联系我们： 手动添加方式: 微信>添加朋友>企业微信联系人>13262280223 或者 QQ: 1483266981

Published September 3rd 2022
Assessment (non-exam) Brief
Module code/name MSIN0022 Mathematics Iii (Probability Theory)
Module leader name Rouba Ibrahim
Academic year 2022/23
Term 1
Assessment title Assignment 4
Individual/group assessment Individual
Submission deadlines: Students should submit all work by the published deadline date and time. Students
experiencing sudden or unexpected events beyond your control which impact your ability to complete assessed
work by the set deadlines may request mitigation via the extenuating circumstances procedure. Students with
disabilities or ongoing, long-term conditions should explore a Summary of Reasonable Adjustments.
Return and status of marked assessments: Students should expect to receive feedback within one calendar month
of the submission deadline, as per UCL guidelines. The module team will update you if there are delays through
unforeseen circumstances (e.g. ill health). All results when first published are provisional until confirmed by the
Examination Board.
Copyright Note to students: Copyright of this assessment brief is with UCL and the module leader(s) named above. If
this brief draws upon work by third parties (e.g. Case Study publishers) such third parties also hold copyright. It must
not be copied, reproduced, transferred, distributed, leased, licensed or shared any other individual(s) and/or
organisations, including web-based organisations, without permission of the copyright holder(s) at any point in time.
Academic Misconduct: Academic Misconduct is defined as any action or attempted action that may result in a
student obtaining an unfair academic advantage. Academic misconduct includes plagiarism, obtaining help
from/sharing work with others be they individuals and/or organisations or any other form of cheating. Refer to
Academic Manual Chapter 6, Section 9: Student Academic Misconduct Procedure – 9.2 Definitions.
Referencing: You must reference and provide full citation for ALL sources used, including articles, text books, lecture
slides and module materials. This includes any direct quotes and paraphrased text. If in doubt, reference it. If you
need further guidance on referencing please see UCL’s referencing tutorial for students. Failure to cite references
correctly may result in your work being referred to the Academic Misconduct Panel.
Content of this assessment brief
Section Content
A Core information
B Coursework brief and requirements
C Module learning outcomes covered in this assessment
D Groupwork instructions (if applicable)
E How your work is assessed
F Additional information
Published September 3rd 2022
Section A: Core information
Submission date 21/08/2023
Submission time 1pm
Assessment is marked out of: 100
% weighting of this assessment
within total module mark
5%
Maximum word count/page
length/duration
Insert maximum word count/page length/duration
Footnotes, appendices, tables,
figures, diagrams, charts included
in/excluded from word count/page
length
Footnotes and any significant textual content in tables, figures
etc. are included in the word count. Appendices should not be
included in this assignment report.
Bibliographies, reference lists
included in/excluded from word
count/page length
Bibliographies and reference lists are excluded from the word
count.
Penalty for exceeding word
count/page length
No specified maximum (and thus no penalty for exceeding)
Penalty for late submission Standard UCL penalties apply. Students should refer to Refer to
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/academic-manual/chapters/chapter-4-
assessment-framework-taught-programmes/section-3-module_xfffe_assessment#3.12
Submitting your assessment The assignment MUST be submitted to the module submission
link located within this module’s Moodle ‘Late Summer
Assessments’ tab by the specified deadline.
Anonymity of identity. Normally, all
submissions are anonymous unless
the nature of the submission is such
that anonymity is not appropriate,
illustratively as in presentations or
where minutes of group meetings
are required as part of a group work
submission
The nature of this assessment is such that anonymity is required.
Published September 3rd 2022
Section B: Assessment Brief and Requirements
Section C: Module Learning Outcomes covered in this
Assessment
This assessment contributes towards the achievement of the following stated module Learning
Outcomes as highlighted below:
Published September 3rd 2022
Section D: Groupwork Instructions (where
relevant/appropriate)
Specific requirements for groupwork are available here. If this section is blank, no specific requirements
for groupwork are applicable to this assessment.
Published September 3rd 2022
Published September 3rd 2022
Section E: How your work is assessed
Within each section of this assessment you may be assessed on the following aspects, as applicable and
appropriate to this assessment, and should thus consider these aspects when fulfilling the requirements of
each section:
The accuracy of any calculations required.
The strengths and quality of your overall analysis and evaluation;
Appropriate use of relevant theoretical models, concepts and frameworks;
The rationale and evidence that you provide in support of your arguments;
The credibility and viability of the evidenced conclusions/recommendations/plans of action
you put forward;
Structure and coherence of your considerations and reports;
Appropriate and relevant use of, as and where relevant and appropriate, real world examples,
academic materials and referenced sources. Any references should use either the Harvard OR
Vancouver referencing system (see References, Citations and Avoiding Plagiarism)
Academic judgement regarding the blend of scope, thrust and communication of ideas,
contentions, evidence, knowledge, arguments, conclusions.
Each assessment requirement(s) has allocated marks/weightings.
Student submissions are reviewed/scrutinised by an internal assessor and are available to an External
Examiner for further review/scrutiny before consideration by the relevant Examination Board.
It is not uncommon for some students to feel that their submissions deserve higher marks (irrespective of
whether they actually deserve higher marks). To help you assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of
your submission please refer to UCL Assessment Criteria Guidelines, located at
https://www.ucl.ac.uk/teaching-learning/sites/teaching-learning/files/migrated files/UCL_Assessment_Criteria_Guide.pdf
The above is an important link as it specifies the criteria for attaining 85% +, 70% to 84%, 60% to 69%, 50%
to 59%, 40% to 49%, below 40%.
You are strongly advised to not compare your mark with marks of other submissions from your student
colleagues. Each submission has its own range of characteristics which differ from others in terms of
breadth, scope, depth, insights, and subtleties and nuances. On the surface one submission may appear to
be similar to another but invariably, digging beneath the surface reveals a range of differing
characteristics.
Students who wish to request a review of a decision made by the Board of Examiners should refer to
the UCL Academic Appeals Procedure, taking note of the acceptable grounds for such appeals.
Note that the purpose of this procedure is not to dispute academic judgement – it is to ensure correct
application of UCL’s regulations and procedures. The appeals process is evidence-based and
circumstances must be supported by independent evidence.
Section F: Additional information from module leader
(as appropriate)
Any additional information is available here. If no additional information is included in this section, none are
applicable.
Published September 3rd 2022