Honours Guidelines (Program 3065)

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION

Program 3065, Honours in Food Science, provides students with the opportunity to pursue research-oriented study in some area of specialisation within the spectrum of food science and technology. Students will, through pursuit of this program, develop or enhance their skills in independent laboratory performance, literature search and synthesis, and written and oral communication. It also provides academic staff with a measure of the aptitude of students to pursue and ultimately describe independent, laboratory-based research, and consequently the likelihood of such students to gain scholarship support and to successfully pursue higher degree research.

2. PROGRAM OUTLINE

The major component of the program is the course FOOD9410 Honours Research Project. Within this course, students undertake a program of independent laboratory-based research, completing a review of the relevant literature, presenting seminars, and finishing with submission of a thesis-style report, based on their research findings. Further details of this course are outlined in Section 3. In addition, students must complete 6 UOC of courses relevant to their chosen area of study, which may or may not, but will normally be taken within Food Science and Technology. The course/s chosen will normally be negotiated between the student, supervisor and Program Authority. This additional coursework must be completed at a level satisfactory to the Program Authority.

3. RESEARCH PROJECT (FOOD9410)

While the candidate must fulfill other requirements for the program, as outlined above, the final Honours grade will be based solely on the marks gained for the components of the course FOOD9410 Research Project, as outlined below.

Literature Review - 10%

This item should be a critical review of the literature in the proposed area of research. The purpose of the review is to ensure that the Candidate has obtained and understands current knowledge in the area of the proposed research, and can therefore identify the deficiencies in knowledge to which the research will contribute. The Review tests the Candidate's ability to critically read the literature, and to organise (synthesise) the information derived from the literature in a well-structured, clearly written document. While the document should be objective, the Candidate's own opinions are welcomed, provided such opinions are based on the evidence presented. However, the Candidate should ensure that the ideas or opinions of others are not represented as their own!

The Supervisor may provide the Candidate with a short list of references as a starting point. The Candidate should use these references (i.e. the bibliographies) as well as other available resources (e.g. CD-ROM or Web-based database searches) to gather further literature for preparation of the Review. If some reference material is not readily available, the Candidate should consult the Supervisor to ascertain the usefulness of such material before instituting any action to obtain it, as significant costs may be incurred.

The review must be typed, using a minimum of 1.5 line spacing on A4 paper (one side only), allowing a 4 cm margin on the left and 2 cm on other edges. Using these layout guidelines, and as some measure of the quality of the document to be submitted, the review should be between 20 and 30 pages in length. In most cases, this length ensures a balance between breadth and depth of coverage and concise style. It must be handed to the Supervisor or the Course Coordinator within six weeks of commencement of the Honours program.

The document should begin with a title page, containing the title of the review, the program for which the document is being submitted, and name and ID number of the student. The body of the document should be divided under headings and sub-headings as deemed necessary to present the review in a structured and clearly flowing manner. The body of text should conclude with a statement summarising the current state of science in the area, defining the gaps in knowledge and justifying the contribution to be made in the research to be pursued. The whole document should finish with a complete list of references, presented in the style of such a list in a scientific journal relevant to the area of research; the selected journal should be indicated below the "References" heading in parentheses. Do NOT use numbers for citation of references in the text.

It is strongly suggested that each Candidate consult his/her supervisor during preparation of the Literature Review, to seek broad guidance as to the quality of the developing document (remember that this may take some time, due to overall commitments and the level of attention a draft review may require!). This does not mean the Supervisor will write the review for you! General advice on technical breadth and depth, style and grammar may be sought, but the review should still be the work of the Candidate.

The supervisor will constructively criticise and assess the Review as soon as possible after receipt. It will then be passed to another staff member who will also assess it as above. That staff member will usually (but not always) have expertise in the broad area or discipline of the research topic. The review, together with constructive criticisms and assessment, will be returned to the candidate. It is essential that the candidate discuss any criticisms with the Supervisor such that corrections can be made prior to inclusion in the Thesis.

Criteria for marking of the review will include clarity and use of English, structure of the review, critical nature of the review, synthesis of information, consistency in style and accurate citation and recording of references.

Review/Proposal Seminar - 10%

This seminar will be a 'symposium' style presentation, providing a precis or summary of the project area, based on the literature review, and a proposal of the research to be undertaken. The seminar will be given as soon as is practical after completion of the literature review, allowing sufficient time for preparation (at least two weeks). The seminar will be of 30 minutes total duration, consisting of 20-25 minutes for presentation and 5-10 minutes for questions.

An abstract, similar in style to that submitted for presentation at a scientific meeting (see example shown later in this document), must be prepared and made available to members of the audience immediately prior to the presentation.

It is strongly recommended that the Candidate consult with the Supervisor on preparation for the seminar, including content, use of audio-visual aids, and construction of the abstract. The Candidate should allow sufficient time for rehearsal once the seminar is prepared.

As many members of the Academic staff as are available will assess the seminar; a minimum of three staff will be involved. The assessment will be made using the criteria outlined on the mark sheet included at the end of this document.

Laboratory Performance - 20%

Each supervisor will make an assessment of the student/s under their supervision, with regard to the performance of the practical laboratory component of the project. Criteria to be assessed include commitment to the project (enthusiasm for, interest in the research), technical performance including Good Laboratory Practice, ability to think creatively and constructively, demonstration of initiative, resourcefulness and independence, and maintenance of a clear and accurate record of experimental work on a day-to-day basis.

With respect to the latter, students should maintain a record of their activities in the laboratory in one or more laboratory journals (day books). While it is not necessary to record every simple mundane technical detail (e.g. I streaked 10 cultures), all raw data, results AND any observations made should be recorded. The last is particularly important, as an unusual yet seemingly irrelevant and unimportant observation made one day, may become a significant finding in the context of further research.

These journals should not be folders of loose papers, but a bound book, to minimise the possibility of loss. It is strongly recommended that copies of records be made and kept completely separate from the laboratory copy, in case of fire, theft or accidental loss. Laboratory journals will be checked regularly and without notice by supervisors, and should thus be kept up-to-date at all times.

Research Seminar - 10%

This seminar is structured in essentially the same way as the Review Seminar, except that it deals with the outcome of the research project or some aspect of it, as appropriate. Consult the section on the Review Seminar for further detail.

Thesis-style Report - 50%

Students must prepare thesis-style document ("the thesis"), which reports in detail the background and approach to, and findings and interpretations of their research project. In general, the thesis will include the following sections:

Title Page
Consult a recent thesis for style

Declaration
The candidate must indicate that the work presented in the thesis is original, except where due reference is given in the text (such as literature citations). This section MUST be signed. Remember that UNSW has rules regarding plagiarism and academic misconduct, and this signed statement implies the student is not misrepresenting anyone else's work as their own.

Acknowledgements

Abstract (Summary)
In no more than a page, the Candidate should state the aim/s of the project, the research performed, especially the results (but may include a very brief description of major methods), and conclusions. This section should appear essentially as if prepared for a scientific paper.

Table of Contents
Provide a list of headings and sub-headings exactly as they appear in the text, along with the starting page number for each.

List of Tables (as required)
List of Figures (as required)

List of Abbreviations (as required)
A list of non-standard abbreviations should be included for easy cross-reference by the reader, standard abbreviations such as SI units, or those generally recognised as standard (e.g. DNA) should not be included. If in doubt, consult your supervisor, or the Instructions to Authors of a reputable Journal in your area.

Introduction
This section, usually 1-3 pages, provides the reader with an outline of the nature and significance of the problem to be investigated, and the way in which the Candidate intends to approach the problem, including broad approaches to experimental design. The aims and objectives of the work should be given.

Literature Review
This will be a revised version of the literature review prepared at the outset of the course.

Materials and Methods
The Candidate should present the materials, equipment and techniques used in their research in sufficient detail that another worker in the area could perform the same experiments. This means that any unusual item or something that may be considered to have a significant impact on the outcome of any experiment should be listed, while simple laboratory items (e.g. inoculating loop) need not be listed. Any published methods or minor modifications thereof need not be reproduced but a citation provided, although the minor modifications must be described. Any major modifications of established methods or newly developed methods must be described in full.

Results
Within the body of text, a concise presentation of results must be given. The results should be just that, a presentation of your observations from performance of your results. Interpretation is the province of the discussion. Depending on the nature of the results, they may be presented as text only, or include tables, graphs or images. The packaging of your results should be discussed with your supervisor. In addition, extensive results, such as raw data, may be presented in one or more Appendices.

Discussion (may be combined with Results)
This is perhaps the most important part of the thesis, as it informs the reader of your depth of understanding of what you have done in your research. You should critically discuss your results in relation to one another, including any limitations of the study, as well as and particularly in relation to the international published literature.

Conclusions
The body of the thesis should finish with a summary of the major findings of your research with respect to your original aims and objectives, and suggestions for further research stemming from your findings.

Bibliography/References
This section should be prepared in the same format as that used for the Literature Review, updated to take account of revision of the literature review and addition of references used elsewhere in the thesis. Ensure that all text citations match the list of references, and that the latter is consistent in style.

Appendices (as required)
For example, raw data that may be useful at a later date, but is not required immediately for the reader to interpret work in the body of the thesis.

Presentation can vary from this format. For example, if the project involves a compilation of discrete experiments rather than a series of linked experiments, it may be better to present the necessary sectional information (Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion) for each experiment within its own chapter.

Students are urged to consult a recent thesis for guidance on exact layout and technical aspects of final presentation of the thesis, such as binding. The Course Coordinator can also provide advice in this regard.

The supervisor and one other staff member will mark the thesis. The latter is usually someone who is familiar with the broad area of research (e.g. microbiology). However, this may not always be the case, and the student should take care to present the thesis as clearly as possible, such that a reader with a general scientific background, but not necessarily an expert in the area, should be able to understand the work. The criteria used in marking the thesis are given in the marking sheet attached to this document.

5. TIMING AND ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Timetable

Milestone	Timing
Commencement of Honours	Two weeks before Week 1, Session 1
Submission of Literature Review	End of Week 4, Session 1
Commencement of Benchwork	Immediately upon submission of the Literature Review
Review/Proposal Seminar	By end of Session 1
Completion of Benchwork	Four weeks before the end of Session 2
Research Seminar	By end of Session 2
Submission of Thesis	Two weeks after end of Session 2

Summary Allocation of Marks

Assessment item	Marked out of:	Percentage
Literature Review	100	10%
Review/Proposal Seminar	20	10%
Laboratory Performance	100	20%
Research Seminar	20	10%
Thesis	200	50%
TOTAL	440	100%

If there is any substantial discrepancy (>10% of any assessable item) between marks allocated by supervisor and assessor/s, a further, independent assessor will be assigned by the Course/Program Coordinator (or Head of School, if the Coordinator is involved). After submission of the additional mark, the Course Coordinator/Program Authority will make a decision on the final mark to be allocated and that decision will be FINAL.

Honours grade allocation

Percentage mark	Honours grade
85-100%	I
75-84%	II, Division I
65-74%	II, Division II
64 and below	Pass

6. CONCLUSION

If after reading this document you have any questions or need any further information regarding Course 3065, consult the Course Coordinator, or the Program Authority.  

[This page revised August 2006]

SAMPLE ABSTRACT

Characterisation of Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Infantis isolates by ribotyping
A.L. SARTOR¹, J.M. COX² & J.B. WOOLCOCK^1
1Department of Microbiology, The University of Queensland, Brisbane Queensland 4072, and ²Department of Food Science and Technology, the University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052

Salmonella Infantis is a common cause of human salmonellosis in Australia. A point-in-time survey of randomly chosen layer farms in south-east Queensland found S. Infantis to be the most widespread Salmonella serovar, suggesting a link between eggs and human illness. In order to further investigate this relationship, a molecular epidemiological study was performed, using ribotyping and 130 isolates from various sources. Chromosomal DNA was extracted from each isolate and digested with a restriction endonuclease, either EcoR1 or Ban I. After gel electrophoresis of the digests, and transfer from the gel to nylon membrane, DNA fragments were hybridised with a DIG-labelled 16S rDNA probe. Sixteen different patterns of bands (ribotypes) were obtained using Eco R1 digestion, although 81% of isolates were clustered in four ribotypes. Ribotyping did not provide a clear indication of the relationship between human and poultry isolates.

Food Science and Technology
THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
FOOD9410 Research Project
SEMINAR MARKING SHEET

Student Name and ID:

Supervisor:

Assessor:

Speaker's ability
For example - is the speaker loud enough, clear enough, does the speaker address the audience, handle questions well?

Visual aids
For example - does the speaker make good use of visual aids (overheads, slides, Powerpoint, etc.), are the visual aids well-constructed (font size, etc.)? Technical content
For example - did the speaker structure and present the material in a logical manner, was the level of detail too much, too little or just right?

Overall mark (/20)

Food Science and Technology
THE UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES
FOOD9410 Research Project
THESIS MARKING SHEET

Student Name and ID:

Supervisor:

Assessor:

Criterion	Allocation	Mark
Scientific/technical merit
Has the literature been adequately and critically reviewed	20
Are the methods sound and adequately described	10
Is experimental design sound and appropriate	10
Have experimental data been clearly interpreted and discussed	40
Is the study novel; does it contribute significant new knowledge	10
Is relevance of the work to the broader community discussed	10
TOTAL	100
Presentation
Are the objectives and significance of the work clearly presented	10
Is the text clear in organisation and expression	20
Is the text grammatically sound	20
Are Tables and Figures used judiciously and adequately presented	20
Are citations and references accurate and consistent in style	20
Has the thesis been adequately proof-read	10
TOTAL	100

General comments:

Final overall mark (/100):

Top of Page