Gå till huvudinnehållet
Lund University

Generic knowledge and skills (Portfolio) 12 hp MEPO003

General information

At the half-time review, the portfolio is assessed by the two opponents and by the assistant head of department responsible for research studies.

Two weeks before the seminar, along with the rest of the material, you should send the presentation version of your portfolio to the halfway opponents, by e-mail. If you are using Mahara, you should create a display page, and send it to the opponents in the form of a URL. If you are NOT using Mahara, the portfolio should be in pdf form.

When assessing the portfolio, half-time opponents use an assessment matrix, which is included in the certificate for the half-time review:

After the seminar:

The certificate, together with the presentation version of your portfolio (updated if you like), is to be sent to the assistant head of the department with responsibility for research studies.

How to present the portfolio

 
  • The half-time review is not an examination. You can’t “fail”. 
  • Instead: a possibility for you to get feedback on your progress (or lack thereof) and advice about the way forward. 
  • To maximize your chances to get relevant and constructive advice:
    • Keep course outcomes and assessment criteria at hand (what am I trying to demonstrate?). 
    • Give a frank and complete picture of your experience and competence so far. 
    • If you lack experience in one or several categories – make that clear. 
    • Be personal but not private.
  • Actively ask for feedback.
  • Document the feedback in your portfolio and revise your study plan accordingly!

What does a good display page look like?

  • Introduction/profile (very brief info on your background, time of admission, department and supervisors, type of PhD (part time/full time, subject, project)).
  • Clear structure (the twelve categories, numbered, with capital letters); easy to overview.
  • Layer 1: “panoramic” view (lists) 
    • Quick grasp of total experience. Empty categories?
  • Layer 2: reflective and descriptive texts + attachments.
    • More detailed description of experiences.
    • Documents to support your participation in various activities.
    • Documents that support your progress towards various goals (eg tasks completed as part of a course, evaluations and other docs that describe your impact).
    • Your reflections on various activities. Choose the ones that you think demonstrate progression/development.
  • Volume: there is no minimum or maximum. With the “layer” strategy, a lot of information can be included without loss of clarity.
  • Activate comment fields to make it easier for the reviewer to give feedback.

 

Example of a display page (Layer 1):

https://libguides.lub.lu.se/ld.php?content_id=32494604

Common feedback

Common feedback in the different categories

  • “Research process”: lacks description of challenges
  • “Research process”: experience from writing project plans lacking. Attachment of project plan missing.
  • ”Research methodology”: reflection on weaknesses and strengths of methods used missing.
  • ”Publication(s)”: large focus on generation of data rather than description of your role in each step of the publication process (choice of journal, writing cover letter, submit, write rebuttal…).
  • “Teacher training and experience”: lack of reflection on development as a teacher.
  • “Conference and seminars”:
    • Individual seminars not documented (18 required in total)
    • total experience of presenting (orally or poster) difficult to overview due to individual presentations only being mentioned inside a long text.
    • Impact/development when presenting not reflected upon
  • ” Cooperation with wider society” or ”Ethical issues”: no reflection on possible uses of results in society, and risks of such use.