First (or ‘full’) reference to books, articles, and manuscript source may be given as in the following examples (you may choose between giving authors’ names exactly as in their works, and using initials-plus-surname for all authors), giving where relevant the specific page number(s) to which you are referring:Books:
Rosamond McKitterick, The Frankish kings and culture in the early middle ages
(Aldershot: Variorum, 1995).
A. T. Runnock, Medieval fortress building, new edn, 2 vols., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976), vol. I, pp.135-7. [Here ‘pp.135-7’ are the specific pages to which reference is being made; there is alternatively a different convention, of dropping the ‘p.’ or ‘pp.’ when a volume number is cited, as it is here.]G. S. Rousseau and Pat Rogers (eds.), The enduring legacy: Alexander Pope, tercentenary essays (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 44. [Here ‘p.44’ is the specific page to which reference is being made. CUP style permits the ‘p.’ here, but its use is not mandatory, and you may choose to omit it so long as you do so consistently.]
Chapter in edited volume:
Charles Taylor, ‘The hermeneutics of conflict’, in Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics, ed. James Tully (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988), 218-28. [Here ‘218-28’ is the complete page range of the chapter.]
Essays and Studies 11 (1958), 34-48. [Here ‘11’ is the volume number, which must be given, and ‘34-48’ is the complete page range of the article. As the Salter example shows, it is not necessary to give the journal issue number or month in addition to the volume. If you do decide to adopt a convention of giving either issue number or month (which must be done consistently), omit the other: so either Journal of American History 91:4 (2005), or Journal of American History 91 (March 2005), but not Journal of American History 91:4 (March 2005).]
Arthur Jerrold Tieje, ‘A peculiar phase of the theory of realism in pre-Richardsonian fiction’, PMLA 28 (1913), 213-52, at p.214. [Here PMLA would have to have been explained in an abbreviations list, otherwise spelt out here at first reference.]Manuscript material:
Richardson to Lady Bradshaigh, 15 December 1748, ‘Richardson / Bradshaigh letters’, Forster collection, XI, fol. 7, Harvard University.Unpublished theses or dissertations:
H. R. Southall, ‘Regional unemployment patterns in Britain, 1851 to 1914’, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cambridge (1984), p. 72.Films, sound recordings, music videos, television programmes:
Use common sense to construct a consistent system of referencing. Include the date produced and for films, the country and director. Example: Kate Nickerson [Arnold Manoff nom de plume], writer, and Sidney Lumet, director, ‘The Death of Socrates: 399 B.C.’, episode of ‘You Are There’, CBS, national USA broadcast, 3 May 1953.
After the first mention, references to the source in the notes should take a shortened form. A shortened reference includes only the last name of the author and an improvised short title for the book (containing the key word or words from the main title, so as to make the reference easily recognisable and not to be confused with any other work), followed by the page number of the reference. Thus:
Rousseau and Rogers (eds.), Enduring legacy, p. 45.
Runnock, Medieval fortress building, p. 74.
Salter, ‘Pilgrimage to truth’, pp.34-5.
Tieje, ‘A peculiar phase’, p.75.
Southall, ‘Regional unemployment’, p. 72.
‘Richardson / Bradshaigh letters’, fol. 116.
BN n.a.fr. 20628 (Thiers Papers), fol. 279.
The marking scheme for the dissertation, expressed in percentage points, used by all MPhils, is as follows:
Marks of 75 and above indicate work of Distinction level: a candidate with confirmed marks of 75 or better will be awarded a Distinction for the Dissertation. The conditions for achieving a Distinction in each M.Phil vary and are explained in Section 4.
Work qualifying for a mark of 75 or better will clearly meet or exceed all or almost all of the requirements for an M.Phil dissertation. It will be ambitious in scope, show depth of research and sophistication of conceptual understanding, and be of high quality in its argument, while being aware of any necessary limits to its findings.
MPhil dissertation examiners should not hesitate to award marks of 75 and upwards, including marks in the 80s, if they feel it appropriate. Examiners should bear in mind that even the best of MPhil candidates are just at the beginning of their scholarly careers, in many cases producing their first piece of sustained scholarly work.
Marks of 70 to 74 are awarded for work of high quality, which nevertheless falls below the level required for a Distinction. These marks clearly support leave to continue to the PhD.
Work qualifying for these marks will comfortably meet all or the majority of the requirements for an M.Phil. dissertation, demonstrating some or all of ambition in the choice of topic, depth of research and conceptual understanding, quality of argument and a due awareness of the limits to its findings.
Marks of 67 to 69 are strong marks which will help the candidate securely to pass the course but will normally exclude leave to continue to the PhD.
Work qualifying for these marks will meet the majority of the requirements for an M.Phil. dissertation, demonstrating a measure of ambition in the choice of topic, depth of research, conceptual understanding, and quality of argument, as well as an awareness of the limits to its findings.
Marks of 63 to 66 are solid but medium-range marks.
Work qualifying for these marks will satisfy the basic requirements for an M.Phil. dissertation, demonstrating an appropriate choice of topic, some depth of research and quality of argument, as well as an awareness of the limits to its findings.
Marks of 60 to 62 are weak pass marks which indicate that the work deserves a bare pass in itself but is not strong enough to offer compensating support should other work be of marginal fail quality.
Work awarded these marks will barely satisfy the requirements for an M.Phil. dissertation. It will have a potentially appropriate topic, be the product of some research, advance a coherent argument, and show some awareness of the limits to its findings.
59 marginal fail
Marks of 59 and below indicate work which falls below the requirements set out above; the implications of these marks are very serious and must be understood: see below for Marginal Failure and Failure.
Weaknesses which suggest the award of a marginal fail or fail mark include: an inadequately or inappropriately-defined topic; insufficient research; the absence of coherent argument; claims of findings which manifestly exceed the evidence and argumentation adduced.
A mark of 59 is a marginal fail mark, which may be redeemable by evidence of more than borderline performance overall in Part I of the course. In awarding a mark of 59 an examiner is indicating that the dissertation alone is not sufficient evidence that the candidate should pass the course, but that it is sufficiently close to passing that evidence of reasonably strong performance elsewhere in the course would warrant the award of the MPhil degree.
In the case of one examiner awarding a Marginal Fail (59) and the other a Pass (60 or above), the dissertation will be marked by the External Examiner. The External Examiner will examine and award a mark independently, without reference to the marks already awarded, but will have the marks and reports of the initial examiners available for consultation in preparing his or her independent report. Whenever possible, the External Examiner’s mark should give a clear recommendation of Pass or Fail. If the third mark is a Pass the candidate is deemed to have passed and the marginal fail mark will be discarded. If the third mark is a Marginal or an outright Fail, a viva will be held (see section 17.3 on viva voce examinations). In the case of both examiners awarding a Marginal Fail, the External Examiner is also asked to examine the dissertation independently, and award a mark. If this third mark is a Pass, a viva will be held. If the third mark is a Marginal or outright Fail, the candidate will be deemed to have failed.
If the outcome of a viva is itself a marginal fail mark of 59, this would constitute a ‘marginal fail’ of Part II of the MPhil (dissertation), and point 3(b) of the Student Registry ‘Memorandum to Examiners and Assessors for the Degree of Master of Philosophy (one-year course) would apply, giving the Degree Committee discretion to judge whether the essays in Part I taken as a whole had achieved what the Memorandum calls ‘high performance’ and to take this into account in recommending a pass to the Student Registry. Such ‘high performance’ would for this course be constituted by a set of essay marks none of which falls under 63 (and excluding for this purpose any mark of 59 which was not confirmed by a third marker). Conversely, agreed dissertation marks (or a post-viva third mark) of 63 and above may be used to compensate a marginal fail in Part I.
Failure: In the case of one Pass and one Fail mark (i.e. 58 or below) from the initial examiners, the dissertation is sent to the External Examiner to award a third mark. If the third mark is a clear Pass, the dissertation will be deemed to have passed. If that marker awards a Fail mark (i.e. 58 or below), the candidate will be deemed to have failed. If the third mark is a Marginal Fail, a viva will be held.
The External Examiner will examine and award marks independently, without reference to the marks already awarded, although the initial examiners’ marks and reports will be made available to the External Examiner, to enable his or her report to take account of them. Whenever possible, the third reader’s mark should give a clear recommendation of Pass or Fail.
In the event of two clear failing marks, the candidate will be deemed to have failed.
In each case where a candidate is deemed to have failed, a viva may be held, but only if the candidate wishes it. Candidates must be informed of their right to request a viva in such cases. In the event of two low failing marks, it is appropriate to advise the student that a conversion of the fail to a passing mark, though theoretically possible, is in practice highly unlikely.
Referral of the dissertation for further work and for re-examination at a later date is not permitted for MPhil dissertations. A fail mark (58 or below; or uncompensated marginal fail mark of 59) confirmed after the viva is grounds for failure of the MPhil course overall. The MPhil Sub-Committee sitting as Board of Examiners will make a recommendation to this effect to the Degree Committee of the Faculty of History. A failed candidate, however, may at the discretion of the Degree Committee receive a Certificate of Attendance or be transferred to postulate for the Certificate of Postgraduate Study.