Advanced Module “Practical Semester”

Type of examination

The module examination is a 30-minute combined examination in which the study project is summarised on a scientific poster and presented in a talk followed by a discussion.

Formal and content requirements

The poster should meet common design standards and be produced in A0 format. Where you have the poster printed (e.g. at a copy shop or at the university computing centre) is up to you; the chair cannot reimburse printing costs. The poster presents your study project.

A typical structure is:

1 Introduction
2 Method
3 Results
4 Discussion

The reference list is not a separate section but should nevertheless appear on the poster. Bring the poster to the examination; do not send it to the examiners in advance.

Examination period

Examinations take place no earlier than 14 days after the end of the practical semester and before 31 March or 30 September respectively.

Aim of the examination

The examination documents the ability to adapt a research project flexibly to specific situations, to carry out a project competently, to analyse the data appropriately and to present and reflect on the results competently.

Prerequisites for participation

1. Successful completion of the Basic Module “Preparation for the Practical Semester” (project outline).
2. Confirmation, entered at the Centre for Teacher Education (ZfL), of participation in the ungraded review and perspectives meeting with your supervisors from the ZfsL and the school.
3. Certificate, entered at the ZfL, of at least 250 hours of training at school.

Registration and deregistration

Registration and deregistration for the module examination of the Advanced Module “Practical Semester” are handled by the ZfL.

Examination procedure

At least 14 days before the examination, submit your poster as an A3 printout (letterbox at Klosterstraße), as a PDF file and together with your data file (by e-mail). You arrange a 30-minute examination appointment with your examiner. In the examination, you have ten minutes to present your study project using your poster. This is followed by a 20-minute discussion on the conceptual, theoretical and methodological reflection of your project and on the current state of research in the field.

Assessment criteria

The grade very good is awarded for performance that is very clearly above the usual standard. The poster meets the highest standards. In the examination, students demonstrate extremely well-founded subject knowledge and respond very flexibly to critical questions. Based on a deep understanding of the subject, they integrate theoretical models and empirical findings at appropriate points and reflect on them at an exceptionally high level. Throughout the examination, they show an outstanding capacity for critical scientific thinking.

The grade good is awarded for performance that is clearly above the usual standard. The poster meets above-average standards. Students demonstrate well-founded subject knowledge and respond flexibly to critical questions. Based on a solid understanding of the subject, they integrate theoretical models and empirical findings at appropriate points and reflect on them at a high level. They show that they are capable of critical scientific thinking.

The grade satisfactory is awarded for performance that meets an acceptable standard. The poster meets satisfactory standards. Students demonstrate largely satisfactory subject knowledge and generally answer factual questions correctly. However, a deeper understanding of the subject and the capacity for critical scientific thinking are not consistently evident, and relating the content to common theoretical models and relevant empirical findings is sometimes difficult.

The grade sufficient is awarded for performance that meets a just acceptable standard. The poster meets moderate standards. Students demonstrate partly satisfactory subject knowledge and answer many factual questions correctly. However, a deeper understanding and the capacity for critical scientific thinking are often not evident, and students are only partly able to relate the content to common theoretical models and relevant empirical findings.

The grade insufficient is awarded for performance that does not meet an adequate standard. The poster meets only low standards. Students demonstrate some subject knowledge but with considerable gaps and answer only some factual questions correctly. A deeper understanding and the capacity for critical scientific thinking are not evident, and students are unable to relate the content to common theoretical models and relevant empirical findings.

The grade fail is awarded for performance of a completely inadequate standard. The poster does not meet acceptable standards. Students demonstrate no subject knowledge, cannot answer factual questions correctly and do not make use of support offered. No capacity for reflection or critical scientific thinking is evident.

Notification of results

Grades are announced after each examination. They are entered once all examinations have taken place, at the latest by the end of the semester.

Weighting

The module grade counts 12/120 towards the overall grade.

Resits

The examination can be repeated twice.