your group was supposed to upload the work. It is your responsibility to ensure all work is submitted within the deadline and errors after the deadline will receive a penalty. Also bear in mind that demand on the system is likely to be high in the last hours before the final deadline.

Late submission

If you submit work after the deadline, your work will be marked subject to a penalty in the form of a deduction of percentage points from the awarded mark. You will receive a five percentage point (marks) deduction per day (excluding Saturdays and Sundays, Bank Holidays and University closure days) thereafter, with a minimum mark for that assessment of zero.

The following table shows how the penalty system works (penalties are given in percentage points):

Day/Time SubmittedSubmission Deadline
After deadline Mon and Before deadline Tues5    
After deadline Tues and Before deadline Weds105   
After deadline Weds and Before deadline Thurs15105  
After deadline Thurs and Before deadline Fri2015105 
After deadline Fri and Before deadline successive Mon252015105
After deadline Mon and Before deadline successive Tues252015105
After deadline Tues and Before deadline successive Weds3025201510
After deadline Weds and Before deadline successive Thurs3530252015
After deadline Thurs and Before deadline successive Fri4035302520
With a further five points for each day, excluding weekends

For work that is submitted electronically, do not leave it too close to the last minute. Penalties cannot be removed in situations where the network was busy around the time of the submission deadline. You must also check your submitted work as invited to do so when e-submitting. If you initially submit the wrong document and either you or the marker identifies this, you can still submit the correct one, but a late penalty will be applied as detailed above. Penalties cannot be adjusted if you or we later find that you have submitted a wrong file or a corrupted document. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are submitting the correct assignment to the correct link by the deadline.

For problem sets, where solutions are discussed in module Support and Feedback classes immediately after submission, any late submissions will receive a mark of zero.

Extensions and exemptions

If you submit work after the deadline, your work will be marked subject to a penalty and if you miss a mid-term test or final examination, you will be given a mark of zero in that assessment. However, during the year there may be times when you are unwell and this might occur in close proximity to assessment deadlines or on the day of a test or examination.

All cases (extensions/class/test/examination absences) of mitigating circumstances evidence should be submitted via the personal circumstances portal in Tabula. Even if you are taking a module that is offered by a different academic department, it is still your home department (Economics) which makes the decision on an extension or an exemption. Further details regarding mitigating circumstances for examinations are given in section 4.11.4Link opens in a new window. Some departments may have their own form for an extension or exemption, which might need signing by the Student Support and Progression Officer, once you have submitted evidence. It is your responsibility to check this for each module you are taking.

All extension and exemption requests are considered by the Student Support and Progression Officer, in consultation with the Director of Undergraduate Studies. They are not considered by your lecturer, class tutor or personal tutor. If you are thinking of asking for an extension or exemption, you should first ask yourself whether you could have reasonably foreseen the reason for your late submission or absence and taken action to avoid this. If so, in fairness to those students in similar situations who took the necessary steps or precautions, your request is unlikely to be granted.

All applications and evidence are considered against the twin criteria of force majeure and evidence. If your request is necessitated by factors over which you have no control, and which you could not have reasonably anticipated (force majeure), and if these factors can be documented in some way, your request will normally be approved. Extensions or exemptions may be granted on compassionate grounds, e.g. death or serious illness in your immediate family.

Evidence that is in any other language than English must be accompanied by an official translation. All evidence must be submitted in a timely manner, which means within one week of the deadline or date of the assessment. Self-certification is available for the following module assessments:

EC346 - Assignment 2 Written Report

All other module assessments are not eligible for self certification.

This must be submitted to the department within 3 days. Only two self-certifications are permitted each academic year and they are closely monitored. All other assessments worth less than 10% are not available for self-certification. For any assessment worth more than 10% or one that is less than 10% but where self-certification is not permitted, official documentation is required. It is your responsibility to ensure that you upload the evidence and submit the form within one week of the date of the absence. We will not chase you for the evidence and if you do not provide it or it is insufficient and doesn't confirm the dates you are claiming for, your submission will not be condoned.


If an extension is granted, a new deadline will be set by the Student Wellbeing and Progression Officer. Submission of work after this new deadline will be subject to the normal late submission penalties.

Any requests for extensions should be made in a timely manner and ideally before the deadline. However, extensions can be applied retroactively, lifting any late penalty you might have already received for that assessment. Should there be an unexplained delay of more than one week before submitting medical evidence, we may not be able to agree to your extension request. Bear in mind that your request will not be the only one coming in, especially during periods of numerous submissions deadlines. Please allow reasonable time for the situation to be resolved before contacting the UG office.

For assessments that are spread over a long period of time, such as dissertations or coursework, there is an expectation that almost every student will encounter some difficulties in their lives during this period. As a result, it is anticipated that you will handle these situations without impacting on your final submission. Thus, low-level and short-term illnesses and factors such as problems with computers, will not be considered as a basis for an extension for this type of work. This differs from assessments which have a shorter time to complete. For problem sets, where solutions are discussed in module Support and Feedback classes immediately after submission, no extensions can be granted, but you may be condoned from the assessment, based on the evidence. The weighting would normally be passed onto the final examination. Information on solution availability can be obtained from module leaders.

Regularly refused reasons for extensions

If you are thinking of applying for a coursework extension or exemption from a test, you should be aware that, if your reason is the same or similar to those given below, your request is likely to be refused.

"I travelled abroad over the vacation and was unable to obtain references from local libraries."

Comment: The University doesn’t require you to do academic work in the vacation. It may be a good thing if you do, but some students have to undertake paid employment. You could, and in this case should, have at least completed your research for the essay in term time.

"I travelled abroad over the vacation and as a result I returned late to the University or I had a poor internet connection whilst abroad."

Comment: The University requires you to be in residence in term time, and most assessments are submitted electronically. If you are concerned about poor internet connection you need to check before travelling whether this will be an issue.

"I have a last-minute invitation to an important job interview for which I need to prepare a presentation."

Comment: You knew you’d applied for the job, and building in some slack for interviews is just part of normal time management. You should plan to research and write assessed coursework with a margin to spare so that complications like this, which are predictable, don’t put you into a spin. However, your request will be viewed sympathetically if you get several last-minute invitations to interviews in quick succession. If the interview or assessment centre falls on the day of a test and you have evidence that this event cannot be moved, we may be able to consider an exemption request.

"I had too many other important things going on and forgot to submit my essay on the right day, but my file is dated the day before the deadline, proving that my essay was ready beforehand."

Comment: You have to give the right degree of priority to your academic work. The date on a file is easily manipulated.

"I was about to submit my essay on the day of the deadline when my computer crashed/was stolen, meaning I could not access e-submission website/access my file to upload."

Comment: Don't leave essential tasks to the last minute; please leave plenty of time to upload your work via e-submission, leaving a margin of error in case of technical difficulties. Always make regular backup copies of files both physically, such as on a memory stick, and using online facilities. Transport issues will also not be accepted as an excuse for late submission.

I submitted the wrong file to the e-submission website, but didn't notice at the time/I submitted the file for the wrong assessment/to the wrong department's system"

Comment: You should review your submission before confirming or submitting. Students submitting the wrong file or submitting to the wrong module on tabula will be able to re-submit the correct document, but will receive a late submission penalty based on when the deadline was and when the correct document was submitted. It is your responsibility to check that you have submitted the correct file to the correct assessment/department.


The Department cannot grant an extension to a test or reschedule the date of any test. If you are unable to take a mid-term test or your illness is of such long duration that it prevents you from submitting a piece of work within an appropriate extension, you can apply for an exemption, so that the work is condoned. The weighting of the assessment is normally passed onto your final examination for that module. In the case of WBS modules, if an assessment is missed or not submitted and you request an exemption based on mitigating circumstances, this will not be considered until the Exam Board. You will be given a mark of zero and this will only be condoned when the Exam Board meets.

Once again, all evidence should be submitted via the mitigating circumstances portal in tabula and should be submitted in a timely manner (one week for official documentation and 3 days for self-certifications).

Please note that requests made to condone absences from tests due to attendance at an interview or an assessment centre will not normally be accepted, unless there is clear evidence that the interview could not be postponed. This does NOT apply for examinations. We expect you to make clear to potential employers who may invite you to attend interviews and assessment centres that you have certain commitments throughout the academic year, and that attending tests is a compulsory part of your course.

These reasons for absences will not normally be condoned:

  • Open Days
  • family celebrations
  • holidays
  • mistakes with travel arrangements
  • mistake with time or location of test

Please note that this list is not exhaustive.

If you are unable to give a presentation due to illness (for example in EC304 or EC331), your tutor will re-schedule your presentation so long as you provide valid evidence for your mitigating circumstance to the UG office.

If you are not sure into which category a given assessment falls, please ask the UG office.

Good practice in assessment

Essay Writing Guidance

Essays are often a major source of uncertainty for incoming students. To understand the criteria used by your tutors to mark your written coursework, you should familiarise yourself with the information here. Not every module requires coursework in the form of essays, but the rules that apply to essays can often help in relation to other kinds of coursework too. Sources of advice on essay writing include:

  • departmental guidance in the form of marking criteria
  • your module Support and Feedback class tutor
  • your lecturer
  • the study skills sessions organised by Careers & Skills
  • online provision from the Library
  • regular drop-in session with the Economics Librarian in the Department.

You are advised to back up your files regularly to minimise the risk of losing documents. Please make sure that you do not leave the submission of your work until the last minute; build in some time to put things right if your computer crashes, as most submission is online, through Tabula.

Word limits

Please remember that work is judged on quality rather than quantity, and you must adhere to word limits and include your final word count clearly on your essay. If you feel you can say what you need to say in fewer words, then do so. We do not include a 10% margin above the word count. Excessive length will be penalised and the marker may ignore any material in excess of the word limit. Module leaders will indicate any exceptions to the standard word limit regulations, such as references. Do not include additional material in the form of lengthy footnotes or appendices unless this is specifically authorised by the coursework assignment.


It is advisable for you to draw diagrams with computer packages where possible in order to further enhance your skills in this area. Pages should be numbered and submissions should be anonymous. You should include your student i.d. number on each page, but not your name.

Marking, Moderation and Feedback

Marking and moderation

A percentage mark will be awarded and recorded on each piece of assessed coursework. All marks that contribute towards your Diploma are moderated across the range of marks and across the first markers. Usually this involves taking a preliminary sample, then sampling more thoroughly where the preliminary sample indicates discrepancies. The agreed marks remain provisional until confirmed by the external examiner at the Exam Board. Thus, you are told your marks on a provisional basis. Due to moderation, the mark on your assessment may not be the same as the mark on Tabula. The mark on Tabula is your final moderated mark.

We want to reassure you that the marking and moderation for all our assessments is fair, consistent, robust and reliable and hence give you confidence that when you receive a mark, the mark has been arrived at following a detailed and rigorous process. You can find further details about the marking and moderation process on the Department's Assessment and Feedback pages.

If you have any concerns or feedback about the assessment process then please contact the Director of Assessment and Feedback in the first instance.

Return of marked assessed work

Marked assessed work (excluding examinations) will normally be available to you within 20 University working days after the submission deadline. Your marked work will be available on Tabula, or will be returned to you by your Support and Feedback class tutor.

Please also see the University Policy on the Timing of the Provision of Feedback to Students on Assessed Work.

Feedback on your assessed work

We take very seriously the provision of feedback to you on assessed work, most of which is electronic. We are sensitive to the importance of this and have mechanisms in place to enhance the quality of the feedback on assessed work. The Warwick tradition is to give some weight to assessed work submitted through the year, especially during years 1 and 2, to enable you to gauge your progress over time from the comments and marks you receive at regular intervals.

Feedback will be provided in a variety of ways. You may receive written comments on your work, or as a separate linked document, or as a summary of comments on the feedback sheet. These might indicate what was done well in your assessment, those areas where you could improve, and a general evaluation of your coursework in aspects of presentation, structure, and referencing. These comments should enable you to understand the basis of the mark you have been given and how you may improve your work in the future. You will also find the mark you received on Tabula. Feedback may be in the form of your submitted answers along with the correct test answers. In addition, we provide generic feedback on assessments, which will provide more general comments on the cohort's performance on this assessment. It will outline particular aspects that were done well, common problems, and ways to improve, as well as an overall assessment of performance, including a cumulative distribution function, which will allow you to determine how you performed relative to your peers.

If you are not satisfied with the quality of the feedback you have received, you should approach the module lecturer or the module Support and Feedback tutor. However, prior to doing this, you must be able to demonstrate that you have reviewed your personal feedback and the generic feedback and reflected on both through re-reading your work. You are also advised to make use of Advice and Feedback hours to further discuss your feedback, noting, however, that markers are not permitted to re-mark your assessment. Academic judgement cannot be challenged. If you still need more information email the UG Office, who will forward your request for more feedback to the Director of Undergraduate Studies.

Other types of feedback on your progress

Feedback to you is provided in a variety of ways. There are many channels through which we give feedback other than only at the point of returning assessed work. Here are some of the different ways in which we provide you with feedback:

  • Module Support and Feedback classes complement in person lectures and are intended to give you the opportunity to test your understanding of material. In most module Support and Feedback classes, you will be expected to prepare some exercises or problem sets in advance and these will be discussed in class. You will then have time during the module Support and Feedback class to work through a new set of questions, usually in groups and with the help of the tutor, before presenting answers to the rest of the class. We try to keep the number of students in these classes as small as possible so that your needs can be accommodated.
  • Pieces of non-assessed work, in addition to assessed work and tests, are collected periodically and feedback on these is given by tutors.
  • Tutors and lecturers are accessible by email and available for both online and face-to-face Advice and Feedback hours to receive and respond to individual clarification questions.
  • A number of modules run online blogs or forums through which lecturers and tutors can respond to issues that you raise.
  • Where you wish to have feedback on more general issues beyond module-specific questions, feedback can be obtained from a variety of sources including the UG Office, the Director of Undergraduate Studies, your Personal Tutor, the Senior Tutor, the Year Tutors, and the Director of Student Engagement and Progression.

Querying assessment marks

University regulations state that you may not query a mark awarded on a piece of assessed work, including an examination, on the basis of academic judgement. We will reject any requests by you to have your work reviewed on the basis that you disagree with the marker’s evaluation of your performance, whether it is based on the mark or the feedback. You are entitled to approach the module leader or lecturer to discuss your performance in the assessment, but please note what you must do prior to this, as outlined in the previous sectionLink opens in a new window. However, you are not permitted to ask your lecturer or tutor to re-read your work or comment on the mark/feedback and certainly not to lobby for a re-mark.

If you believe that the marks for a piece of coursework (not an exam) in a module run by the Department of Economics have been totalled incorrectly, you are permitted to request an arithmetic check on the paper. We have the right, after such an arithmetic check, to adjust the mark upwards or downwards.

Should you wish to request an arithmetic check of your marks for an assessment (not an exam), please complete an Assessed Work Mark Check form, which is available from the useful forms section. You should email it, together with the marked copy of the assessed work in question, to the UG Office within seven working days of the date the marked assessment was made available for you to view. We will then carry out a check of the marks. If no discrepancy is found, you will be advised of this. You will be advised that there is no right to a further check or questioning of marks. Should a discrepancy be discovered, we will calculate the correct mark for the work and adjust this on our systems. You will then be contacted and emailed with a copy of your assessed work with the corrected mark annotated on it.


You must provide a general bibliography at the end of your essay, listing all the works (and people) you consulted when researching the essay. Do not omit any sources. Do not ‘pad out’ the bibliography with works you have not consulted.

Correct referencing is important. To quote facts, figures, theories and theorems without accrediting their original source is an academic malpractice as well as being plagiarism. Direct quotations and results must be footnoted stating the author, publication or book, date and page or table number. If you rework published data or use it as the basis of your own calculations, you must identify the source in the same way. If you paraphrase the arguments or theories of other people you should again acknowledge the source in a footnote. Footnotes should be listed at the end of your essay, term paper or project. The following are three examples of the form of the footnotes.

  • Layard, R. How to Beat Unemployment, Oxford University Press, 1986, page 34.
  • Based on Feinstein C.H., “Capital Formation in Great Britain”, in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, P. Mathias and M.M. Postan (eds.),Cambridge 1978, page 29, table 2.
  • de Meza, D. and Webb, D. “Risk, Adverse Selection and Capital Market Failure” Economic Journal Volume 100, March 1990, pages 206-14.

In practice, you may find that some of the theories you mention have passed into the public domain and appear in any number of textbooks. Hence, it is not necessary to reference statements like: “Economic theory suggests that demand curves for normal goods are negatively sloped.”

However, any textbooks you use should be listed in the bibliography at the end of the essay, term paper or project. The bibliography should include all books and articles referred to in the particular piece of assessed work. Where tables of data are presented the source of the data should be stated at the foot of the table.

For further information on Plagiarism, you can refer to the online Plagiarism Tutorial on Moodle.Link opens in a new window


A significant proportion of your assessment will be in the form of University examinations. In 2023/24 we are planning for students to take their exams in person, though they will still be online. This means, you will have a set start time and will be given a location where your exam will take place, but the exam will be online. Some exams may be online but not in a set location, meaning you will need to find a quiet space where you can take your exam. Please note that we are still awaiting University approval for in person online exams and this will be confirmed at a later date.

For on campus exams, you are required to bring your student ID card and place it on your desk, so that your identity can be checked during the examination. You should avoid bringing a bag with you to the examination room, as you will not be permitted to bring it into the exam with you. The use of PDAs or mobile phones, or any other hand-held devices that facilitate wireless communication is not normally permissible in examination conditions. The exception may be if you are required to take and upload photos of diagrams/mathematical equations as part of your exams. You will be told what devices, if any, are permitted prior to any exam. If you are found to have an electronic device in an examination or test that is not permitted, even if it is switched off and hasn't been used, the penalty will normally be a mark of 0% on that examination and can be even more severe.

Whether you have an online or an in person exam, the exams will be timetabled and will start at set times. The exam timetable is normally published towards the end of the Easter vacation or at the start of the summer term.

Examination dates and timetable

For undergraduate students, there are two examination periods, with the main exams being held in May/June and resit exams held in September. For more information on the exam periods, please see the Examinations Office websiteLink opens in a new window. Please note that undergraduate exams are scheduled centrally by the Examinations Office and, as such, the Department has no control over which exams are held on which day.

It is your responsibility to check the date and time of your exams and ensure you log on to the University's exams platform at the correct time. Exams usually start at a set time (either 9.30am GMT/BST or 2pm GMT/BST) and have to be completed by a set time. You must start your exam at the time stated. If you start after this time, you will be deemed to have started late and you will not receive the full duration of your exam. If you miss an exam, you are not permitted to sit at a later time and you will be marked as absent.

Special arrangements for exams

If you have a properly-documented and approved need for special arrangements for your examinations (e.g. you are allowed extra time to compensate for a condition) then these arrangements can be made. If your condition will last more than 12 months, typically evidence will be provided by Disability Services. But you do still need to notify us when asked to do so - otherwise late requests may not be granted. If you have a serious condition which will affect you sitting an exam but it will last less than 12 months, you will need to send medical evidence from a doctor or hospital to the UG Office. If it is in a language other than English then an official translation is required. You must contact Disability Services by the end of the spring term to register for special arrangements. Please check the Student Administrative Services websiteLink opens in a new window for specific dates.

Please contact the UG Office with the details of any special arrangement requests.

Good practice in online examinations

To maximise your chances of success in an online examination, there are a number of things that you must do:

  • Familiarise yourself with the instructions on the University's platform for each of your examinations and ensure that you follow them when completing your exam paper.
  • Answer the correct number of questions. If you answer more than the required number the department will mark the questions in the order that they appear, up to the required number of questions in each section.
  • Fill in the question numbers on the required page.
  • Ensure you only upload the required number of documents and in the correct format.
  • You can upload your work during the exam, so you have a record of your work and we recommend that you do so.
  • Check the last file that you upload to ensure that it is the version you want marked - if you upload an incorrect version we will only mark that one. If you upload a blank or corrupt file you will receive a mark of zero. It is your responsibility to check that you have uploaded the correct document to the correct module.
  • Try to ensure that your file size does not exceed 10MB.
  • Ensure that any images you insert have been compressed (following the department's guidanceLink opens in a new window), and are visible on the paper, images that cannot be seen clearly or are cropped might not be marked.

Other pointers for good practice in examinations, include:

Examination Feedback

We want to assure you that the marking and moderation for all our examinations is fair, consistent, robust and reliable and hence give you confidence that when you receive a mark, the mark has been arrived at following a detailed and rigorous process. All examination scripts have a first marker and a moderator and undergo a further administrative check to ensure the marks have been totalled correctly. All results are considered by a Board of Examiners. Further details regarding the assessment procedures in the Department can be found on the Department's Assessment and Feedback webpages.

Following the decisions of the Exam Board all marks and decisions are passed onto the University and will be available to be viewed on Tabula.

Following the September examination period, you will be provided with feedback from the summer examinations:

  • The exam paper for each of your modules;
  • Summary statistics for each of your modules, showing the range of mark classifications for the exam paper ;
  • A cumulative distribution function for the exam paper for each of your modules;
  • Summary statistics per each exam question that you attempted for each of your modules,
  • For all modules, and for the questions you attempted, the module leader’s comments per question on the areas on which the cohort generally did well and not so well.
  • For all modules, the module leader’s comments on the kind of answers that may have scored highly in this exam paper, or other guidance on assessment criteria.
  • Bottom line solutions to quantitative papers will also be provided as a further form of feedback.

All feedback will be provided after the September examination period so that no student is advantaged and the feedback will be available for a limited period of time. The feedback is there for you to reflect on your performance, but you are not permitted to discuss the feedback with any member of staff.

Please be aware that for modules with small numbers of registrations, data will be withheld in order not to breach anonymity, consequently we are not providing feedback on Special Syllabus papers, modules with less than ten students and the September exam papers.

If you are a student in the Economics Department, you will automatically be sent a copy of your exam script, if and only if you have failed a module and must resit it in order to progress to the next year. No other exam scripts will be made available to students. Class tutors and lecturers will not be able to provide further individual feedback or explanations and you will not be able to use the script to challenge marks. Please note that the moderation process may have had the effect that the final mark on your script does not coincide exactly with the marks given to each part.

While you may appeal against an exam board decision, there is no provision under the University guidelines for you to challenge the academic judgement of the examiners or to dispute the marks awarded in individual modules or pieces of work.

If you have any concerns or feedback about the examination process then please contact the Examinations Coordinator in the first instance:

Examination boards

The Board of Examiners comprises a subset of full-time members of the academic staff in the Department of Economics and one external examiner appointed by the Senate. The Board, chaired by the Head of Department, makes recommendations that are subject to confirmation by the Senate.

External examiners are experienced senior academics from other universities whose role is to monitor our standards, to advise us on issues including borderline cases, and to act generally as independent arbiters and scrutineers to ensure that the Board’s decisions are fair. Please note that all marks are provisional and may be raised or lowered by the Exam Board.

Exam Board Decisions

The following are guidelines only and the Board of Examiners reserves the right to exercise its discretion in individual cases.

You will (full-time) normally take four full modules in one academic year. One full module can consist of two half-weight modules: in such a case the average of the marks for the half module counts as the mark for the full module.

  1. To pass the Diploma

    Aim:To broadly achieve at least a third class honours standard.
    Guidelines:(i) Pass (> 40%) at least 90 CATS
    (ii) An average mark of 40.0% or better over 120 CATS
  2. To pass the Diploma and satisfy the standard to proceed to the MSc

    Aim:Normally you would be required to achieve at least an upper second class honours standard
    Guidelines:(i) Pass (> 40%) at least 90 CATS
    (ii) An average mark of 58.0% or better over 120 CATS
    (iii) A mark of 60.0% or better on at least 60 CATS
  3. Resitting Students

    Normally resit marks will be based on the combined exam and assessment weights, and the total mark will be capped at 40%.

It is a requirement if you wish to proceed to the MSc that you must pass the Diploma at the first attempt and achieve the necessary higher marks outlined in (i), (ii) and (iii).

You will be notified by email when exam results are available with information on how to access them. Compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (2018) means that we will not give out examination or assessment marks over the telephone or to any third party without your prior written permission.

Mitigating circumstances

Detailed guidance on how to submit a case for mitigating circumstances and the evidence required to substantiate a case is available hereLink opens in a new window.

Mitigating circumstances are defined as:

  • Situations that the student could not have predicted and had no control over (e.g. serious illness, death of someone close, being the victim of crime, family difficulties and financial hardship);
  • Situations with negative impact on the student’s ability to undertake assessments/examinations which are independently evidenced in a timely fashion; (e.g. doctor’s note during illness showing duration and level of negative impact);
  • Situations that are acute or short term, the timing of which are relevant to the impact on study (normally within three weeks of the relevant assessment event deadline).

Mitigating Circumstances must be submitted to the Department using the personal circumstances portal in Tabula.


Where you are applying for an extension to a coursework deadline because of mitigating circumstances, you must apply as soon as possible and ideally before the submission deadline. All mitigating evidence related to exams should be submitted no later than five working days following the affected exam. All other mitigating circumstances claims must be submitted as soon as possible and no later than 3rd June 2024 for Diploma students.

The University expects that all mitigating evidence is brought to the Department’s attention in a timely manner, despite the discomfort you might feel in so doing. The Department will do all it can to support you in difficult situations. You should be aware that mitigating circumstances not submitted by the relevant deadline cannot be considered by the Department and may only be considered by an Academic Appeals Committee as part of an academic appealLink opens in a new window and then will only be considered if there is detailed and convincing explanation for why the evidence was not supplied in a timely manner.

Medical evidence

Evidence is a vital part of a mitigating circumstances submission. It must written by an independent qualified practitioner (letters from relatives are not acceptable); dated and written on headed or official notepaper and in English. If the letter is in another language students must provide both a copy of the original note and a certified translation into English. When requesting medical evidence to support your application for mitigation, you are advised to make clear to your doctor that the information will be shared with a number of people and to discuss with your doctor the most appropriate wording of the medical evidence.

Who to talk to

In order for your circumstances to be considered as mitigating by the Department, they must be conveyed formally to the Mitigating Circumstances Officer in the Department using the mitigating circumstances portal in Tabula. For UG students the Mitigating Circumstances Officer is the Student Support and Progression Officer.

We are aware that in some cultures it is considered shameful or embarrassing to disclose the details of these kinds of circumstance to those outside one’s family. This is not the case in the prevailing UK culture and you should be aware that the Department and the University are fully supportive of students in difficult circumstances and want to assist if at all possible. If you feel inhibited from talking to a Personal Tutor, Senior Tutor or Student Support and Progression Officer, you may also consider talking to a member of the SSLC, the Students’ Union, the Dean of Students or a member of staff in the Wellbeing and Student Support office for initial, informal advice. Be assured that we treat all information in a confidential manner and our electronic filing system is secure. If you believe that your mitigating circumstances submission contains sensitive personal information and/or highly confidential evidence, you may submit your mitigating circumstances marked “strictly confidential and for the attention of the Chair of the mitigating circumstances panel only”.

Exam anxiety

Exams are a stressful time for all students and hence you should expect to feel some degree of anxiety during the exam period. When taking an exam, it is not uncommon for students to feel a rising level of anxiety and to think that it is a panic attack. A panic attack during an exam will not be taken as a severe mitigating circumstance, unless:

  • the Department already has evidence to confirm that you have a history of similar anxiety and panic attacks and can provide medical evidence of this panic attack.
  • significant medical evidence can be provided that documents the symptoms of the panic attack during the exam and confirms that you would have been unable to complete the exam under the circumstances.

Mitigating Circumstances Panel

The Mitigating Circumstances Panel is Chaired by the Director of Undergraduate Studies and membership includes the Senior Tutor, the Deputy Director of Undergraduate Studies, the Deputy Director of Undergraduate Studies (Assessments), the Year Tutor, the Student Support and Progression Officer and an Programme Administrator. The panel has the following remit:

  • To consider details of applications for mitigating circumstances and make recommendations on the outcome of each application to the Board of Examiners.
  • To determine whether the circumstances submitted are acceptable grounds to grant mitigation and to grade them as rejected (R), mild (A), moderate (B) or severe (C).
  • To ensure that decisions are equitable and that there is consistency of treatment across cohorts.

Acute mitigation (e.g. for assessed work extension requests)

The Student Support and Progression Officer will review the mitigating circumstances in confidence and decide whether an extension or late submission penalty waiver is appropriate. A decision will normally be communicated to you within three working days. Detailed guidance on extension requests can be found hereLink opens in a new window.

Deferral of an Examination Period

If you have severe circumstances which mean that you will be unable to take assessments such as examinations during an official University examination period (e.g. January, June, Sept Examination period) you may request to defer the entire examinations period to the next available opportunity (for Undergraduates normally the September resit period).

Deferral of an examination period is governed by the University’s Deferral of Examination PolicyLink opens in a new window which was implemented for all undergraduate students from April 2020.

Students who need to apply for deferral will need to submit a mitigating circumstances application on tabula and discuss it with the senior tutor. Applications should be submitted at least five working days before the beginning of the exam period (i.e. the first exam in the exam period). Applications submitted within the five working days before the exam period may not be considered given any time constraints. Please refer to the policy to check if you are eligible for a deferral.

Possible action by the Exam Board

For severe mitigating circumstances the Exam Board might recommend the candidate sits examinations (as for the first time) in September or the following May/June or offer a further opportunity for re-examination. In the case of the Second Year Exam Board, it may be recommended that no action is required in terms of progress decisions, but the circumstances will be carried forward and be considered when determining the degree classification at a future meeting of the Board of Examiners. Please note that the Exam Board will not change any marks, whether module or average marks for any student, even if there are mitigating circumstances. The role of the Exam Board is to determine progression and Degree Class.

If you sit an exam or test, you are declaring yourself fit to sit and cannot retrospectively submit evidence of a mitigating circumstance.

Reasonable Adjustments 

Long term chronic conditions (normally greater than a term in duration and that are likely to continue) and disabilities are dealt with under the reasonable adjustmentsLink opens in a new window (RAs) policy. However a significant deterioration of a permanent or chronic condition already reported and covered by reasonable adjustments, is classed as a mitigating circumstance. Guidance in relation to reasonable adjustments is available on the University web pages and is summarised below.

The Equality Act 2010Link opens in a new window requires the University to make reasonable adjustments where a candidate who is disabled (within the meaning of the Act), would be at a SUBSTANTIAL DISADVANTAGE in comparison to someone who is not disabled.

  • Noting ‘substantial’ is defined as ‘more than minor or trivial’ and that a disability is defined as ‘a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term negative effect on the ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’.
  • Students who have long term chronic conditions or disabilities and who believe they are entitled to reasonable adjustments should in the first instance contact Disability Services or Mental Health and Wellbeing and request an appointmentLink opens in a new window to discuss their support requirements.
  • A reasonable adjustment may be unique to the individual and could include special examination arrangements, delayed deadlines but also alternative methods of assessments.
  • Any reasonable adjustments made are evidence based; students are required to supply appropriate and recent medical evidence, or, in the case of a specific learning difference such as dyslexia or dyspraxia, a full diagnostic assessment. The type of appropriate evidence required can be discussed with Disability Services or Mental Health and Wellbeing.
  • Once a student has met with Wellbeing Support Services, the adviser will contact the student's department and the Examinations Office (with their permission) to recommend any specific adjustments.
  • Reasonable adjustment recommendations for examinations must be made before the annual deadlines as set out by the Examinations Office on the Disability ServicesLink opens in a new window website. Recommendations that are made AFTER these deadlines will be handled under the Mitigating Circumstances Policy.
  • Recommendations to apply reasonable adjustments may include for the student to be able to complete assessments via alternative assessment methods; bearing in mind that academic or professional standards in relation to core competencies and assessed criteria still need to be met.
  • Further information on disabilities and reasonable adjustments can also be accessed in the University’s Disability PolicyLink opens in a new window.


If an Exam Board decides that your performance merits the award of a lower qualification than the one for which you were registered or does not merit the award of a qualification at all, you have certain rights of appeal within 10 days of notification. You are required to complete a form if you wish to appeal against the decision of the examiners for their course. Find out more about the appeals procedures at: opens in a new window

There is no right of appeal against the requirement to resubmit work or resit examinations.

Appeals may be made on one or more of the following grounds:

  1. There is evidence of exceptional circumstances that affected your performance which you were unable to present in time for the meeting of the Board of Examiners. In this instance, you are required to provide an explanation why the evidence was not available at the meeting of the Board of Examiners.
  2. There is evidence of procedural irregularity or unfair discrimination in the examination process.
  3. There is evidence of inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during your enrolment at the University. In this instance, you are required to explain why a complaint was not made at an earlier stage.

Appeals made on grounds covered by (1) or (3) will be rejected if you do not provide an explanation for the lack of availability of the evidence when the Board of Examiners reached its original decision.

If you have any queries about appeals please contact the Undergraduate Office:

Academic Integrity

What it Academic Integrity?

Academic integrity means committing to honesty in academic work, giving credit to the ideas of others, and being proud of our own achievements.

The Department follows the Academic Integrity FrameworkLink opens in a new window approved by the University. Students should ensure they are familiar with this framework, and with Regulation 11Link opens in a new window, which governs academic integrity at the university level.

The Department of Economics has a dedicated Academic Integrity webpageLink opens in a new window with detailed information and guidance on all aspects of Academic Integrity and Misconduct. We expect all our students to familiarise themselves with these pages.

The University also provides Moodle courses on Avoiding PlagiarismLink opens in a new window and Academic ReferencingLink opens in a new window. All students are expected to complete these.

A breach of academic integrity is called 'academic misconduct'. This term can include deliberate cheating, which Warwick's regulations define as 'an attempt to benefit oneself or another, by deceit or fraud... [including] reproducing one's own work or the work of others without proper acknowledgement'. However, a breach of academic integrity can occur, for example due to being in a rush to complete an assignment, or by not checking what’s being submitted.

Academic misconduct includes (this list is not exhaustive):

    • Plagiarism. Presenting someone else’s work or ideas as your own, this can include the use of shared/group notes;
    • Self-plagiarism. Submitting the same work (fully or partially) that you have already submitted for another assessment, unless this is permitted;
    • Taking a copy of another student’s work;
    • Passing someone your work to use as they see fit;
    • Collusion. Working with one or more other people on an assessment which is intended to be worked on and submitted individually;
    • Contract cheating. Where someone completes work for you, whether for remuneration or not, which is then submitted as your own (including use of essay mills or buying work online, including code);
    • Arranging for someone else to impersonate you by undertaking your assessment or examination, in person or otherwise;

      • Accessing, or attempting to access, unseen assessment materials in advance of an in-person or online examination, or to obtain or share unseen materials in advance of an in-person or online examination, or to facilitate such activities;
      • Submitting fraudulent mitigating circumstances claims or falsifying evidence in support of mitigating circumstances claims (this may also be considered a non-academic disciplinary matter);

      • Fabrication or falsification of research, including falsifying data, evidence or experimental results.

      Academic misconduct or poor practice?

      Warwick distinguishes between academic misconduct and poor academic practice.

      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)

       There is no penalty for poor academic practice: marks are not deducted, instead work is assessed under the marking criteria  (e.g., the University Marking Scales have an implicit expectation in respect of good academic practice). (A4.2 Regulation 11)

      Judgements about poor academic practice are academic judgements against which there is no appeal. (A4.3 Regulation 11)

      Should poor academic practice be identified in your work, the Department will provide you with resources to help you to improve on your academic practice skills. Please also see the section on Academic Referencing further on in this section of the Handbook.

      How we investigate suspected breaches of academic integrity

      The Department of Economics has an established process for investigating potential breaches of Academic Integrity. Once the Academic Integrity team receives a notification of possible misconduct, the Department's Academic Integrity Lead will determine the need for further investigation and whether the student will be required to attend a meeting of the Academic Conduct Panel (ACP). Please refer to the Department's dedicated Academic Integrity webpageLink opens in a new window for further information.

      In the event the investigation concerns a group work assessment, all students within the group will be asked to attend the Academic Conduct Panel, and penalties may be applied to all students within the group.

      Please note that the level of proof required for suspected academic misconduct to be found proven or not proven is the civil standard ‘the balance of probabilities’; that is, on the basis of the available evidence it is more likely than not that the student committed academic misconduct.

      Consequences of breaches of academic integrity

      Breaches of academic integrity are quite damaging. They damage the perpetrator, who does not learn how to be an economist, but learns how to be dishonest. They damage relations between tutors and students, because it generates suspicion. They damage all students when they leave Warwick, because such misconduct cases lower the reputation of a Warwick degree, which is perceived by employers as very high. They damage academic staff, who spend time policing the rules instead of teaching and researching.

      Breaches of academic integrity are regularly detected and penalised. The penalties are severe. The policies are strict even if it’s the first time your work has not met standards of academic integrity. The Department of Economics has a formalised range of penalties that we apply to cases where Academic Misconduct has been found, ranging from reductions in marks for specific parts of an assessment to up to a 100% reduction in mark for an assessment. Please refer to our dedicated webpage Link opens in a new windowfor further information.

      In 2022/23, the Department investigated 328 students (across UG and PG) for possible misconduct. 136 students were called to attend Academic Conduct Panels and 118 students had penalties applied to their assessments.

      Academic referencing

      It is important that you, no matter what your background is, familiarise yourself with the academic integrity approach used at Warwick. The fact that you may not have written essays before coming to this University, or that you may come from a different school system, are not acceptable excuses. You must take the initiative to ensure you have all the skills needed to produce good work as it is expected here, and the referencing and plagiarism tutorial that forms part of the PDM will help with this. Bear in mind that there will be slight differences between what departments require so do not assume that the approach will be exactly the same if you are taking a module in another department.

      There are numerous online resources to help you grasp proper academic referencing including the LibraryLink opens in a new window, The Centre for Student Careers & SkillsLink opens in a new window.

      We also have a dedicated Economics Librarian coming to the Department regularly that is available to help and guide students in need.

      If you are ever in doubt about referencing and avoiding plagiarism speak to your module leader/tutor or your personal tutor, before you submit your piece of work.

      When to acknowledge sources

      One of the most important skills to develop at university is the recognition of when you need to acknowledge a source. You should acknowledge a source:
      • when you quote directly using other people’s words. Text taken directly from someone else must always be in quotation marks. You are strongly advised to avoid this practice, which, if done repeatedly, demonstrates only copy-paste skills. Use your own words to show knowledge and understanding of the material.
      • when you paraphrase the ideas, arguments, or theories of others, including lecture material, in your own words.
      • when you use evidence from the work of others to support your own arguments.
      • when you rework published data or use it as the basis of your own calculations.
      • when you include charts, tables, and diagrams produced by other people. If the source you have taken the material from has been copied from someone else, you must reference both the original author and the source you have used yourself.
      • when you reuse material that comes from work you have previously submitted for assessment whether at Warwick or elsewhere.

      In each of these cases you need to incorporate a specific citation into the text or tables of your coursework. You must also include the source in your bibliography, but it’s not enough just to include the source in a bibliography or list of references at the end.

      Any textbooks you do use should be included as a reference in your bibliography at the end of your coursework. However, you do not need to give references for ideas and theories which have passed into the public domain and appear in any number of textbooks: for example “Economic theory suggests that demand curves for normal goods are negatively sloped.” The same logic means that you can refer to a vacuum cleaner as a hoover, even if it is made by Panasonic or Miele, because the Hoover Corporation failed to register its name as a trademark before it entered the public domain.

      Further guidance is provided in the Moodle course Introduction to Referencing.

      How to acknowledge sources

      There are many possible forms of citation. The one we favour takes the form of abbreviated references in the text (rather than footnotes or endnotes) coupled with a list of references with full detail at the end. Each text reference is limited to the author's last name, date of publication, and page reference. Some examples:

      (1) According to Howlett (1994, p. 3), the need for rapid mobilisation is a crucial reason why market institutions may not sufficiently adjust the allocation of resources to wartime priorities.

      (2) The original application of rational expectations to macroeconomics is usually attributed to Lucas (1972).

      (3) One theory argues the first industrial revolution occurred in Britain due to a unique combination of factor prices (Allen 2009).

      Avoid the use of footnotes to add extra comments and asides. If what you need to say matters it should go in the main text. If it doesn’t belong in the text, leave it out. If you are required to or choose to use footnotes as the means of referencing, you should include the full reference in the footnote, as well as in the bibliography.

      Common pitfalls in academic referencing

      Citations and references can be misused. Here are some points on which to take care:

      • An essay is an exercise in writing, not in using other people’s words. This means that, unless something is extremely effective, you should not quote. You can summarise the thoughts of others, but make sure that the writing is your own style. We want to know what you think.
      • Do not use citations as a substitute for argument. What gives your argument authority is logic and evidence, not the number of scholars you can find who agree with you, so don't pad the bibliography with material you haven't used. It will not impress the marker. The marker does want to know that you have read widely, but to read widely without understanding benefits no one. Using large quantities of references can sometimes actually signal to the marker that you do not really grasp the topic in detail. Use references selectively as proof of your good faith as a scholar, not to batter down disagreement or bury points of difficulty.
      • Only cite what you yourself have used. For example, you may read something that itself refers to another source. Thus Gordon (1998), Macroeconomics, p. 490, discussing excess volatility in aggregate consumption, refers to an article by Marjorie Flavin (1981) in the Journal of Political Economy.

      Suppose the point matters to your essay. Whom do you cite: Flavin or Gordon? If you cite only Flavin it makes you look good: here’s a student who seems to have gone into the subject in depth. But you run the risk of making an inappropriate citation: you have to trust Gordon; was his purpose in making the citation really the same as yours? The correct form is “Flavin (1981), cited by Gordon (1998, p. 490)”. That makes Gordon, not you, responsible should the citation prove incorrect or inappropriate. Better still, if the point really matters, go to the original reference and read it yourself. Then you can cite it confidently without risk of being caught out.

      It is particularly important to note when a table, chart, or diagram has been reused by someone you are citing. You must include the reference to the source you used but also show that the author(s) themselves took the material from someone else.

      Academic integrity advice and support

      The University provides comprehensive guidance on academic integrity and links to resources on the Academic Integrity website.Link opens in a new window

      If you have any questions on this, you should seek advice in good time from either the module leader, your module tutor, and/or your Personal Tutor. For advice on the Department's Academic Integrity Procedure, please refer to the Assistant Programmes Manager on opens in a new window.

      There is also a an Economics Department Academic Integrity pageLink opens in a new window, where you will find detailed information and guidance.