Skip to main content Skip to navigation

3: Assessment

Assessment

In this section of the Handbook, we will provide information about the assessment methods that are 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 our Assessment and Feedback webpage. In particular, here you will find a link to the Department's Assessment Strategy.

We have always been focused on enhancing teaching and learning. Through the richness of the curricula and syllabi, you are able to develop a range of skills, capacities and capabilities, which are designed to meet the aims and learning objectives of the courses and modules. It is appropriate that different learning objectives are assessed in different ways and this is reflected in a wide variety of types of assessment.

As a Department we are mindful of the different academic backgrounds of our students. We are aware that the UK higher education system may be very different to systems in which you have previously studied. With this in mind, we do our best to help familiarize you with the academic culture in the UK, particularly around how learning takes place in lectures and classes, approaches to assessment, expected standards of work, marking and plagiarism.

You will receive feedback on your work in a variety of ways and it we encourage you to make use of all opportunities for feedback, as a means of developing your skills, reflecting on your work and enhancing your student experience.

Assessment methods

The assessment methods for each core MSc module are summarised in the table below. Assessment methods for optional modules can be viewed on the relevant module webpageLink opens in a new window.

Name and Code of ModuleAssessment (weight)Exam (weight)

EC901
Microeconomics A

Test 1 and 2 (5% each)Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)

EC9D3
Microeconomics B

Test 1 and 2 (5% each)

Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)

EC9D4
Macroeconomics A

Test 1 and 2 (5% each)


Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)

EC9D5
Macroeconomics B

Test 1 and 2 (5% each)
Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)
EC902 Quantitative Methods: Econometrics A

Test 1 (4%) and Test 2 (6%) for Introductory Maths and Statistics

Test 3 (10%)

Group project (25%)

Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in May (55%)
EC910 Quantitative Methods: Econometrics B

Test 1 (4%) and Test 2 (6%) for Introductory Maths and Statistics

Test 3 (10%)

Group project (25%)

Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in May (55%)
EC959 DissertationProposal (1000 words) submitted at the end of June (10%) and Dissertation (8,000 words) submitted in September (90%) 
Various EC-coded optional modulesSome modules have assessed courseworkExaminations in May

For MSc BES Economics Track students:

Name and Code of ModuleAssessment (weight)Exam (weight)
EC901
Microeconomics A
Test 1 and 2 (5% each)Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)
EC9D3
Microeconomics B
Test 1 and 2 (5% each)
Three-hour examination (plus 15 minutes reading time) in January (90%)
EC907 Quantitative Methods: Econometrics A (for MSc BES Economics Track students)

Test 1 (8%) and Test 2 (12%) for Introductory Maths and Statistics

Test 3 (20%)

Two-hour examination in May (60%)
EC987 Quantitative Methods: Econometrics B (for MSc BES Economics Track students)

Test 1 (8%) and Test 2 (12%) for Introductory Maths and Statistics

Test 3 (20%)

Two-hour examination in May (60%)
PS922 Issues in Psychological ScienceThree Class Tests (11% each), Modelling Assignment (67%) 
PS923 Methods and Analysis in Behavioural ScienceTwo Assignments (36% each), Weekly brief assessments (16%), Presentation (12%) 
PS916 ProjectProject (20,000 words) submitted in August (100%) 
Various optional modulesSome modules have assessed coursework Examinations in May

Marking criteria

The pass mark for all MSc modules is 50%. Listed below is the criteria we use in the Department of Economics for marking work on the MSc.


80 PLUS

An outstanding piece of work, showing complete mastery of the subject, with an exceptionally developed and mature ability to analyse, synthesise and apply concepts, models and techniques. All requirements of the set work are covered, and work is free from errors. The work demonstrates originality of thought, with strong critical reflection and the ability to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are explained with great lucidity and in an extremely organised manner.


70-79

An excellent piece of work, showing mastery of the subject, with a highly developed and mature ability to analyse, synthesise and apply concepts, models and techniques. All requirements of the set work are covered and work is free from all but very minor errors. There is good critical reflection and the ability to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are explained very clearly and in a highly organised manner.


60-69

A good piece of work, showing a sound grasp of the subject. A good attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of concepts, models and techniques. Most requirements of the set work are covered, but there may be a few gaps leading to some errors. There is some critical reflection and a reasonable attempt is made to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are explained clearly and in a well organised manner, with some minor exceptions.


50-59

A satisfactory piece of work, showing a grasp of major areas of the subject, but probably with areas of ignorance. Analysis, synthesis and application of concepts, models and techniques is mechanical, with a heavy reliance on course materials. The requirements of the set work are covered but with significant gaps. Little or no critical reflection and limited ability to tackle questions or issues not previously encountered. Ideas are explained adequately but with some confusion and lack of organisation.


40-49

A failing piece of work. There is a weak attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of concepts, models and techniques. Only some of the requirements of the set work are covered. Inability to reflect critically and difficulty in beginning to address questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are poorly explained and organised.


Below 40

A failing piece of work. There are extremely serious gaps in knowledge of the subject, and many areas of confusion. Few or none of the requirements of the set work are covered. The student has failed to engage seriously with the subject and finds it impossible to begin to address questions and issues not previously encountered. The levels of expression and organisation in the work are very inadequate.

Coursework and tests

We aim to give you the opportunity to reflect on your development and progress as you proceed through your degree at Warwick. Much of your time here will be spent engaged in coursework. This includes locating information, taking notes, carrying out calculations and analysis, preparing reports for class discussions, completing exercises, and writing essays and projects. To this end, we use a variety of different types of assessments.

Assessed and non-assessed coursework

Coursework can be either 'assessed' or 'non-assessed'.

Most assessments will give a mark that contributes to your final module mark. These assessments are called 'summative' and they define the progress you have made towards the module's learning objectives. However, some coursework is informally assessed, and we call these 'formative' assessments, which provide you with feedback on your progress and advice on how to maintain or improve it.

Assessment often combines both formative and summative elements, for example, when work is returned to you with a mark and feedback of one form or another. Only in exams is assessment purely summative, though generic examination feedback is provided after the September exam period.

We give you exercise sheets and problem sets on modules to provide you with more continuous feedback on how you are performing against the standards we set and to allow you to reflect on your progress.

Non-assessed coursework is not less important than assessed coursework, and is just as compulsory, forming an essential part of the learning process in all modules. You will benefit from it intellectually, psychologically, and in your examination performance. You need to submit all work, whether formal or informal, by the deadlines set. Working to deadlines is a skill which employers look for from graduates.

Make sure you use module Support and Feedback classes as well as Advice and Feedback hours to help you prepare for your assessments.

Deadlines

Each piece of work must be submitted by a particular date set by the Postgraduate Office and module leader. You will be given notice of these deadlines; the Department’s guidance to markers specifies a minimum of four term-time weeks between work being set and submitted. It is your responsibility to arrange your own programme 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, IT problems and so on.

Please note that the submission deadlines and test dates can be found in TabulaLink opens in a new window.

Word limit

You should remember that work is judged on quality rather than quantity and word limits must be adhered to. If you feel, however, that you can say what you want 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.

Bibliography

Include a complete reference list (bibliography) at the end of your essay. It should contain all references that you cite in the text; no more and no less. Markers are wise to ‘bibliography padding’: including references that have not been cited in order to make the essay appear better researched.

In Economics we recommend using the Harvard referencing style. If you choose to use a different style, you must please do so consistently within any particular assignment. More information on how to use the Harvard referencing style can be found on the university library’s webpage for Economics - Referencing.

Your reference list should be sorted alphanumerically: by author(s)'s last name(s) and then publication date. The book or journal title should be italicized with the title of the article or chapter in single quotation marks. This in accordance with the principle that the library catalogue entry gets italicised. The place of publication and publisher should be included when referencing published books. When citing an article (chapter) you should also include the page number range (first and last) for that article in the journal (book).

Here are a few examples:

  1. Reference list entry for a book:

Allen, R. (2009) The British Industrial Revolution in Global Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  1. Reference list entry for a chapter in an edited book:

Howlett, W.P. (1994) ‘The Wartime Economy, 1939-1945’, in Floud, R. and McCloskey, D. (eds) The Economic History of Britain Since 1700: Vol. 3. 1700-1860. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-31.

  1. Reference list entry for a journal article:

Lucas, R.E. (1972) ‘Expectations and the Neutrality of Money’, Journal of Economic Theory, 4, pp. 103-24.

Methods of submission

You should submit assessed coursework via electronic submission in Tabula.

You can submit your work electronically up until 12 noon 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 11:00 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 reason for late submission.

It is your responsibility to check carefully that you have uploaded the correct file via e-submission. Failure to upload the correct file will result in a penalty of five marks per day until the correct file is produced. Penalties only accrue on working days (not weekends or public holidays).

Here are some key points to follow to ensure you don't make a mistake:

  • You must ensure your document includes your student ID number, but not your name, as all marking is carried out anonymously. You should also include the final word count.
  • The assignment must be a 100% electronic submission and so any object such as graphs, figures or equations will have to be incorporated into your electronic document.
  • To submit your document online, you will need to create a PDF document. You can download a copy of the free software ‘PDF ConverterLink opens in a new window’ from ITS and follow the instructions. Alternatively, on a Warwick PC go into Software Center and install Power PDF. You will then be able to create a PDF within Word by choosing the Nuance PDF tab and then selecting Create PDF. If you do not have any PDF software installed and can only use the Microsoft Word SaveAs PDF feature you MUST select the options button and then untick ‘Bitmap text when fonts may not be embedded’. If you do not the file will be unreadable and you will be asked to resubmit your work and may receive a late penalty.

  • Name the resultant PDF file as follows: module code-assignment number.pdf. For example EC924-a1.pdf would be the name for your first assignment for EC924 Monetary Economics.
  • Check the final document before uploading to ensure it has been converted accurately.
  • Double check that you are submitting the correct document and that you are submitting it to the correct module/assessment.
  • If you submit more than one document for your assignment these should be submitted simultaneously.
  • You must take care that you have logged into Tabula using your own username and that you are not logged in using a friend's account who has used the computer before you.

Self-certification

You can obtain a short deadline extension of up to 5 University working days for eligible assessed work without the need for evidence. Self-certification may only be used twice in an academic year and groupwork, presentations and tests are not eligible. You can view the full list of eligible assessments on our Self CertificationLink opens in a new window webpage. Please be aware that you can only apply for 1 self-certification per assessment and you can only self-certify a maximum of 5 days in advance of the assessment submission date.

You should submit your request using the personal circumstances portal in Tabula. If you make a request, you will be given a 5 working days extension to all eligible assessment deadlines that fall within the self-certification period. Further guidance on how to use the portal can be found on the self-certifyLink opens in a new window webpage. You can continue to request extensions on specific assignments using the specific extension procedure explained in the next section.

Specific deadline extensions

To seek a specific extension for assessed work you must make a request in TabulaLink opens in a new window via the Coursework Management portal. Please email economics.pgoffice@warwick.ac.ukLink opens in a new window if you have any difficulties. The Assistant Programmes Manager will consider extension requests for modules delivered by the Department of Economics. Any requests for extensions should be made in a timely manner and ideally by the assessment deadline. Requests must be supported by evidence, which should be submitted within 5 working days of making your request. Evidence that is in any other language than English must be accompanied by an official translation. Should there be an unexplained delay of more than one week before submitting your evidence we may not be able to agree to your extension request.

If you are taking an external module that does not use Tabula coursework management, then please submit a Mitigating Circumstances claim in Tabula and we will liaise with the delivering department. Students taking external modules who do not wish to disclose information outside their home department may contact their home department to request support for a specific extension request. Further details about mitigating circumstances for examinations are given in the Examinations section of the Handbook.

Any requests for extensions should be made in a timely manner and ideally by the assessment deadline. Requests must be supported by evidence, which should be submitted within 5 working days of making your request. Evidence that is in any other language than English must be accompanied by an official translation. Should there be an unexplained delay of more than one week before submitting your evidence we may not be able to agree to your extension request.

Extensions are not available for technological difficulties — you should anticipate that your hard drive may crash, your work may be destroyed by a virus, or that your laptop may get stolen. Make sure you back up to One Drive or your network disk space. Do not store your backup with your computer and definitely not in your laptop bag. Note also that extensions will not be granted on the basis of a student being in full- or part-time employment, or undertaking a summer internship.

For assessments that are spread out over a long period of time, such as dissertations, 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 will not be considered as a basis for an extension for this type of work.

Class tests

Many modules have mid-term tests, which are summative assessments that contribute to your final module mark. You can find details of the assessment weights for each Economics module on the module webpages. The timing of each test will be added to our timetableLink opens in a new window and on Tabula once they have been set. Most of the in-term tests will take place online, using various software and details will be provided to you.

If you require special arrangements for tests, please contact the Postgraduate Office to make us aware of this, providing the relevant documentation from Disability ServicesLink opens in a new window.

Mitigation for tests

The Department of Economics defines technical mitigating circumstances in a class test as those events which are you of your control; this might include (but is not limited to):

Mitigating EventEvidence Required
Loss of internet connectionDetailed timeline and description of events and screen shot of internet connection error message or IT Network Activity report.
Slow internet connectionDetailed timeline and description of events and internet test screen shot (taken within 1 day of event) OR departmental record of logging concerns relating to internet speed.
Examination submission system issues e.g., unable to accept file type or size, other file upload error, incorrect link or other information providedDetailed timeline and description of events and screenshot of file upload error message or IT upload data report.
Failure of computer or scanning equipmentDetailed timeline and description of events and screenshot, photograph or detailed description of equipment and when it was last known to be working.
Building related incidents (power cut, fire alarm, flood)Detailed timeline and description of events and photographs of event taken at the time e.g., being outside the building due to a fire alarm, building works having caused a flood etc.
Access issues to test delivery systemDetailed timeline and description of events and copy of emails or delivery system queries from the time of the test showing steps taken to resolve issues.

If you experience technical difficulties within the window of a test then you should contact the Postgraduate Office to see if the problem can be resolved. If the problem cannot be resolved then you should submit a mitigation application through your personal circumstances records on Tabula.

Please do not contact your personal tutor, or any member of academic staff with this information. The Department will not accept screen shots of your answers as a substitute for the official submitted answer sheet though the platform upon which the test is delivered. Examples of technical mitigating circumstances and evidence requirements are given in the table below.

The Department cannot grant an extension to a test or reschedule the date of any test. If you are unable to take a test, or your illness is of such long duration that it prevents you from submitting a piece of work within an appropriate extension, please submit an application for mitigating circumstances in Tabula with supporting evidence.

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. 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.

Waivers

If you have moderate or severe mitigating circumstances then it may be possible to waive a piece of assessment work. Waivers can only be applied to assessments where:

  • It is not possible to mitigate the circumstances via a deadline extension;
  • The assessment has a credit weighting of 3 credits or less;
  • The learning outcomes are covered in other assessments in the same module;
  • The assessment has not be awarded a mark above the pass mark;
  • The cumulative total of waived assessments will not be more than 6 credits for the academic year.

The overall module mark will be calculated as a weighted average of the remaining components (including the exams) for the module.

If your home department is not Economics, after you have applied through the Personal Circumstances section on Tabula, your home department must inform the Department of Economics whether your mitigating circumstances have been accepted.

If the credit weighting of the failed assessment is more than 3 credits, then the claim for mitigating circumstances will be considered by the Exam Board. You may be permitted a further opportunity to sit (as if for the first time) or resit a failed module, or the assessment may be discounted for the purpose of degree classification if there is evidence of severe mitigation and the assessment is not more than 30% of the weighted degree credit.

Late submission or failure to submit

Coursework submitted late will be marked subject to a penalty, unless an assessment deadline extension has previously been approved. All work submitted late (after 12.00 noon on the due date) will incur a five-mark penalty per day (not including weekends, University closure days and public holidays) with a minimum mark of zero for an assessment. Late work must be submitted by the original method of submission for that particular module.

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. 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.

A zero mark will be recorded when a candidate fails to present themselves for a test, or fails to submit an item of assessment for a module for which they have been registered.

Marking and moderation

A percentage mark will be awarded and recorded on each piece of assessed coursework. All marks that contribute towards degree credit 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 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.

Marks for all assessed work (excluding exams and the dissertation/project and some final coursework assessments) will normally be returned to you within 20 University working days of the submission deadline/test date through Tabula. Please note that this excludes weekends and other days when the University is closed. You will receive a notification when your mark is available in Tabula. All assessment and examinations marks are only provisional and will not become finalised until after the Exam Board.

Please also see the University Policy on the Provision of Feedback to Students on Assessed WorkLink opens in a new window.

Feedback on your assessed work

Learning is a dynamic process and feedback plays an important role in helping you to develop your knowledge and build confidence in your own abilities. Therefore, our aim is to provide you with as much feedback as is reasonably achievable, given the volume of students taught on any module. The Department takes very seriously the provision of feedback on assessed work. We are sensitive to the importance of this and have mechanisms in place to enhance the quality of the feedback on assessed work.

You will receive a written evaluation of your coursework on a range of relevant criteria including comprehension, analysis, critique and presentation. You may also receive written comments in the margins of your work. These 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.

Where relevant, the lecturer will provide generic feedback about what was expected, together with reflections on what students typically did well or where they might have struggled. You may also be provided with a mark distribution for the assessment (modules with 40 or more students).

If you are not satisfied with the quality of the feedback you have received, you should approach the module lecturer or tutor. However, prior to doing this, you must be able to demonstrate that you have reviewed your personal feedback, and any 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-read your assessment. If you still need more information, go to the Postgraduate Office, who will forward your request for more feedback to the Director of Graduate Studies (Taught Degrees).

Other types of feedback

There are many channels through which we aim to give feedback other than at the point of returning assessed work. Here are some of the different ways in which we provide you with feedback throughout your MSc course:

Solutions: Formative assessments (e.g., quizzes, tests and problem sets) may have a set of written solutions, which you should use to work back over the questions and learn from any mistakes.

Support and Feedback Classes: These feedback sessions are a prime opportunity to ask questions and generate discussion. Most classes are based on exercises or problem sets which should be prepared in advance. Time during classes is given to working through answers so that you can see what you did well and what less well. The solutions/guidance provided in class are an invaluable source of feedback. We try to keep the number of students in a class as small as possible so that each student’s needs can be accommodated.

Advice and Feedback Hours: These are an opportunity for you to meet with your lecturers and tutors on a one-to-one basis and receive invaluable feedback and guidance or simply discuss interesting topics.

Email: Tutors and lecturers are accessible by email to receive and respond to individual questions. Lecturers are often available at the end of lectures to respond to questions.

Past student performance: The performance of previous cohorts is given on each module webpageLink opens in a new window.

This academic year, online Forums hosted on Moodle will also be used by lecturers and tutors to engage into different discussion topics thus providing additional feedback throughout your learning journey.

If you wish to have feedback on more general issues beyond module-specific questions, feedback can be obtained from a variety of sources, including the Postgraduate Office, the Director of Graduate Studies (Taught Degrees), the Director of Student Engagement and Progression (PGT), or your Personal Tutor.

Querying of assessed work 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 PG 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.

Feedback and concerns

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.

If you have any concerns or feedback about the assessment process, then please contact the Programmes Manager in the first instance. Please see Section 5 for further information on your feedback to us and raising concerns.

Academic Integrity

What is 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 academic 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. 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 reference to the source you used but also show that the author 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 economics.integrity@warwick.ac.ukLink 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.