PART 6: FACULTY RESEARCH PAPER REGULATIONS

Article 1. Objectives

§1 A research Paper is the capstone of the Bachelor's degree programme and the academic bridging and preparatory programmes in which the student independently further develops and integrates the knowledge and skills built up in the various course units. 

§2 In contrast to the papers for some other course units, a research paper is an individual work. However, this does not exclude that several students may work on different aspects of the same broad subject, or that they may discuss their progress in group meetings.

Article 2. Method

2.1. Guidance

§1 Each student is guided by a supervisor (a member of the professorial staff or post-doctoral researcher / post-doctoral assistant). 

Assistants and scientific staff with the necessary experience and expertise and/or staff from other departments may also be involved in the supervision under the final responsibility of the supervisor.

§2At the start of the academic year (week 1), each programme publishes a document via the Research Paper UFORA sites in which the supervision modalities, expectations and interim deadlines for the research paper are clearly communicated.

§3 A supervisor may add additional deadlines to the communicated deadlines with regard specific steps when preparing the research paper. These are presented to students at the start of research paper process.

2.2. Choice of topic and supervisor

§4 Possible subjects and supervisors with relevant expertise are presented in the first week of the academic year, during, for example, an information session. This information will also be communicated via Ufora.  After the information session, students can obtain information from the supervisors about the proposed subjects. Students can, of course, also formulate a proposal themselves and submit it for approval to a supervisor.

§5 In order to be able to guarantee high-quality supervision of a research paper, the topic is situated as much as possible in the field / research domain of the supervisor. The aim is to ensure a solid distribution of the students among the various potential supervisors.

§6 Once a student has been allocated to a supervisor with a topic, and both have given their explicit approval, each student has confirm this choice via Plato. A student has to be linked to a topic and supervisor before the deadline expires. 

§7 Submission date 1th session: check the FSA website:
https://www.ugent.be/ps/en/education/administration/data.htm 

§8 Anyone who does not meet this deadline will be excluded from participation in the first session for the Research Paper. To participate in the second session you also have to register in Plato.

See also:
https://www.ugent.be/ps/en/education/administration/data.htm

2.3. Approval of research theme and supervisor

§9 The supervisor's approval (requested to submit the research theme) counts as approval of the proposal.

2.4. Submitting the Research Paper

§10 A research paper is to be submitted electronically  on Plato (pdf format). The supervisor can request a hard copy if necessary (two copies, printed on both sides, no plastic folders, covers or rings). The paper should be submitted according to the same modalities in the resit period. In order to enable further checks (e.g. conformity in terms of word count), students also have to keep a Word version of their master's dissertation available at all times

§11 If a research paper is not submitted before the specified date, the student concerned is not admissible for the deliberation, except in the case of force majeure (i.e. an event that has nothing to do with the student and that could not reasonably have been foreseen, prevented or overcome). The supervisor, in consultation with the chair of the examination committee, decides if the reason of force majeure is valid.

2.5. Oral defense

§12 Before anything else, the research paper consists of a written report. Programmes may choose to organise other (compulsory) components and, if necessary, assign marks to them (e.g. interim assignments and/or oral defence).

2.6 The evaluation procedure

§13 Each research paper will be evaluated by at least the supervisor. Programmes may choose to appoint a commissioner and develop further modalities for the final score, particularly in the event of certain grade differences.

§14 Assignments with regard to progress, if any, are evaluated by the supervisor.

The research papers in Political Science and Conflict and Development (Ba/SP/VBP) are also subject to a process evaluation. This accounts for 25% of the marks. Students have to pass both the process evaluation and the submitted paper.

2.7. Feedback

§15 Each student is entitled to feedback on his/her paper. After the examination results announcement of the first and/or second examination period,  a feedback opportunity will be provided.

Article 3. The format of the paper

3.1 General form requirements

§1 The specific content and format requirements are specified by the programme. At the beginning of the academic year, each programme clearly communicates its formal expectations regarding content, structure and formal requirements via UFORA. 

3.2 Structure

§2
a) Front pieces
- Title page (a standard title page is used. A template is made available on Ufora)
- Abstract (min. 150 words, max. 250 words, the language of the programme)
- Word Count

b) Recommended corpus. This usually consists of:

-Introduction (problem statement, research question, social and scientific relevance, etc.)
-Literature review, conceptual and theoretical framework
-Research design.
-Exploratory research (if applicable)
-Conclusions

c) Back pieces
- Bibliography - mandatory attachment
- Ethics/Data Management Plan (DMP, including AI form) - mandatory attachment
-Informative attachments (such as questionnaires)

3.3 Source reference

§3 The APA system has to be used for source reference (see APA manual on Ufora). In the bibliography, for each source used, the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) or another permanent link has to be added (where available) immediately after the reference (in APA format).

3.4 Size

§4 The length of the Research Paper shall be between the following minimum and maximum limits:

Article 4. Assessment criteria

§1 The assessment criteria are laid out in the Research Paper Assessment Form (see attachments). For the evaluation of the '"Education research paper", a separate rubric for the assessment of the educational (research) competences is to be completed.

Article 5. Originality, scientific transparency, language, plagiarism, ethics/data management plan and data availability

5.1. Originality and independence

§1 A research paper requires a certain originality and independence of the student. The student is expected to contribute to the academic knowledge of a theme on the basis of his own exploratory empirical research.

5.2. Scientific transparency

§2 In scientific work all assertions always have to be properly and clearly substantiated. Students have to enable the reader to follow the argumentation well and to estimate the scientific value and scope of each statement.

This means that for his or her own ideas the writer has to make clear how he / she constructed these ideas (one’s own experience, data collection (how was the data collected ?; where ?; when ?; etc.). With each use of the ideas or empirical findings of others, the writer has to refer to the source (s) used in an adequate manner. He / she also has to make a clear distinction between one's own summary / interpretation and the literal citation of a source. In the interests of transparency, it must always be clear to the reader which ideas or conclusions originate from the student and which from other authors.

5.3. Language of course Research paper

§3 A research paper is written in Dutch. Upon simple request and with the supervisor's approval, the research paper can also be written in English or French. When a research paper is written in English or French, a summary in Dutch is required.

Exception. The following research papers are written in English:
• Preparatory programme Sociology (EN)
• Preparation programme Conflict and Development studies(EN). The use of a language other than English may be approved upon reasoned request to the supervisor. If the research paper is written in a language other than English, a summary in English is mandatory (OER art 59).

5.4. Plagiarism

§4 With regard to irregularities with regard to a research paper / Master's dissertation, or with regard to other forms of (written) reporting, the Faculty has drawn up Faculty Plagiarism Regulations (see Part 9 of the EEC). Students have to follow these regulations thoroughly.

5.5 Ethics/Data Management Plan (DMP)

§5 A Research Paper has to include a properly completed data management plan and ethics form. The completed form is to be attached as the final document of the research paper (together with the references and other attachments). If an informed consent form is required, it should also be included. 
The DMP should be completed according to all relevant research dimensions (e.g. research design, data collection, analysis, etc.) that are explicitly discussed in the research paper, even if the research paper does not contain or discuss (self-collected) data. The form is to be completed in the same language in which the research paper is written. In this form, the student also briefly indicates whether/how generative AI was used.

5.6 Data availability 

§6 If the research paper already contains an empirical section, the supervisor of the research paper has to be granted read access to all data generated or processed by the student in the context of his/her research at all times until the end of the academic year in which the research paper is submitted. This applies to all stages of the entire process. Examples of such data are the following (non-exhaustive list):

-raw data such as interview recordings, survey data and field observation authenticity evidence

-(semi)processed data such as transcripts

-analyses (for example, output from coding software such as MaxQDA and SPSS)

Upon request of the supervisor, students have to make the files available. Depending on the nature of the files, this can be done by email (as an attachment), via a link to secure files on a site (such as Sharepoint) or by providing access to a certain application (for example, sharing a Qualtrics project).

When data is shared, the principals of confidentiality have to be adhered to (third parties do not have access). In addition, ranting this "read access" to the supervisor does not imply an automatic transfer of rights to this data.

Article 6. Progress process

6.1. Progress session guidance information

§1 The subject “Research Paper” comprises, on the one hand, progress sessions consisting of information sessions and (possibly graded) individual and/or collective work meetings and, on the other hand, the final product (the actual Research Paper) and, where applicable, the defence.

6.2 Communication

§2 At the beginning of the academic year, the programmes communicate the necessary information in writing, via UFORA, about, among other things:

- Date of the first information session(s);
- Administrative procedure for choosing a supervisor/topic;
- Collective work meetings (number, dates, etc.);
- All interim and final deadlines (including the conditions for deviating from them, e.g. because fieldwork, Erasmus or force majeure, etc.);
- Any assessment methods for the progress sessions (and alternative assessment in the event of illness or force majeure);
- Evaluation criteria for the various elements of the “Research Paper” course and their relative weighting;
- Procedures for the second examination period (e.g. regarding the transfer of partial marks to the second examination period)
- Procedures for individual supervision
- Procedures for feedback after the first and second examination periods

Article 7. Additional requirement for those who failed the research paper and have to resubmit it at a later time

Students who did not pass the research paper and who resubmit at a later date, have to add a separate document, in which they (a) provide an overview of the changes made, and in which they (b) indicate how they have taken the reports and the comments on the earlier version into account.