Master of Science/Master of Philosophy

in

Comparative Social Policy

HANDBOOK
2015 - 2016/2015 - 2017

Department of Social Policy and Intervention

UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
Welcome to Oxford and the Department of Social Policy and
Intervention

Welcome to Oxford and the Department of Social Policy and Intervention. We hope you will
enjoy your time living and studying in Oxford, and that you will find it a rewarding
experience. You will find that the Department of Social Policy and Intervention (DSPI)
provides a friendly and supportive environment in which to work.

All graduate students will have been admitted both by the University and by one of the
Colleges or Halls. The main responsibility for graduate students lies with the relevant
University division and department (in this case the Social Sciences Division and the
Department of Social Policy and Intervention). The Department appoints a supervisor for
each graduate student and arranges lectures and seminars as appropriate. Though colleges
are equally concerned for the academic success of their students, their role as regards their
graduate students is more pastoral in nature: they are concerned to see that their students -
especially those who are new to Oxford or to the United Kingdom - are sufficiently well
provided for to be able to make the most fruitful academic use of their time in Oxford.

This handbook contains detailed information for graduate students taking the MSc/MPhil in
Comparative Social Policy. We hope you will find it a useful guide throughout your studies.
If you need information that is not currently included in the handbook, or if you need
clarification about certain aspects, please contact the Course Administrators or Gemma
Roche, Admissions and Ethics Officer for the Department.

Please note that while we hope the handbook fully answers your questions and fully guides
you through your studies, any formal questions have to be settled by reference to the
Examination Decrees and Regulations (the ‘Grey Book’) and not these notes.

2
 Key People 2015/16
Head of Department
Dr Rebecca Surender

Director of Graduate Studies

Dr Erzsebet Bukodi

Comparative Social Policy Course Director

Professor Mary Daly

Comparative Social Policy Courses Administrator

Bryony Groves bryony.groves@spi.ox.ac.uk
Teena Stabler teena.stabler@spi.ox.ac.uk

Admissions and Ethics Officer

Gemma Roche gemma.roche@spi.ox.ac.uk

Comparative Social Policy teaching team

Dr Stuart Basten
Fran Bennett
Dr Erzsebet Bukodi
Professor Mary Daly
Dr Paola Mattei
Professor Brian Nolan
Dr Rebecca Surender
Professor Robert Walker
Dr Chris Wilson
stuart.basten@spi.ox.ac.uk
fran.bennett@spi.ox.ac.uk
erzsebet.bukodi@spi.ox.ac.uk
mary.daly@spi.ox.ac.uk
paola.mattei@spi.ox.ac.uk
brian.nolan@spi.ox.ac.uk
r.surender@spi.ox.ac.uk
robert.walker@spi.ox.ac.uk
chris.wilson@spi.ox.ac.uk

Key Dates 2015/16

Introductory Course starts - 5 October 2015
Michaelmas Term begins - 12 October 2015
Hilary Term begins - 18 January 2016
Trinity Term begins - 25 April 2016
Deadline for submission of Critical Methods Essay - 25 April 2016 (noon)
Deadline for submission of marked Methods Workbooks - 3 June 2016 (noon)
Written Examinations (Provisional) - 20/21/22 June 2016
Written Examination Results Published - Mid-July 2016
Written Examinations (MPhil Yr 2) (Provisional) - 19/20/21 June 2017
Deadline for Submission of MPhil thesis - 2 June 2017 (noon)
Deadline for Submission of MSc thesis - 15 August 2016 (noon)
Final Results Published (MSc) - Mid-End September 2016
Final Results Published (MPhil) - Mid-July 2017

3
Contents Page

1. Introduction to Studying in the Department of Social Policy

and Intervention 6
Current teaching programmes
How we work with you
Management of teaching and student-related issues
Study skills and assessment
Examination conventions

2. The MSc in Comparative Social Policy: An Overview 17

3. The MPhil in Comparative Social Policy: An Overview 22

4. Taught Course Outline (MSc and MPhil) 29

5. Outlines and key readings for all papers ……………………………………………………………….32

The Core Paper:
• Comparative Social Policy and Social Policy Analysis
Research and Methods Paper:
• Principles and Practice of Comparative Research
• Quantitative/Statistical Methods
• Qualitative Research Methods
Option Papers:
• Community Analysis and Large-Scale Interventions
• Comparative Education Policy
• Family, Gender and Welfare State in Comparative Perspective
• Health and Health Care
• Population Challenges in a Global World
• Poverty in Comparative Perspective
• The Economics of Social Policy
• The Policy Challenges of Ageing Societies: Pensions and Long-term Care

6. Empirical Research in Social Policy and Social Intervention – A Guide to

Good Practice 45

7. Transferring from One Course to Another 48

From MSc to MPhil
From MSc to DPhil

8. Study Resources and Facilities 50

Weblearn
Libraries
Computers
Photocopying and Printing

4
Facilities for students with disabilities
Teaching, study and common rooms
Language classes
Keeping in touch
Emergencies

9. Other Important/Useful Information 55

Residential requirements
Fees
Suspension of status
Illness
Harassment
Other problems and advice

Appendices 56

5
 1. Introduction to Studying in the Department of Social Policy and Intervention

The Department is an inter-disciplinary social science institution carrying out teaching and
research at the University of Oxford. It is part of the university’s Social Sciences Division. Staff
in the Department includes demographers, economists, political scientists, psychologists, social
policy specialists, and sociologists. The Department’s research programme includes work on
poverty and disadvantage, the family, parenting and childcare, demography and population
ageing, social security and welfare reform, politics of social policy, mental health, anti-social
behaviour, sleep problems, HIV prevention, health and health care.

Current teaching programmes

The Department’s teaching programme currently includes:

• The one year MSc and two year MPhil in Comparative Social Policy (CSP)
• The one year MSc and two year MPhil in Evidence Based Social Intervention and Policy
Evaluation (EBSIPE). The EBSIPE degree course has its own separate handbook.
• The DPhil research degrees, which also have a separate handbook.
• The Department also offers courses that can be taken by undergraduate students
studying for the PPE (Politics, Philosophy and Economics)/History and Politics, Human
Sciences or Experimental Psychology (Developmental) degrees.

For the academic year 2015 – 16, the MSc programmes in Comparative Social Policy and
Evidence Based Social Intervention and Policy Evaluation have been recognised by the UK’s
Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) for the initial research training year for
Doctoral Study (the "1+3" route). The ESRC has also recognised the Department for its +3
doctoral programme and for CASE studentships.

How we work with you

Induction programme
The degree courses begin with an intensive three-day induction programme in which
students are introduced to the MSc degree and MPhil course in Comparative Social Policy.
This induction programme takes place in the week before Michaelmas Term (term one)
begins and starts with an introductory meeting at 10.45 am on Monday 5th October 2015
starting with photographs then coffee in the Common Room. The Introductory Programme
will them commence at 11.45 in the Violet Butler Room at Barnett House, Wellington
Square. The induction programme covers: supervision and teaching arrangements; methods
of assessment; Departmental structure and student representation; Department and
University facilities, including IT, libraries and bibliographical aids; and relevant
Departmental and University seminar series. The introductory programme also provides a
hands-on introduction to computing (including use of the internet and University intranet,
focusing on the social policy sources available online); basic SPSS skills; an introduction to
the research in the Department and to the library facilities in Oxford as well as a session on
writing and study skills.

6
Degree courses and papers
Our MSc/MPhil courses are made up of different components called papers. Papers are taught
by various members of the Comparative Social Policy teaching team, and where applicable by
other members of staff in the Department or Social Sciences Division. These papers include a
combination of lectures and/or seminars.

Full timetables for the course in Comparative Social Policy are provided to all students before
the beginning of each term. The three teaching terms are known as Michaelmas (term one),
Hilary (term two) and Trinity (term three). The Michaelmas, Hilary and Trinity term timetables
identify which items are essential and which are recommended or optional. Any amendments
to the timetable will be notified to students via email and posted on the website through the
learning and teaching portal Weblearn.

All students have the opportunity to comment on the structure, teaching and content of all
aspects of the degree course. Feedback will be sought through the use of student evaluation
forms at the end of each taught paper and more generally at the end of the degree course.
This feedback makes an invaluable contribution to the review of all aspects of the degree
course which is undertaken each year.

Supervision
Students are allocated a University supervisor. The supervisor, who will normally be someone
from the Comparative Social Policy teaching team, guides the student through his or her
studies. Supervisors take responsibility for:
• discussing the student’s core paper essays in individual tutorial sessions
• helping students select an appropriate option paper
• working with the student to develop a thesis topic and proposal
• supporting the student through all aspects of the thesis research process.

The supervisor writes a report on the student’s progress at the end of each term. This report
goes to the student’s College Advisor and to the Graduate Studies Committee (see below).

It is very important for the student to keep in regular contact with their supervisor and to keep
the supervisor fully informed about the progress of their studies. In working with supervisors,
students also have specific responsibilities, particularly in recognising their own responsibility
for the successful completion of the degree course. In particular, students are expected to:

• Make appropriate use of the teaching and learning facilities provided, particularly the
lectures and seminars outlined on the degree course timetables
• Ensure that their standard of English is sufficient for successful completion of the
degree course
• Hand in work in good time for supervisors (or other tutors in the department) to
assess it
• Observe all the requirements of the degree course
• Take full responsibility for the work involved in the thesis, essays or other similar
material.

7
The frequency with which a student needs to discuss their work with their supervisor will
depend to some extent on the stage that the student has reached. However, the usual
expectation is that students should meet their supervisor individually three times a term
including a meeting in the first weeks of term one. Although supervisors are asked to make the
first appointment with the student each term, it is sensible for students to contact supervisors
whenever necessary.

It may be appropriate in some cases to change supervisor if, for example, the direction of the
student's work changes. The Social Sciences Divisional Board and all University supervisors also
recognise that occasionally incompatibilities of temperament or approach can arise between
supervisor and student. Because of the central importance Oxford attaches to the relationship
between supervisor and student, students are urged to discuss any problems of this kind freely
and in full confidence with the Director of Graduate Studies. Alternatively, students can discuss
these matters with their College Supervisor or College Tutor for Graduates. A change of
supervisor requires the approval of the Graduate Studies Committee.

Graduate Supervision System (GSS)

At the end of each term, your supervisor(s) will submit a report on your academic progress. To
facilitate this reporting, the University operates an online Graduate Supervision System (GSS).
Within this system, you have the opportunity to contribute to your termly supervision reports
by reviewing and commenting on your own progress.

You are strongly encouraged to take the opportunity to review and comment on your
academic progress, any skills training you have undertaken or may need to the future, and
your engagement with the academic community (e.g. seminar/conference attendance or any
teaching you have undertaken).

Your supervisor(s) will review and comment on your academic progress and performance
during the term and assess skills and training needs to be addressed during the next term. Your
supervisor should discuss the report with you, as it will form the basis for feedback on your
progress, for identifying areas where further work is required, for reviewing your progress
against an agreed timetable, and for agreeing plans for the term ahead.

When reporting on academic progress, students on taught courses should review progress
during the current term, and measure this progress against the timetable and requirements for
their programme of study. Students on doctoral programmes should reflect on the progress
made with their research project during the current term, including written work (e.g. drafts of
chapters) and should assess this against the plan of research that has been agreed with the
supervisor(s).

All students should briefly describe which subject-specific research skills and more general
personal/professional skills they have acquired or developed during the current term. You
should include attendance at relevant classes that form part of your programme of study and
also courses, seminars or workshops offered or arranged by the Department or the Division.
Students should also reflect on the skills required to undertake the work they intend to carry
out. You should mention any skills you do not already have or you may wish to strengthen
through undertaking training.

8
If you have any complaints about the supervision you are receiving, you should raise this with
the Director of Graduate Studies. You should not use the supervision reporting system as a
mechanism for complaints.

Students are asked to report in weeks 6 and 7 of term. Once you have completed your sections
of the online form, it will be released to your supervisor(s) for completion and will also be
visible to the Director of Graduate Studies and College Advisor. When the supervisor’s sections
are completed, you will be able to view the report, as will the relevant Director of Graduate
Studies and College Advisor. Directors of Graduate Studies are responsible for ensuring that
appropriate supervision takes place, and this is one of the mechanisms they use to obtain
information about supervision. College Advisors are a source of support and advice to
students, and it is therefore important that they are informed of your progress, including
concerns (expressed by you and/or your supervisor).

To access the GSS, please visit http://www.gss.ox.ac.uk/. You will be able to log on to the site
using your single sign-on details. Full details of how to use the site are provided at the on-line
help centre. Should you need additional support, please contact your Graduate Studies
Assistant in the first instance.

University guidelines on the role of the supervisor and the responsibilities of the student
The Department’s Code of Practice for Supervision can be found at
http://www.weblearn.ox.ac.uk/site/. This follows the University’s guidelines promoted by the
Education Committee and adopted by the Social Sciences Division.

See also the Education Committee notes of guidance, http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/edc.

Being part of our research culture

The department has a vibrant research culture and students are encouraged to get involved.
Students might like to explore opportunities for working with members of staff as well as
publishing papers including the in house Barnett Papers series (see later section on this as well
as http://www.spi.ox.ac.uk/publications/barnett-papers-in-social-research.html for more
information).

We also encourage students to attend our seminar series held in Michaelmas and Hilary terms
on Thursdays at 5pm. These host excellent speakers from the UK and overseas.

9
Management of teaching and student-related issues

The Head of Department holds overall responsibility for the running of the Department
through a series of committees. Of relevance to students is the Graduate Studies Committee
(GSC), chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies.

The Graduate Studies Committee

The Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) normally meets once a term to cover graduate
admissions and examinations as well as other matters relating to graduate teaching and
studying. The Social Policy Teaching Committee, which is a sub-committee of the full GSC,
meets twice a term to review teaching related issues specifically relating to the MSc, MPhil and
Research degree courses in Comparative Social Policy/Social Policy (as well as the
undergraduate social policy option course). This includes reviewing student progress, student
feedback and the content and structure of the overall degree course as well as specific papers
making up the degree course.

The responsibilities of the GSC include:

• considering applications for admission
• confirming appointments of a University supervisor for each student
• monitoring and reviewing student progress
• monitoring and reviewing course content and structure
• drafting changes in regulation
• considering applications from students during the course of their study (e.g. change of
course, transfer of status, confirmation of status)
• reviewing assessors’ and examiners’ reports and recommendations
• reviewing policy issues and debates relating to the graduate programme and research
training raised by the Department or by the University, including national and
international debates, and Education Committee policy.

Dates for meetings of the full GSC will be listed on the Department timetable. Students must
submit anything that needs consideration by the GSC in plenty of time before these meetings.
While some matters can be dealt with under ‘Chair’s action’ during the vacations and between
meetings, this will not always be appropriate.

The Graduate Joint Consultative Committee

Course directors also meet once a term in Michaelmas and Hilary terms with elected student
representatives on the Joint Consultative Committee (GJCC). Students on each degree course
elect representatives who will have the opportunity to discuss teaching and teaching related
issues though the GJCC forum.

10
Study skills and assessment

Reading
Students are given reading lists for every paper they take as part of the Masters Degree.
Reading lists indicate key texts – often indicated by a * - that students are expected to cover
as well as additional suggested reading that students are encouraged to explore according
to their own particular interests. Students are encouraged to ask their supervisor or the
specific provider of different papers for help in identifying texts that will be of particular
use.

Note-taking
Part of the skills students are expected to develop and take away from the course is to make
links, comparisons and contrasts from material that may have come up from various
readings, seminars or lectures within and across the different papers taken. Students should
make notes of key points being made and on how they respond to these key points –
whether they agree, disagree, feel excited by or somewhat uneasy and WHY. These notes
will be invaluable when it comes to written assignments and exam preparation.

Writing essays
Essay writing is a key part of studying. It:
• helps to crystallise what students have read at a particular time point
• helps to develop student’s own distinct position and voice
• offers a useful source of revision
• gives supervisors an indication of students’ level and grasp of the subject matter.

Students should ensure that they structure the essay in a logical way. Poor structure can
severely weaken an essay: it can give the impression that the writer is unsure of how
various arguments fit together; it can also make it hard for readers (i.e. markers) to follow.
Students should ensure their essays include:
• an introduction: telling the reader what the essay is about; an indication of the ways
in which the essay will be structured; and an indication of the main arguments that
will be made in the essay
• a main section: developing the main arguments in the essay drawing on theoretical
arguments and research evidence
• conclusion: a re-capping of the main arguments and a final statement in answer to
the essay question
• list of references: indicate full details of all publications referred to in the essay.

Students are expected to be critical of what they read. Rather than simply accepting what is
written in books or articles or what is said by lecturers, seminar leaders or fellow students,
students should assess claims that are made: 1) are these claims supported by research
evidence?; 2) how have these claims conceptualised the particular issue they are referring
to?; and / or 3) how and in what ways do such claims support or refute particular theories?
For more information on essay writing see Redman, P. (2001) Good Essay Writing: A Social
Science Guide, London: Open University in association with Sage.

11
Plagiarism
Why plagiarism matters
It is important to understand that plagiarism is a breach of academic integrity. It is a
principle of intellectual honesty that all members of the academic community should
acknowledge their debt to the originators of the ideas, words, and data upon which they
found their own work. For students, passing off another’s work as your own also means you
have failed to complete the learning process. Students who cheat are not only letting
themselves down if they obtain a degree through sub-standard and dishonest work; they
are devaluing the work of honest students, and degrading the perceived quality of all the
degrees issued by their university.

Most educational institutions have a policy to assist in the avoidance of plagiarism.

Universities need to take measures against plagiarism because plagiarists threaten the very
principles on which academia is based. In academia, an individual’s reputation, and,
therefore, that of the institution by which they are employed, are based primarily on the
quality and veracity of their research and the originality of their published material.

By presenting the work of others as their own, plagiarists threaten the spirit of cooperation
that exists between many academics, which is itself a condition of much academic progress.
The aim of furthering knowledge through research is undermined when individuals claim
ownership of work they have misappropriated.

When a plagiarist is uncovered, it is not only that piece of work that is called into question
but also the legitimacy and value of all their pre-existing work.

Deceitful use (whether intentional or not) of another’s work can sully the reputation of a
whole field. If we cannot follow the trail of research, discussion, thought and presentation
that leads us to the cutting edge of intellectual debate, we cannot establish the truth or
observational integrity of an argument.

The correct acknowledgement of well-used sources helps to prove the legitimacy of original
work and ensures that it will be useful to others.

The consequences for anyone found to have plagiarised can be very serious and may result
in being expelled from the university, stripped of a degree already awarded, or dismissed
from a job.

What is plagiarism?
Plagiarism is the copying or paraphrasing of other people’s work or ideas without
appropriate acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in
manuscript, printed, or electronic form, is covered under this definition. Proctors Office
2006.

Plagiarism is a serious breach of trust and the consequences could include any of the
following:

• expulsion from university

12
 • dismissal from academic positions, and/or other jobs
• withdrawal of published works
• rescindment (removal) of a previously awarded degree

The test for determining if plagiarism has taken place is quite simple: has material been
included in the piece of work without adequate referencing? If, on the balance of
probabilities, the answer to this is ‘yes’ then plagiarism has occurred. You will notice that
this test does not consider whether the author intended to deceive or knowingly plagiarised
material. In other words, in the act of including material without adequate referencing the
author has plagiarised.

A charge of plagiarism will usually initiate a disciplinary investigation by the Proctors, who
are the University officers responsible for student discipline. Under University legislation,
the Proctors must determine whether or not the charge is correct, and then, if plagiarism is
proven, whether it was 'intentional or reckless'. If so, the case will be dealt with as a
disciplinary offence and sent to the Student Disciplinary Panel for adjudication. If the
Proctors deem the plagiarism not to have been intentional or reckless, the case will
normally be referred back to the Examiners with the recommendation that an academic
penalty be applied. The author's intention, while not a test for determining whether or not
he or she has committed plagiarism, is taken into account when deciding what disciplinary
action to take.

The best way to avoid disciplinary action resulting from plagiarism is to use ‘appropriate
acknowledgement’.

Students will be asked to submit their assessed essays and assignments electronically to the
Courses Administrator.

Students should also complete the course, Good Practice in Citation and the Avoidance of
Plagiarism, see also http://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills.

Seminar presentations
Seminar presentations are another key part of studying. Seminar presentations offer
students a chance to communicate how they have understood and responded to particular
topics and relevant readings to other students and the seminar leader. Seminar
presentations also offer students the chance to experiment, practise and gain confidence in
communicating their ideas to other people.

Students often present in groups. Group presentations can benefit from the knowledge and
understanding of a number of different people as well as collaborative work among them. It
is important to ensure that everyone is given the space to present their arguments.
However, it is also important to ensure that the material covered is being presented in a
clear and coherent way.

Whether presenting in a group or individually, it is a good idea to finish the presentation

with a summary of the key points that have been made and any questions that presenters

13
would like other members of the seminar to consider and reflect upon in the following
discussion.

Examination conventions

Informal and formally assessed coursework

Essays, seminar presentations and other assignments form the basis for much of the
student’s learning and progress throughout the degree course. This work is compulsory and
termly supervisor reports on individual progress are required by the student's college. These
termly reports are discussed by particular tutors in the student’s college as well as in the
meetings of the Graduate Studies Committee. Negative reports or non-attendance at
seminars and tutorials are taken seriously by the colleges and the Graduate Studies
Committee, though they do not form part of the formal assessment for the degree. NOTE:
non-attendance by overseas students will be reported and will result in problems with visas.

Formally assessed work, which forms part of the overall examination, includes coursework for
the Research Design and Methods paper and the thesis. Information about the coursework for
the Research Design and Methods paper and for the thesis is given below in the relevant
sections.

Core and option paper examinations

The core and option papers are formally assessed by examination. Students are responsible for
entering their own names for University examinations. This is usually done through the
student’s college, which will normally arrange for the entrance forms to be completed. Forms
for this purpose are available from the college office, and should be submitted to the
University Offices through the college Secretary. Any revision to your examination entry, such
as a change of option paper, has to be notified to the examination board via the college. Unless
this is done in due time, examination timetables or papers set will reflect the original
examination entry. Any further contact with the examination board has to be routed through
the college, and not through the Comparative Social Policy Course Director, teaching team,
course or individual examiners.

Deferral of the written examination is not normally possible (as it is fixed for all students
equally). If students are unable to attend the examinations through serious illness or other very
exceptional reasons, the normal procedure would be to defer until the following year. Students
should be aware that if they have chronic illness or other disabilities that may affect their
performance in an examination they can apply through their college for this to be taken into
account in the examination conditions.

Examination papers from previous years can be obtained from the Examination Schools. They
can also be accessed from the following web address: http://www.oxam.ox.ac.uk/

Overall assessment of the Masters Degree

The University Examination Decrees and Regulations (the ‘Grey Book’) sets out the formal
content and procedure for the examinations. The examination is conducted by an Examination
Board, which includes two or more Internal Examiners and one External Examiner.

14
Candidates are examined on the basis of their examination scripts, thesis, and research
methods coursework. The main criteria used in assessing this material are analytical skills, the
ability to apply theoretical and methodological approaches offered in the course work, critical
awareness of alternative approaches and sources of data, the ability to link empirical evidence
with theory and the overall capacity to shape such material into a coherent and critical
response to examination questions, thesis research and other coursework topics. The
examiners may award a Distinction for excellence in the entire examination on the basis of the
material submitted to them.

For borderline results between a fail and a pass, the Examiners may examine any candidate
‘viva voce’ (by oral examination). Examiners have the power, if they wish, to examine any
candidate viva voce.

This will last about a half-hour. Given the difficulty of evaluating information from such
examination, Examiners exercise this power sparingly. Candidates are reminded that
Examiners may fail candidates without calling them for viva voce examination.

If any such examinations are required following the written examination, these will normally
be held on the day of the first Examiners’ meeting; this will be usually two weeks after the
written examinations (June). If any such examinations are required following submission of
theses, these will normally be held on the day of the second Examiners’ meeting; this will be
around four to six weeks after the MSC thesis submission date in August. This applies to
MSc, MPhil and MPhil (Qualifying Test) candidates. The names of candidates, if any, called
for viva will be posted in the Department, at the latest by noon of that day. It has been
Examiners’ practice to give candidates as much advance notice (of either exemption or risk)
as is possible, but such advance notice cannot be guaranteed. Accordingly, all candidates
must be ready to make themselves available on the day. Candidates should be aware that a
prior announcement by Examiners of “no vivas required” is not an announcement that all
have passed the examination.

Candidates called for viva voce examination but who fail to attend will thereby forfeit the
opportunity to better their assessment, but will not otherwise be penalised. The candidate
can expect to be examined on the questions attempted in the written paper(s) of concern,
or the content of the thesis submitted; unless three questions were not addressed in the
written paper, the candidate will not be required to show knowledge on questions not
attempted. The viva voce examination is conducted by the full examination Board, with the
expectation that the External Examiner shall take the lead in questioning. Should a
candidate's supervisor happen to be an Examiner, that Examiner will be present at the viva
voce examination, but will not participate in the questioning, or in the formal adjudication
of the candidate's performance therein. The mark awarded on the basis of the written work
will not be lowered by the candidate’s viva voce performance.

Marking is done on a numerical percentage scale. In 2014/15 the scale had a pass mark of 50%
for each paper, with 70% and above representing a distinction level performance in specific
papers. In calculating an overall mark for the examination, the Examiners give greater weight
to the thesis. Last year this carried 34% of the marks, compared with 22% for each of the three

15
other components. An Examiners’ Memorandum for 2015/16 will be issued in Hilary Term and
sent to students.

A candidate who fails the degree may only enter for one subsequent re-sitting of these
examinations. Candidates need only retake the failed paper(s).

Examination conventions

>80 Superb work: showing fine command of intellectual debates and making a
creative contribution to them.

75 – 79 Excellent work: intellectually stimulating argument.

70 – 74 Fine work: showing powerful analysis, a distinctive argument, and full

awareness of the secondary literature.

65 – 69 Strong pass: strong and well-developed analysis with some indication of

distinction potential.

55 – 64 Good pass: sound analytical standard with most points developed rather
than stated.

50 – 54 Pass: basic analytical skills apparent from identification of intellectual

problems and some structured discussion of them.

45 – 49 Marginal fail: inadequate development of points made.

<44 Outright fail: inadequate coverage and inadequate analysis.

16
2. The MSc in Comparative Social Policy: An Overview

The MSc in Comparative Social Policy is designed to provide high quality graduate level
research training in comparative social policy. The various components of the course are as
follows:

Paper Michaelmas Hilary term Trinity term Assessment

term (MT) (HT) teaching (TT) teaching
teaching
The Core Paper: 8 lectures and 8 100% exam
Comparative seminars on (Week 9 of Trinity
Social Policy comparative term)
social policy
1 revision seminar
Social Policy 8 lectures and 8
Analysis seminars on social
policy analysis

22% of final mark

Option Papers 8 seminars for a 100% exam (week

selected option 9 of Trinity term)
22% of final mark paper

Principles and 8 lectures on

Practice of comparative
Comparative approaches
Research 100% coursework
2 lectures on 1 lecture on (2 statistics
research design research design assignments;
1 qualitative
Qualitative 8 sessions on assignment; 2
Methods Paper qualitative critical methods
research methods essays (one
qualitative and
Quantitative 8 lectures on 8 workshops on one quantitative))
Methods Paper statistics/quantita quantitative
tive methods research methods

22% of final mark

The Thesis 100%

coursework:
34% of final mark 10,000 word
thesis due in mid
August

The MSc in Comparative Social Policy is designed to provide a thorough exploration of the
interdisciplinary literature on comparative social policy, the current issues in the field, a

17
range of conceptual and theoretical approaches, and a detailed understanding of policy-
making, implementation, evaluation and outcomes in particular fields of social policy. This is
taught through the core and option papers. The MSc will also provide intensive training in
comparative research design and methods through a range of lectures, seminars and
workshops. The thesis offers students an opportunity to carry out their own research,
drawing on the substantive and research training received in other parts of the degree
course.

The MSc degree course has a number of learning outcomes. These include:

• Being able to demonstrate understanding of major concepts in Comparative Social

Policy.
• Being familiar with different theoretical approaches relevant to the exploration of
policy making and implementation (e.g. ‘path dependency’ and the importance of
institutional arrangements, the articulation of ideas and their role in problem
recognition and policy formation, and the role of different actors).
• Being able to engage with the major debates in the field (e.g. over the effects of
globalisation on social provision, the degree of ‘convergence’ in social provisions
between countries, the role of different actors in the ‘mixed economy of welfare’).
• Having an understanding of the nature of, and reasons for, international variations in
the constitution of social welfare systems and their outcomes.
• Being familiar with the nature of social policy variation in particular areas of
provision and be able to present a comparative analysis of the major issues driving
policy in that field (e.g. in education, health, social security, gender relations,
provision for young or old).
• Being able to appreciate the varied ways in which social policy research may be used
in policy making and implementation.
• Understanding of and ability to use a wide range of quantitative methods (including
social surveys and secondary analysis of large data sets).
• Understanding of and ability to use a wide range of qualitative methods (including
interviewing, observation techniques, and methods of analysis).
• Being able to interpret and critically evaluate research findings.
• Being able to present your analysis in a variety of written and other forms – e.g.
critical essays or thesis, individual and group seminar presentations.
• Understanding the importance and nature of ethical issues in social policy/social
policy research.
• Being able to identify and design a manageable research topic; and to manage and
schedule the appropriate stages in the research process.

On completion of the degree course, students should have acquired a solid basis for further
independent research for work in, for example, central or local government, voluntary
agencies or ‘non-profit’ organisations, international agencies or high level journalism. It is
intended that students who wish to study for a doctoral degree following completion of the
MSc would have acquired the necessary familiarity with the general literature in
comparative social policy and comparative methodology, as well as the necessary training in
research design and methods to begin doctoral study.

18
The course content is described in section 4 below. Since there are different obligations for
the thesis for an MSc and an MPhil, the thesis obligations are described in detail here.

The Thesis

The student should carry out their own research on a relevant social policy topic employing
comparative method. Comparative method normally involves comparison of the
characteristics of large macro-social units, such as countries, jurisdictions, or historical
periods, in order to adequately analyse and understand the attributes and/or behaviour of
individuals, institutions, policies or policy regimes nested within them.

MSc students are discouraged from embarking on extensive data collection of their own as this
is not usually practical within the timescale of their studies. MSc students may, however,
consider secondary analysis of existing data, or they may consider a limited number of
interviews to illuminate or exemplify a detailed area of social policy.

The lectures on the principles and practice of comparative research in Michaelmas term on
designing a research project will be particularly useful for introducing the different parts of
the research process. Students are also supported in their research by their supervisor.

Students may wish to consult past theses kept in the Social Sciences Library, St Cross
Building, Manor Road. The Course Director can advise on a range of theses that were
particularly well received by the examiners.

Expectations
MSc students are expected to write a thesis of up to 10,000 words. Please note that this is a
limit, not a target. This word count does not include graphs, tables and charts in the main
text (provided these are not excessive in volume), or the bibliography. An additional word
limit of 2,000 words in total applies to the abstract, footnotes, endnotes and any technical
appendices (including graphs, tables and charts). Marks may be deducted by the Examiners
for theses that are over length.

Hilary term
Students will agree a topic with their supervisor early in Hilary term or in late Michaelmas term
and prepare a high-quality thesis outline by the end of the sixth week of Hilary term at the
latest. This should be some 4-5 pages in length and:

• Identify the topic and key questions the thesis is addressing

• Discuss the comparative dimension that the thesis must have
• Justify the methods of data collection to be employed
• Outline a proposed timetable for the research.

The outline should also indicate any ethical issues or problems raised by the proposed
approach. The student also completes the Department’s Research Ethics and Safety in
Fieldwork checklists available from Weblearn. For further guidance on ethical procedures you
will be provided with a thesis booklet in Hilary term. You can also visit:
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/curec/approval/.

19
Towards the end of Hilary Term all MSc students will be required to present their thesis outline
to a panel from the Comparative Social Policy teaching team (usually two members of staff not
including the student’s own supervisor). The thesis panel is designed to provide students with
additional feedback and advice. The feedback is provided in writing to the students and
supervisor. Based on the principle of academic freedom, it is up to the student (and lesser
extent the supervisor) to accept or reject the advice provided by the thesis panel. There is no
formal procedure to approve a topic.

Trinity term and beyond

Students are expected to work on the thesis during Trinity term, providing on a regular basis
draft material for discussion with their supervisor during this term. Normally the supervisor
would read and comment on one complete pre-final draft before submission. Students will be
notified of a date after which they will not normally be able to receive comments and feedback
from their supervisor. This date is likely to be 15th July 2016. Students should be aware that
supervisors may be on leave from mid-July onwards and they should check exact times
supervisors will be available.

Formal assessment
MSc students must submit two printed copies of their thesis by noon on Monday 15th August
2016 to the Clerk of Examination Schools, High Street, Oxford. At least one copy must be
bound between hard covers; the other may be hard-bound or soft-bound. These should be
taken or sent to the Clerk in a parcel bearing the words `MSC THESIS IN COMPARATIVE SOCIAL
POLICY' and candidate number (not the student OSS number) in BLOCK CAPITALS in the
bottom left-hand corner. Examiners will normally deduct 5% per day for late submissions.

To assist the Examiners in their duty to prevent plagiarism, candidates are asked to submit to
the Department an electronic copy of their thesis, in addition to the bound copies delivered
to Examination Schools. Please submit the work as one file, bearing only your candidate
number as identification, by noon on 15th August 2016; details of where to submit this will be
provided nearer the submission date.

Unless the board has excused the candidate from this requirement, the thesis may be printed
double-sided, with a margin of 3 to 3.5cms on the left-hand edge of each page. The front page
should include the following information – the thesis title; degree course name; department
name; student candidate number; word count. There are no formal rules regarding the type of
binding except as stated above; students might wish to refer to previous copies kept in the
Department and also in the Social Science Library for ideas. Loose-leaf binding is not
acceptable. Students should also note that electronic submission of the thesis to the
Examination Schools is not possible. The thesis has to be delivered or posted securely. In the
case of successful candidates, one copy of the thesis may be deposited by the examiners in the
Social Sciences library, Manor Road.

The thesis must be accompanied by a signed statement by the student that it is the student’s
own work except where otherwise indicated. This should be on a separate sheet of paper; it
should not form part of the bound thesis. A copy of the Ethics approval letter must also be
included.

20
Theses are examined anonymously with students identified only by their candidate number.
The thesis submitted should therefore not include acknowledgements that might reveal the
student’s identity.

Students should ensure that they have complied with any confidentiality agreements they
have made in seeking data or other information as part of their thesis. They should ensure
that it is not possible to identify individuals in any data they may present in ways that might
infringe the Data Protection Act or any confidentiality undertakings they may have given. If
in doubt, they should consult their supervisor. In carrying out any interviews or surveys in
their fieldwork students should ensure respondents are given clear information about how
any material collected will be used and attributed.

Barnett Papers in Social Research

The Barnett Papers in Social Research give graduate research students and faculty
members, as well as distinguished visitors to the Department, the opportunity to “pre-
publish” high quality research on the Department's web pages in a timely manner. MSc
theses that are awarded a distinction level mark are automatically considered for
publication. Collaborative and cross-disciplinary papers are particularly encouraged.
Manuscripts should be submitted to the editor(s) of the series in Word format. For more
information on the Barnett Papers in Social Policy and for submission guidelines see
http://www.spi.ox.ac.uk/publications/barnett-papers-in-social-research.html.

21
3. The MPhil in Comparative Social Policy: An Overview

The MPhil in Comparative Social Policy is designed to provide high quality graduate level
research training in comparative social policy. The first year of the MPhil is taught in parallel
with the MSc but allows students to develop their work in greater depth with a further year
of study that includes the development of a much more substantial thesis and an additional
option paper. The various components of the course are as follows:

Paper Michaelmas Hilary term Trinity term Assessment

term (MT) (HT) teaching (TT) teaching
teaching
Year 1
The Core Paper: 8 lectures and 8 100% exam
Comparative seminars on (Week 9 of Trinity
Social Policy comparative term)
social policy 1 revision seminar

Social Policy 8 lecture and 8

Analysis seminars on social
policy analysis
15% of final mark

Option Paper 8 seminars for a 100% exam (week

selected option 9 of Trinity term)
15% of final mark paper
Principles and 8 lectures on 100% coursework
Practice of comparative (2 statistics
Comparative method assignments; 1
Research qualitative
2 lectures on 1 lecture on assignment; 2
research design research design critical methods
essays (one
Qualitative 8 sessions on qualitative and
Methods Paper qualitative one quantitative))
research methods

Quantitative 8 lectures on 8 workshops on

Methods Paper statistics/quantita quantitative
tive methods research methods
15% of final mark
Year 2
Option Paper 8 seminars for a 100% exam (week
selected option 9 of Trinity term)
15% of final mark paper
The Thesis 100% coursework:
30,000 word thesis
th
40% of final mark due in Friday 6
week of Trinity
term in the second
year

22
The MPhil in Comparative Social Policy is designed to provide a thorough exploration of the
interdisciplinary literature on comparative social policy, the current issues in the field, a
range of conceptual and theoretical approaches, and a detailed understanding of policy-
making, implementation, evaluation and outcomes in particular fields of social policy. This is
taught through the core and option papers. The MPhil will also provide intensive training in
comparative research design and methods through a range of lectures, seminars and
workshops. The thesis offers students an opportunity to carry out their own research,
drawing on the substantive and research training received in other parts of the degree
course.

The MPhil degree course has a number of learning outcomes. These include:
• Being able to demonstrate understanding of major concepts in Comparative Social
Policy.
• Being familiar with different theoretical approaches relevant to the exploration of
policy making and implementation (e.g. ‘path dependency’ and the importance of
institutional arrangements, the articulation of ideas and their role in problem
recognition and policy formation, and the role of different actors).
• Being able to engage with the major debates in the field (e.g. over the effects of
globalisation on social provision, the degree of ‘convergence’ in social provisions
between countries, the role of different actors in the ‘mixed economy of welfare’).
• Having an understanding of the nature of, and reasons for, international variations in
the constitution of social welfare systems and their outcomes.
• Being familiar with the nature of social policy variation in particular areas of
provision and be able to present a comparative analysis of the major issues driving
policy in that field (e.g. in education, health, social security, gender relations,
provision for young or old).
• Being able to appreciate the varied ways in which social policy research may be used
in policy making and implementation.
• Understanding of and ability to use a wide range of quantitative methods (including
social surveys and secondary analysis of large data sets).
• Understanding of and ability to use a wide range of qualitative methods (including
interviewing, observation techniques, and methods of analysis).
• Being able to interpret and critically evaluate research findings.
• Being able to present your analysis in a variety of written and other forms – e.g.
critical essays or thesis, individual and group seminar presentations.
• Understanding the importance and nature of ethical issues in social policy/social
policy research.
• Being able to identify and design a manageable research topic; and to manage and
schedule the appropriate stages in the research process.

On completion of the degree course, students should have acquired a solid basis for further
independent research for work in, for example, central or local government, voluntary
agencies or ‘non-profit’ organisations, international agencies or high level journalism. It is
intended that students who wish to study for a doctoral degree following completion of the
MPhil; would have acquired the necessary familiarity with the general literature in

23
comparative social policy and comparative methodology, as well as the necessary training in
research design and methods to begin doctoral study.
The course content is described in section 4 below. Since there are different obligations for
the thesis for an MSc and an MPhil, the thesis obligations are described in detail here.

The Thesis
The student should carry out their own research on a relevant social policy topic employing
comparative method. Comparative method normally involves comparison of the
characteristics of large macro-social units, such as countries; jurisdictions or historical
periods in order to adequately analyse and understand the attributes and/or behaviour of
individuals, institutions, policies or policy regimes nested within them. MPhil students have
the opportunity to embark on extensive data collection. Alternatively they may wish to
conduct secondary analysis of data.

The lectures in Michaelmas term on the comparative method as well as on designing a

research project will be particularly useful for introducing the different parts of the research
process. Students are also supported in their research by their supervisor.

Students may wish to consult past theses kept in the Social Sciences Library, Manor Road
Building. The Course Director can advise on a range of theses that were particularly well
received by the examiners.

Expectations
MPhil students are expected to write a thesis of up to 30,000 words. Please note that this is
a limit not a target. This word count does not include graphs, tables and charts in the main
text (provided these are not excessive in volume), or the bibliography. An additional word
limit of 6,000 words in total applies to the abstract, footnotes, endnotes and any technical
appendices (including graphs, tables and charts). Marks may be deducted by the Examiners
for theses that are over length.

Year One
MPhil students are expected to identify a topic for their thesis during the Hilary term of the
first year. They should identify data sources and data collection requirements during this term
and begin reviewing relevant literature and other studies during Trinity term in their first year.
They will be expected to present their proposal that outlines their research questions and
methods to a thesis panel in Trinity term (generally week 5) in the first year. The thesis panel is
designed to provide students with additional feedback and advice. The feedback is provided in
writing to the students and supervisor. Based on the principle of academic freedom, it is up to
the student (and lesser extent the supervisor) to accept or reject the advice provided by the
Thesis Panel. There is no formal procedure to approve a topic. The proposal should:

• Identify the topic and key questions the thesis is addressing

• Discuss the comparative dimension that the thesis must have
• Justify the methods of data collection to be employed
• Outline a proposed timetable for the research.

24
The outline should also indicate any ethical issues or problems raised by the proposed
approach. The student will be expected to complete the Department’s Research Ethics and
Safety in Fieldwork checklists (more information on this can be obtained from their supervisor
or Course Administrator). For further guidance on ethical procedures see the relevant sections
in the appendices of this handbook. You can also visit:
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/curec/approval/.

If the thesis involves any data collection, this must be planned during the Trinity term of year
one with a view to completing the main bulk of data assembly/data collection and any
interview material over the long summer vacation once the proposal and any ethical or safety
issues have been approved.

At the end of Trinity term it is important that students meet with their supervisor to:
i) refine their research question
ii) finalise their research design, methodology and timetable
iii) complete the necessary research ethics forms (CUREC)
iv) complete Health and Safety forms.

Year Two
Students will be expected to be analyse data and prepare draft sections of their thesis during
the Michaelmas term of the second year. Final write-up and preparation of the thesis will be
during Hilary and the first part of Trinity term of the second year. (Note that during this second
Hilary term MPhil candidates normally take their second option paper.) Submission of the final
thesis in the sixth week of Trinity term means that students must complete most of the write-
up by the start of this term to give supervisors a chance to review their material before final
drafting and submission. The Easter holiday needs to be taken into account.

If students want to undertake DPhil study after completion of their MPhil, they have the
opportunity of including all or part of their MPhil thesis into their DPhil thesis. For more
information on this see section five in this handbook on transferring from one degree to
another.

Formal assessment
MPhil students must submit two printed copies of their thesis by noon on the Friday of sixth
week of Trinity term in their second year – June 2 2017, again to the Clerk of the Examination
Schools, High Street, Oxford. At least one copy must be bound between hard covers; the other
may be hard-bound or soft-bound. These should be taken to the Clerk in a parcel bearing the
words `MPHIL THESIS IN COMPARATIVE SOCIAL POLICY' and candidate number (not the
student OSS number) in BLOCK CAPITALS in the bottom left-hand corner.

To assist the Examiners in their duty to prevent plagiarism, MPhil candidates are asked to
submit to the Department an electronic copy of their thesis, in addition to the bound copies
delivered to Examination Schools. Please submit the work as one file, bearing only your
candidate number as identification, by noon June 2 2017, details of where to submit this will
be provided nearer the submission date.

25
Unless the board has excused the candidate from this requirement, the thesis may be printed
double-sided, with a margin of 3 to 3.5cms on the left-hand edge of each page. The front page
should include the following information – the thesis title; degree course name; department
name; student candidate number; word count. There are no formal rules regarding the
particular type of binding other than as stated above; students might wish to refer to previous
copies kept in the Department and also the Social Science Library for ideas. Loose-leaf binding
is not acceptable. Students should also note that electronic submission of the thesis to the
Examination Schools is not possible. The thesis has to be delivered or posted securely. In the
case of successful candidates, one copy of the thesis may be deposited by the examiners in the
Social Sciences library, Manor Road.

The thesis must be accompanied by a signed statement by the student that it is the student’s
own work except where otherwise indicated. This should be on a separate sheet of paper; it
should not form part of the bound thesis. A copy of the Ethics approval letter must also be
included.

MPhil theses are examined anonymously with students identified only by their candidate
number. The thesis submitted should therefore not include acknowledgements that might
reveal the student’s identity.

Students should ensure that they have complied with any confidentiality agreements they
have made in seeking data or other information as part of their thesis. They should ensure
that it is not possible to identify individuals in any data they may present in ways that might
infringe the Data Protection Act or any confidentiality undertakings they may have given. If
in doubt, they should consult their supervisor. In carrying out any interviews or surveys in
their fieldwork students should ensure respondents are given clear information about how
any material collected will be used and attributed.

Research Groups

Aims and format

All 2nd year MPhil students are expected to attend a Research Group throughout their time
in the department. The role of the Research Groups is to focus on substantive academic
issues and strengthen the intellectual climate in the Department for research students,
alongside individual supervision and faculty. They provide a forum to discuss new
developments in a certain field of study. They also provide an opportunity to discuss work in
progress with peers working on related topics, through student presentations of draft thesis
chapters, transfer/ confirmation of status material, or draft conference papers or journal
articles. The role of the faculty member is to provide leadership by facilitating these
meetings, and encouraging collaborative work which could potentially lead to collaborative
publications and research proposals.

Groups meet weekly or fortnightly throughout term as a minimum; some groups continue
throughout vacations. The list of the Journal Clubs/ Student Research Groups is published at
the beginning of the academic year. When the list is published at the beginning of the year,
students should discuss their choice with their supervisor and the group convenors as
appropriate, and inform the Courses Administrator.

26
Programme
The programme of the different groups will vary according to the interests of the members
and the members of staff convening the group, but all groups offer the following basic
programme in the context of ‘playing to their strengths’:

• Discussion of new research (as well as classic texts) in the field(s) relevant to the
group – journal articles, books, research reports, research reviews, for example,
introduced by a member of the group and critiqued by the whole group;

• Discussion of research design and methods relevant for research students in the
group – this will emerge from discussion of new research as well as students’ work in
progress; it could also include ‘research surgeries’ when students bring particular
queries to an ‘open session’, or ‘group seminars’ on a new research proposal or
research report, with different members of the group reviewing aims, content,
research design, research methods, policy context, etc;

• Individual presentations by all members of the group of their own work – this will
include PRS students presenting an early draft of their literature chapter or research
design, for example, or DPhil students presenting drafts of material for confirmation/
submission, for peer review/ critique by the whole group of content, research
design, research methods, context, etc. The advantages of this are that material will
be discussed by students at different stages of their DPhil careers, and thus able to
bring different levels of experience in support of their colleagues;

• Individual presentations of drafts of conference papers, journal articles, book

chapters, research proposals etc; all members of the group will be expected to make
such a presentation at some point, and students will be encouraged and helped to
develop the necessary skills.

How the different groups cover these programme elements each term will vary. But all
students will have the opportunity to do the following:
• present their own research
• review/ critique other research
• explore a range of relevant research designs and methods
• widen their understanding of relevant concepts and contexts, policy and research
• select, lead and present discussion
• meet research student colleagues at different stages of their DPhil ‘trajectory’
• meet staff and researchers in the department
• present and review draft conference papers, articles and research proposals.

The termly seminar/research meeting convened by the Graduate Research Students Co-
ordinator will build on the programme as organised by the Journal Clubs/ Student Research
Groups during that term, and will be planned in conjunction with the groups’ convenors.

For 2015 – 2016 the following Research Groups are likely to be convened:
• Evidence Based Social Intervention

27
 • Politics of Social Policy
• Poverty Research Group
• Family and Gender Research Group
• Inequality Research Group.

On demand or as requested sessions may be provided on for example:

• Seminars on research methodology and practical skills
• Extra training workshops on special skills e.g. NVivo training
• Career development

Students will also have the opportunity to compete for the Barnett Prize.

Barnett Papers in Social Research

The Barnett Papers in Social Research give Graduate Research Students and faculty
members, as well as distinguished visitors to the Department, the opportunity to “pre-
publish” high quality research on the department's web pages in a timely manner. Students
are encouraged to submit papers for publication in this series. Collaborative and cross-
disciplinary papers are particularly encouraged. Manuscripts should be submitted to the
editor(s) of the series in Word format. For more information on the Barnett Papers in Social
Research and for submission guidelines see http://www.spi.ox.ac.uk/publications/barnett-
papers-in-social-research.html.

28
4. Taught Course Outline (MSc and MPhil)

The Core Paper: Comparative Social Policy

The Core Paper is taught in the first term through lectures, seminars and tutorials. It has two
main components.

The first consists of 8 lectures on Comparative Social Policy together with accompanying
seminars led by members of the Comparative Social Policy teaching team. These lectures
and seminars focus on ‘theories, principles, ideas, institutions and providers’ that underlie
different types of welfare systems and provisions. Students will be introduced to key
theories and concepts within Comparative Social Policy and will be asked to reflect on how
and why welfare provisions might differ in different contexts across time and space. As part
of the first term’s learning and informal assessment, students write two essays for
discussion with their supervisor in supervision tutorials.

The second part of the Core Paper focuses on the skills of Social Policy Analysis. The course
seeks to equip students with the theoretical and analytic tools necessary to engage in
formal policy analysis and to provide an experience of applying them to real-world-like
problems while receiving constructive feedback. An eight lecture series is accompanied by
four sessions devoted to illustrative case-studies in the first half of the term that are
followed in the second half of the term by four practical sessions in which students working
in groups present and defend policy analyses of their own accompanied by four seminars.
Students are expected to make small group presentations in these seminars.

Formal assessment
The Core Paper is formally assessed through a three hour exam scheduled in the week after
the end of Trinity term in the first year.

For the MPhil qualifying test

There are three parts of the qualifying test for continued MPhil study (Core Paper, Principles
and Practice and Methods Paper and the first year Option Paper). Students who fail the
qualifying test may, in exceptional circumstances, and at the discretion of the Graduate Studies
Committee, be allowed to retake the test before the beginning of the first week of the next
academic year. The Graduate Studies Committee can decide that the retake shall consist of the
whole test or parts of the test.

Principles and Practice of Research Design and Methods Paper

The Principles and Practice of Research and Methods paper is taught in both Michaelmas
and Hilary terms. It is taught through a range of lectures, seminars and workshops. It is split
into two key components: 1) Principles and Practice of Comparative Research, and 2)
Research Methods.

29
Principles and Practice of Comparative Research
This consists of an 8 week course of lectures on the comparative method plus a set of three
lectures on research design in general. All but one of these lectures takes place in
Michaelmas term.

This course explores the basic principles and characteristics of comparative method and
assesses the philosophical underpinnings and potential use of a wide range of comparative
methodologies and approaches. The course is designed so that students gain knowledge of
the principles and practice of comparative research and how it can be applied in social
policy. The course also offers some hands-on experience of Qualitative Comparative
Analysis.

The second component of comparative research design consists of three lectures (2 in

Michaelmas and 1 in Hilary) aimed at preparing students for carrying out their own
comparative research.

Research Methods
The Research Methods component of the Principles and Practice of Research Design and
Methods paper is again split into two parts. Quantitative Research Methods will be taught in
both Michaelmas and Hilary terms and Qualitative Research Methods in Hilary.

The quantitative methods component comprises 8 lectures and 8 ‘hands-on’ workshops

which introduce basic principles of statistical inference and statistical models for the
analysis of quantitative social science data.

The qualitative methods component is taught through 8 two-hours sessions (a mix of

lectures and practice sessions), which provide opportunities for student exercises and
discussions. These introduce students to the main qualitative research methods and to
specific techniques and strategies involved in the collection and analysis of qualitative data.

Formal assessment
The Principles and Practice of Research Design and Methods Paper is designed to equip
students to carry out a piece of research that constitutes the thesis. However, the Research
Methods component is also assessed in a series of assignments.

First, a ‘Methods Workbook’ has to be submitted consisting of two quantitative methods

assignments, each of up to 2,500 words and one qualitative assignment (of up to 3,000
words). These have to be submitted by the dates set during the course; examiners have the
authority to deduct 5% per day for late submissions. To pass candidates must obtain a mark
of 50% in all components. The course assignments, once successfully completed and
marked, form the ‘Methods Workbook’. The completed Workbook must be submitted by
noon on Friday of the sixth week of Trinity Term to the Course Administrator. Examiners may
deduct marks for late submission.

In addition to the ‘Methods Workbook’ students have to complete two ‘Critical Methods
Essays’ of up to 2,500 words each, one on a qualitative methodology and the other on a
quantitative piece of work. Students select a research paper of each type from a circulated

30
list. Students must submit two copies of the critical methods essay directly to the Clerk of
Examination Schools, High Street by noon on the first Monday of Trinity term. The Critical
Methods essays’ average mark must reach 50% to pass. Examiners may deduct marks for
late submissions (up to 5% per day).

If any elements of the methods component are not passed then the whole component will
be failed.

Option Papers

Specialist option papers are taught through small seminar groups usually of between 6-12
students depending on what students select. MPhil students are required to select three
option papers and to be examined in two; MSc students take two and are examined in one.

Option papers are designed to offer students the opportunity to develop an in-depth
knowledge of a particular policy area. Option papers are built around specialist research
interests of academic staff. Although not all option papers are offered each year, option
papers offered in the Department in the coming year are likely to include:

• Community Analysis and Large-Scale Interventions

• Comparative Education Policy
• Family, Gender and Welfare State in Comparative Perspective
• Health and Health Care
• Population Challenges in a Global World
• Poverty in Comparative Perspective
• The Economics of Social Policy
• The Policy Challenges of Ageing Societies.

Subject to agreement with the Course Director, students are permitted to take an option
paper from a selection of papers taught by the Evidence Based Social Intervention and
Policy Evaluation teaching team within the department, or in particular cases an option
paper offered in another University department. In the latter case, students must provide
details of the option syllabus including the examination process, make a case for why the
desired option is core to their degree programme and have submitted their three Core
Paper essays to their supervisor for assessment.

In option papers students are typically required to prepare seminar presentations and write
essays to be informally assessed by the option paper provider.

Formal assessment
Option papers are, typically, formally assessed through a three hour exam in the week after
the end of Trinity term.

31
5. Outlines and key readings for all papers

The Core Paper

Comparative Social Policy

Mary Daly
mary.daly@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: This course provides an introduction to comparative social policy. It examines theories of the
emergence and development of the welfare state, key concepts of comparative social policy
analysis, and the main challenges facing the welfare state today. The main focus is on the advanced
economies of the developed world.

Aims: Students will be expected to be able to discuss the historical evolution of the welfare state
and engage in debates regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the theoretical and empirical
approaches to comparative welfare state analysis; evaluate factors and emergent issues that affect
welfare state transformations; and analyse these in respect to how and why they vary (or not) across
countries.

Content and structure: The course begins with consideration of the origins of the welfare state and
how its determinants have been theorized over time. In a second step, we will discuss the various
welfare state typologies and how outcomes differ among various cases. Next, we will discuss the
implications for social policy of population ageing, changing inequality patterns, the transformation
of the family and ‘new social risks’. Finally, we will consider debates about the impact of processes
of globalisation on social policy.

Key texts:
Castles, F.G., Leibfried, S., Lewis, J., Obinger, H. and Pierson, C. (eds) (2010) The Oxford Handbook of
The Welfare State, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Daly, M. (2011) Welfare, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Esping-Andersen, G. (1990) The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hay, C. and Wincott, D. (2012) The Political Economy of European Welfare Capitalism, Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Hemerijck, A. (2013) Changing Welfare States, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pierson, C. (2006) Beyond the Welfare State? The New Political Economy of Welfare, 3rd edition,
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Pierson, C., Castles, F.G. and Naumann, I. (eds) (2014) The Welfare State Reader, 3rd edition,
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Van Kersbergen, K. and Vis, B (2014) Comparative Welfare State Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

32
Social Policy Analysis
Robert Walker
Robert.walker@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric/rationale:
Social policy analysis employs a range of different concepts and methods in order to understand the
origins, evolution and effectiveness of social policies. Practitioners require: an awareness of different
models of policy making and development; an appreciation of the role and perspectives of policy
actors; knowledge of the theory and practice of policy learning and of the nature and role of
evidence; and an understanding of the various modes of policy analysis and evaluation.

Aims:
The course seeks to equip students with the theoretical and analytic tools necessary to engage in
formal policy analysis and to provide experience in applying them to real-world-like problems while
receiving constructive feedback. To achieve this, the course comprises TWO sessions EACH week
during Michaelmas term. An eight lecture series is accompanied by four sessions devoted to
illustrative case-studies in the first half of the term that are followed in the second half of the term
by four practical sessions in which students working in groups present and defend policy analyses.

Content and Structure of lecture series component:

The eight lectures seek to illustrate how social policy analysts can employ a range of concepts and
methods in order better to understand the origins, development and effectiveness of social policies
and/or to contribute to the formulation and implementation of policy. The lecture series divides into
two, the first four lectures introduce key concepts, and the second four discuss processes.

Case-studies: The case-study sessions this year are likely to embrace domestic violence, extreme
poverty, tax credits and conditional cash transfers and communication.

Practical classes: The practical classes will take the form of student led presentations on particular
‘social problems’ and suitable policy responses. The motif is that each week one group of students
presents their findings to another that receives and critiques the presentation. Jointly with other
students, each student will participate in one seminar presentation and one critique.

Assessment:
There is no direct assessment of this component of the course but Social Policy Analysis contributes
to the core examination paper for both Comparative Social Policy and the evaluation pathway on the
Evidence-based Social Intervention and Policy Evaluation degrees. For the practical component in
weeks 5-8 students normally prepare written handouts in support of their presentation. In addition,
students will be required to produce a written (essay length) report for tutorial discussion with their
supervisor.

Key texts:
Bardach, E. (2011) A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The eightfold path to more effective problem
solving, (fourth edition), Washington and Oxford: CQ Press
Knoepfel, P., Larrue, C., Varone, F. and Hill, M. (2007) Public Policy Analysis, Bristol: Policy Press.
Goodin, R., Rein, M., and Moran, M. (2006) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Kingdon, J. (2010) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, Pearson Education (US).
Parsons, W. (2005) Public Policy: An Introduction to Policy Analysis, Cheltenham: Elgar.
Spicker, P. (2006) Policy Analysis for Practice: Applying Social Policy, Bristol: Policy Press.

33
Research and Methods Papers

Principles and Practice of Comparative Research

Convenor: Mary Daly (mary.daly@spi.ox.ac.uk), Erzsébet Bukodi and Steph Thompson.

Rubric: Comparative method is a powerful method to: test hypotheses, infer causation, illustrate
and gain depth in understanding of specific patterns, and interpret social change. This course
engages with the core principles of comparative research design and provides an overview of the
comparative method in social policy research.

Aims: The course explores the basic principles and characteristics of comparative method and
assesses the potential use of a wide range of comparative methodologies and approaches. The
course – in enabling students to gain knowledge and perspective on the principles and practice of
comparative research in social policy – is intended also to feed into the thesis.

Content and Structure: The course is divided in two parts. The first three lectures introduce the
principles of comparative method; the other five lectures illustrate and discuss the use of
comparison in different types of research design, covering case study methods, Qualitative
Comparative Analysis and statistical techniques.

The readings are based on a wide range of literature, i.e. comparative politics, political theory,
comparative sociology, sociological theory and comparative social policy. In addition, each lecture
provides applied examples of the methods discussed.

Organisation of the teaching: Students attend a one-hour lecture weekly in Michaelmas Term.
Students will be expected to read core texts before each lecture. There is no formal exam or
assessment for this course.

Key Texts:
Brady, H. E., and Collier, D. (2010) Rethinking Social Inquiry: Diverse Tools, Shared Standards (2nd
ed.), Plymouth: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
George, A. and Bennett, A. (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences,
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
King, G., Keohane, R. and Verba, S. (1994) Designing Social Inquiry, Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Newsletter of The American Political Science Association Organised Section for Qualitative and
Multi-Method Research, Fall 2011, Vol. 9, N.2 (Contribution of: Patrick Emmenegger,
Bernhard Ebbinghaus, Jon Kvist, Lane Kenworthy, Gary Goertz, Klaus Petersen, Michael
Shalev).
Della Porta, D. and Keating, M. (eds) Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ragin, C. (1987) The Comparative Method, Berkeley: University of California Press.

34
Quantitative/Statistical Methods
Erzsébet Bukodi
erzsebet.bukodi@nuffield.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: This course is designed to develop students’ skills in quantitative data analysis. It covers basic
principles of statistical inference and introduces various statistical methods for analysing
quantitative data in the social sciences. The course will familiarise students with basic descriptive
statistics, but the main emphasis will be on multivariate regression models for continuous and
categorical dependent variables.

Aims: The course seeks to equip students – through lectures – with a clear theoretical understanding
of selected statistical techniques and – through practical classes – with the competence to apply
these techniques to real data. By the end of the course, students will be able to produce descriptive
statistics, understand methods of modelling associations between variables with a focus on linear
and logistic regression and interpret findings of multivariate statistical analysis correctly.

Content and structure: The course is divided into two parts. The first is a series of eight lectures,
taken in the first term, on the principles of quantitative data analyses (attended by all of the
evidence-based Masters degrees’ students in the Social Sciences Division). Secondly, in the second
term students take a series of eight practical classes – specifically designed for CSP students – that
are held in the IT room in Manor Road. For these, detailed guidance will be provided and, using a
statistical computer package (STATA), students will work through, discuss and interpret statistical
analyses using data-sets of relevant data.

The course will cover the following main topics:

• describing and exploring data
• multiple linear regression with continuous and categorical explanatory variables
• interaction between explanatory variables in multiple regression
• model selection procedures, model building
• logistic regression for binary and categorical dependent variables.

Assessment: Assessment is by way of two assignments – a data analysis task and a more complex
research issue. These assignments, once marked, form part of the ‘workbook’.

Key texts:
Agresti, A. and Finlay, B. (2009) Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. Fourth Edition. New York:
Pearson Education International.
Brambor, T., Clark, F.W. and Golder, M. (2006) Understanding interaction models: Improving
empirical analysis. Political Analysis, 14: 63-82.
Bring, J. (1994) How to standardise regression coefficients. The American Statistician, 48: 209-213.
Cox, D. (1992) Causality: Some statistical aspects. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 155: 291-301.
King, G. (1986) How not to lie with statistics: Avoiding common mistakes in quantitative political
science. American Journal of Political Science, 30: 666-87.
Miller, J. E. (2005) The Chicago Guide to Writing about Multivariate Analysis. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press.
Pampel, F. C. (2000) Logistic regression: A Primer. London: Sage.
Pontusson, J. (2007) Methods in comparative political economy. Comparative Social Research, 24:
325-333.
Shalev, M. (2007) Limits and alternatives to multiple regression in comparative research.
Comparative Social Research, 24: 261-308.

35
Qualitative Research Methods
Stuart Basten
(stuart.basten@spi.ox.ac.uk)

Rubric: In a series of eight two-hour weekly sessions, this course examines the rationale and
techniques of qualitative methodology applied to the social sciences, with particular reference to
social policy. The course combines theoretical and philosophical grounding with practical
application, and introduces students to a number of specific methods of data gathering and data
analysis as well as general principles of qualitative research design. Students learn to apply think
qualitatively, to explore the features of a number of qualitative research techniques via policy
relevant exercises and to choose methods that will best enable them to answer their particular
research question.

Aims: Students will be introduced to the philosophy behind a qualitative approach and research
design, a range of qualitative research methods will be examined including interviewing; focus
groups and different modes of analysis of qualitative data, including thematic analysis and process
tracing.

Content and structure: The course divides into two sections. The first comprises The Principles of
Qualitative Research (a set of lectures that introduces students to theories concerning the nature,
underlying philosophy, key features and strengths and limitations of qualitative research in general)
and Specific Qualitative Research Techniques (lectures that introduce a range of methods including
individual and group interviewing and ethnography and fieldwork). This section may be taught
jointly with the MSc in EBSIPE. The second section - Modes of Analysis of Qualitative Evidence - will
treat of a range of different analytic methods and techniques (including the use of different
software). The specific modes of analysis covered may include thematic analysis, discourse analysis
and process tracing.

Students are expected to read for and contribute to the discussion each week. Students will be
required to complete one main assignment for the course which will involve utilising qualitative
data to address a specific social policy problem. Details of the assignment will be distributed
separately.

Key texts:
Bennett, A. and Checkel, J.T. (eds) (2013) Process Tracing From Metaphor to Analytic Tool,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Berg, B. L. (2001) (4th edition) Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, London: Allyn
and Bacon.
Brinkmann, S. and Kvale, S. (2015) InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research
Interviewing, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Flick, U. (2006) An Introduction to Qualitative Research, London: Sage, especially chapter 2.
Gibbs, G. (2007) Analyzing Qualitative Data, London: Sage.
Huberman, M. and Miles, M. (2002) The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion, London: Sage.
Kuckartz, U. (2014) Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice and Using Software,
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Richards, L. (2005) Handling Qualitative Data: A Practical Guide, London: Thousand Oaks, New Delhi:
Sage.
Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. McNaughton Nicholls, C. and Ormston, R. (2014) Qualitative Research Practice,
2nd edition, London: Sage.

36
Option Papers

Community Analysis and Large-Scale Interventions

David Humphreys
david.humphreys@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric:
Concepts of ‘community’ and ‘social capital’ have increasing importance for policy intervention and
evaluation in both developed and developing countries. Is a particular policy ‘appropriate’ to the
culture, community or group where it is to be implemented? What is the evidence base for policy
implementation? How should large-scale programmes be evaluated?

Aims:
This option paper will
• provide an introduction to key conceptual debates;
• explore different levels and types of interventions;
• analyse examples of interventions, research designs and studies.

Content and structure:

The programme for the term will cover
• policy debates about the importance of community in promoting and understanding
individual and community change – ‘neighbourhoods and communities as contexts for
development’ – ‘neighbourhood effects’;
• examples of policy implementation (are interventions targeted at particular groups, or a
universal service?)
• definitions of concepts such as ‘community’, ‘neighbourhood’, ‘networks’, ‘social capital’ (for
example, is ‘social capital’ simply another label for ‘community’?)
• ‘pathological’ or ‘structural’ approaches to intervention; are programmes aimed at
individual or structural change?
• different approaches to evaluation of interventions, and measurement of individual and
community level change
Each week a student will present a short paper; other members will be expected to have read some
material in order to contribute to the discussion. Students will write two essays from the list
provided and give one presentation.

Key texts:
Belsky, J., Barnes, J. and Melhuish, E. (eds: 2007) The National Evaluation of Sure Start: does area-
based early intervention work? Bristol: Policy Press
Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, J.D. and Aber, J.L. (eds: 1997) Neighborhood Poverty. Volume I: context and
consequences for children. Volume II: policy implications in studying neighborhoods. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation
Coulthard, M., Walker, A. and Morgan, A. (2002) People’s Perceptions of Their Neighbourhood and
Community Involvement. Results from the social capital module of the General Household
Survey 2000. ONS. London: TSO
Hills, J., Le Grand, J. and Piachaud, D. (eds (2002) Understanding Social Exclusion. Oxford: Oxford
University Press (see chapters by Lupton and Power; Richardson and Mumford)
Putnam, R. (ed) (2002) Democracies in Flux: the Evolution of Social Capital in Contemporary Society.
New York: Oxford University Press.

37
Comparative Education Policy
Paola Mattei
paola.mattei@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: In many advanced welfare states, state involvement in education precedes the development
of other universal welfare services. It has been argued that the quality and capacity of a country’s
education system are a critical element in its economic competitiveness, and a contributory factor to
the quality of its democratic system. Comparative education is a diverse field, comprising
multidisciplinary analytical and methodological approaches. Inequalities in access to education and
variations in educational outcomes according to socio-economic background, gender, ethnic groups
have been of central concern.

Aims: This course introduces students to key issues in the comparative analysis of educational
systems, institutions and reforms. Students will improve their understanding of educational systems
in comparative perspective through knowledge of the historical and cultural underpinning of
different institutional arrangements for the organisation, financing and delivery of public schooling.

Content and Structure: The course is designed to provide students with a knowledge and
understanding of key issues in the developments of educational systems in comparative perspective,
educational reforms, and educational inequalities. The course will examine the historical origins and
process of institutionalisation of educational systems in Europe, North America and Asia. It will
explore the role of political ideas in the conceptualisation of educational institutions and policies
through different understanding of the concept of citizenship and civic education. Central to the
course is a comparative examination of education policy reforms in Europe over the past two
decades, and the relationship between policy reforms and organisational changes. The course
explores education provision in relation to globalisation and Europeanization, focusing on the extent
of convergence and divergence, paying special attention to the frameworks used by political
scientists and theories of the state.

Teaching and Assessment: Students will attend weekly two-hour seminars in Hilary Term. Each
seminar is designed to address questions arising from and extending beyond the recommended
reading list. The seminars are an opportunity for co-operative learning. All students are expected to
develop their skills in presenting ideas and discussing their arguments with the rest of the group. All
students are expected to do the key readings for each seminar. Each student will make two seminar
presentations and will write one assessed essay (of up to 2,000 words) to be delivered to the
Convenor by the end of Week 4 . There will b a three-hour examination in Trinity Term.

Key texts:
Archer, M.S. (1979) Social Origins of Educational Systems, London: SAGE.
Chitty, Clyde (2009) Education Policy in Britain, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
David, M. (2012) ‘Education’ in P. Alcock, A. Erskine and M. May (eds.), The Student’s Companion to
Social Policy, 4th edition, London: Blackwell.
Gewirtz, S. et al. (1995) Markets, Choice and Equity in Education, Buckingham: Open University
Press.
Glennerster, Howard (1998), ‘Education: reaping the harvest’, in H.Glennerster and J.Hills (eds.), The
State of Welfare, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 27-74.
Gorard, S. (2003), Schools, Markets and Choice Policies, London: Routledge Falmer.
Halsey, A.H (1997), Education: Culture, Economy and Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Phillips, D and M. Schweisfurth (2006), Comparative and International Education. An introduction to
theory, method and practice. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

38
Family, Gender and Welfare State in Comparative Perspective
Mary Daly
mary.daly@spi.ox.ac.uk

Content and Focus: The paper probes the nature, forms and challenges of policy relating to family as
well as gender relations. It problematises variations in the aims, modalities and underlying
motivations of relevant social policies within and across countries. Among the topics considered are
child wellbeing, gender equality, family functioning, care and ageing. Theoretically, the paper locates
family and gender policies within the nexus of relations between family, market, state and society at
macro level and in terms of the exigencies of managing everyday family and personal life at a more
micro level.

Aims and objectives: The paper has two central objectives: to identify key variations in family and
gender policies cross-nationally; to account for such variations. The paper aims to provide students
with a grounding in the key issues and concepts in the study of comparative family and gender policy
and the opportunity to critically reflect on both the policy practice and the scholarship especially
from a comparative perspective.

Organisation of the teaching: Students will attend weekly two-hour seminars in Hilary Term.

Key Learning Objectives:

• to acquire detailed empirical knowledge of the key policy options and preferences for
family- and gender-related issues within and across countries;
• to identify and analyse the key debates and reforms in policy in advanced democracies;
• to understand how family and gender policies are linked with other types of social policies
within the context of the welfare state and the society and economy more broadly.

Assessment: Formal: Written examination at the end of Trinity term; Informal: All participants are
expected to undertake two class-related roles: be a discussion leader and make a presentation.
In Trinity Term there will be a three-hour examination.

Source Texts for the Course:

Saraceno, C. and Keck, W. (2008) The Institutional Framework of Intergenerational Family
Obligations in Europe: A conceptual and Methodological Overview, Berlin: WZB
http://www.multilinks-project.eu/uploads/papers/0000/0010/Report_Saraceno_Keck_Nov08.pdf

Family Platform (2010) Research on Families and Family Policies in Europe: State of the Art, Family
Research Centre, University of Jyväskylä
https://eldorado.tu-dortmund.de/bitstream/2003/27686/1/WP1StateoftheArtFINALREPORT.pdf

Lohmann, H. et al (2010) Towards a Framework for Assessing Family Policies in the EU, OECD Social,
Employment and Migration Working Papers No 88,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/223883627348

39
Health and Health Care
Rebecca Surender
rebecca.surender@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: The following are the main topics to be covered: alternative forms of provision of health care;
problems (particularly organisational and financial) confronting modern health-care systems;
effectiveness, quality and efficiency in health care; changes in the role of the medical profession and in
the doctor-patient relationship; methodological issues in comparative health care; the measurement of
health status and of medical outcome; social factors in illness and health inequalities.

Content: The paper considers what is meant by health policy, how we define a health care system,
how we understand health policy processes and politics and how we understand these things
comparatively. It examines the key features and limitations of the main typologies of health systems,
with particular focus on western industrialised societies. To what extent are western health care
systems confronting universal dilemmas, particularly with regard to issues of management, quality,
funding and resource allocation? Methodological issues in the measurement of medical outcomes
and quality are considered both for examining the value for individuals of health services as well as
for judging the effectiveness and efficiency of health care systems. The course considers the
traditional and changing role of the medical profession in shaping health care; patient satisfaction
and assessment of health care; and the nature and policy implications of inequalities in health.
Finally, the course examines the main health challenges in developing countries and evaluates the
major policy strategies used to meet these challenges.

Aims and Objectives: This paper aims to provide students with grounding in some of the key issues
and concepts in the study of comparative health policy. Students will be expected to engage with a
variety of disciplinary approaches to the study of health care (including sociology, economics,
political science and management), to critically evaluate policy cross-nationally, to draw upon
relevant research, and to be able to communicate their ideas effectively.

Organisation of the teaching: Students attend a weekly two hour seminar throughout Hilary term
and are expected to read for, and contribute to, the discussion each week. In addition each student
will make two seminar presentations and will write one assessed essay (of up to 2,000 words).

Key Texts:
Blank, R. and Burau, V. (2010) Comparative Health Policy, Palgrave Macmillan
Blaxter, M. (2010) Health, 2nd ed. Polity,
Buse, K., Mays, N. and Walt, G. (2005) Making Health Policy, Open Univ. Press
Crinson, I. (2008) Health Policy, Sage,
Hunter, D. (2008) The Health Debate, Policy Press.
Mahon, A. et al. (2009) A Reader in Health Policy and Management, Open UP
Marmor, T. and Wendt, C. (2011) Reforming Health Systems, E. Elgar
Mossialos, E. (2002) Funding Health Care; Options for Europe, Open UP
OECD (2013) Health at a Glance, OECD, Paris
OECD, (2003) A Disease Based Comparison of Health Systems, OECD, Paris
Taylor, G. and Hawley, H. (2010) Key Debates in Health Care, Open University Press.

40
Population Challenges in a Global World
Chris Wilson
chris.wilson@spi.ox.ac.uk

Content: Demographic transformations are a fundamental aspect of social change, yet because
populations tend to change relatively slowly, demography is often taken for granted and its impact
under-appreciated. However, rather like some slow geological process that is imperceptible in the
short-run, demographic change often has an ineluctable force, and ends up transforming the whole
social and economic landscape. Eventually, the sheer scale of demographic change forces it to a spot
high up on the policy agenda. Understanding the long-term processes of demographic change, and
the challenges they pose, is thus of paramount importance. The need for policy-related research in
the population field has never been greater. It is scarcely possible to open a serious newspaper
anywhere in the world without coming across articles, editorials or opinion pieces highlighting the
role of demographic change in reshaping society.

In this course we will examine some of the most important population challenges facing societies
today. We will look at how countries in many parts of the world are responding to these challenges
and we will aim to get insights into the contribution demographic research can make to planning for
the future in many areas of economic and social life. Topics covered include: low fertility, gender
equity and social policy; increasing longevity and health care; international migration; age-structure
changes, labour force and population ageing; gendercide (sex-specific abortion) and sex ratio
distortions.

Aims and objectives: The course provides students with an introduction to the main dimensions of
demographic change in the contemporary world and examines how meeting the challenges posed
by these changes helps shape social policy. Students will become familiar with demographic
terminology and concepts, though there is no large element of computational work.

Organisation of the teaching: Students attend a weekly two-hour seminar in Hilary Term. The first
two meetings take the form of an introduction to the key issues and concepts in population studies
and an overview of demographic terminology and methods. The remainder of the seminars are
student-led discussions of specific topics. Students make one or two presentations (15 minutes) and
write one or two essays.

Key texts: No single text book is appropriate for this course. This makes life both more complicated
and more interesting, because students need to get to grips with leading-edge research as the
principle source of information. Although there is no text book, there are several online sources that
can provide a good point of entry into the field. One is the Population Bulletin published by the
Population Reference Bureau in Washington D.C. (www.prb.org). Each bulletin addresses a key issue
in demographic change and is accessible to a non-specialist reader. To get a first idea of
demographic terminology, see:
Joseph A McFalls Jr. 2007. Population: a lively introduction, Population Bulletin, 62.1, 1-31.

Another excellent source is the journal Population and Development Review published by the
Population Council in New York. Searching this journal’s archive for a specific topic is a very good
way into the literature.

41
Poverty in Comparative Context
Fran Bennett
fran.bennett@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: The course will examine concepts and measurement of poverty and associated concepts and
conditions such as capability deprivation, social exclusion and inequality; major relevant policy issues and
approaches to tackling poverty in different countries, and the challenges and tensions involved; and the
politics of policies on poverty, including public attitudes and the involvement of international institutions.
This will be undertaken in a comparative context, whilst focusing on developed countries in particular.

Aims: To help students to gain a detailed understanding of the conceptualisation and measurement of
poverty, in particular within a comparative context, and its relationship with other concepts and
conditions such as capability deprivation, social exclusion and inequality; and to develop students’ ability
to evaluate critically major issues in the field and apply their knowledge to key questions of policy
debates and political approaches. The main focus of the course is exploring the study of poverty and
policies to tackle poverty within a comparative perspective.

Content and structure: The course will cover major issues in conceptualising and measuring poverty in
comparative context and will examine its relationship to the capabilities framework, social exclusion and
inequality, as well as area-based approaches. Some key policy issues in tackling poverty (amongst those
below pension age in particular) will be discussed in comparative perspective. These issues are likely to
include child poverty; the turn to conditionality; and ‘targeting’ and welfare regimes. Major influences on
policy making on poverty will be analysed, in particular public attitudes to poverty and the role of key
international financial and policy making institutions.

There will be 8 seminar group sessions. All students will be expected to read at least the key texts for
each topic and to participate actively in class debate, as well as completing 3 pieces of work (essays, of
about 2500 words each, presentations and/or responses). A reading list, with essay/presentation
questions, is provided. The course is assessed through a 3-hour exam after the end of Trinity term.

Key texts:
*Barrientos, A. and Hulme, D. (eds.) (2008) Social Protection for the Poor and Poorest: Concepts, policies
and politics, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan
* Brady, D. (2009) Rich Democracies, Poor People: How politics explain poverty, Oxford and New York:
Oxford University Press
* Daly, M. (2008) ‘Whither EU social policy? An account and assessment of developments in the Lisbon
social inclusion process’, Journal of Social Policy 37(1): 1-19
* Hills, J., Le Grand, J. and Piachaud, D. (2002) Understanding Social Exclusion, Oxford: Oxford University
Press
* Korpi, W. & Palme, J. (1998) ‘The paradox of redistribution & strategies of equality: welfare state
institutions, inequality & poverty in the western countries’, American Sociological Review 63(5): 661-687
* Lister, R. (2004) Poverty, Cambridge: Polity Press
* Narayan, D. et al. (various) (2000; 2002) Voices of the Poor: Crying out for Change, Oxford: Oxford
University Press (with World Bank)
* Oxford Poverty and Human Development Initiative (Department of International Development,
University of Oxford): www.ophi.org.uk - OPHI multidimensional poverty measure
* Rothstein, B. (1999) Just Institutions Matter: The moral and political logic of the universal welfare state,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
* Sen, A. (1983) 'Poor, relatively speaking', Oxford Economic Papers 35:153-69
* Walker, R. (2005) Social Security and Welfare: Concepts and comparisons, Basingstoke: Open University
Press/McGraw-Hill (especially chapters 7 & 8)
* Articles in Journal of Policy Analysis and Management (2009) 28(4): 713-752; & see JPAM (2010) (29(2))

42
The Economics of Social Policy
Brian Nolan
brian.nolan@spi.ox.ac.uk

Rubric: This course focuses on the relationship between economics and social policy, which is of
central importance to understanding how social policy has evolved, how it impacts on individuals
and society, and how current debates about its future are framed.

Key Learning Objectives:

• To obtain a clear understanding of core economic concepts and principles of relevance to
social policy;
• To employ these economic concepts and frameworks in analysis of core areas of social policy
such as social protection, education, health and housing;
• To critically appraise and reflect on the role of economic analysis in the process of designing
and assessing social policy.

Content and Structure: The course introduces students to the basic principles of economics, setting
out how economics approaches the understanding of behaviour at the micro level, for consumers
and producers, and the framework derived from welfare economics for assessing whether reforms
are welfare-improving. It then employs this analytical framework to explore insights from the
application of an economics perspective to debates about equity versus efficiency, the welfare state,
and core areas of social policy such as social transfers, education, health, and housing. It brings out
how the economic analysis of labour markets informs the design of social protection systems, and
highlights core economic issues in thinking about pensions. It deals with the ways in which standard
economic analysis has to be adapted to the specific features of other key arenas for public policy,
namely health, education and housing. It also deals with broader debates about the role of the state
versus “the market”, and brings out how very different conclusions can still be drawn in this respect
when the framework provided by standard economic theory is taken as the point of departure.

Teaching and Assessment: Students will attend weekly two-hour seminars in Hilary Term. Each
seminar is designed to address questions arising from and extending beyond the recommended
reading list. The seminars are an opportunity for co-operative learning. All students are expected to
do the key readings for each seminar.
Informal Assessment: All participants are expected to engage in presentation and discussion in class,
and must also write one essay (no longer than 2,500 words excluding bibliography) which is due by
Friday week 7.
Formal Assessment: Written examination (three hours) at the end of Trinity term.

Core Texts for the Course:

Barr, N. (2012) Economics of the Welfare State, 5th. Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012

LeGrand, J., Smith, S. and C. Propper, (2008) The Economics of Social Problems, 4th. edition, Palgrave
Macmillan.

43
The Policy Challenges of Ageing Societies
Stuart Basten
stuart.basten@spi.ox.ac.uk

Introduction: In this course, we will set out to explore the various different ways by which
demographic, structural changes might impact upon future trajectories of social welfare and the
provision of services such as pensions, long-term care, healthcare and so on. Through
reconceptualising ageing and what it means to be ‘old’, the course will encourage students to think
beyond the accepted ‘apocalyptic’ narrative associated with population ageing to consider an
alternative future. To do this, we will explore philosophical and empirical conceptions of ageing and
‘dependency’ as well as exploring advanced, cutting-edge themes in demography, social gerontology
and economics – with a special focus on ‘National Transfer Accounts’. While the course is primarily
focussed upon the OECD countries, special attention will be paid to developing settings not yet
characterised by large-scale institutional support for older people.

Course objectives:
• To obtain a clear understanding of the core policy challenges associated with population
ageing
• To employ this knowledge to the understanding of systems of policy and the impact of
population ageing
• To be able to critically appraise existing narratives and discourses regarding the impact of
population ageing on social policy and social welfare and develop new insights.

Course outline: The course starts with an examination of the structural context of population ageing
and goes on to focus upon the shifting trends in provision of formal and informal social provision for
the elderly. In this context, we first examine the shift from family responsibility for elderly care
towards corporate and state institutional arrangements in the West over the past 150 years. Next,
we provide students with tools to analyse and map contemporary pension provision and long-term
care for the elderly. In regard to the demographic issue, we attempt to understand it in the context
of shifting patterns of intergenerational justice and age structures. We then consider the challenges
that pension systems have to face as a result of a shift from industrial capitalism to more service-
and finance-dominated market economies. Trends are analysed both in affluent democracies and in
emerging economies.

Organisation of the Teaching: Students attend a weekly two-hour seminar in Hilary Term. The
seminars will be comprised of student-led presentations of the core reading, followed by individual
presentations of case studies. The second half of the seminar will be a group discussion on issues
emanating from both the week's reading and the presentations in class. Students will make one or
two presentations (15 minutes) and write one essay.

Core References
Bonoli, G. and Shinkawa, T. (eds) (2005) Ageing and Pension Reform Around the World: Evidence
from Eleven Countries. Edward Elgar.
Dannefer, D. and Philipson, C. (2010) The SAGE Handbook of Social Gerontology. SAGE
Costa-i-Font, J. (ed.) (2011) Reforming Long-Term Care in Europe. Chichester. Wiley-Blackwell.
Lee, R. and Mason, A. (eds) (2012) Population Aging and the Generational Economy: A Global
Perspective. Edward Elgar.
Surender, R. and Walker, R. (eds) (2012) Social Policy in a Developing World. Edward Elgar.
Weeks, J. (2010) Population: An Introduction to Concepts and Issues. Cengage Learning.
WEF (2012) Global Population Ageing: Peril or Promise
[http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GAC_GlobalPopulationAgeing_Report_2012.pdf

44
6. Empirical Research in Social Policy and Social Intervention – A Guide to
Good Practice

This note is intended to provide guidance on good practice in empirical research, by which
we mean practice which is both ethical and effective. It is not exhaustive but indicative, and
aims to alert researchers to the questions which they may need to consider in their work
and provide guidance for resolving difficulties. Bibliographical or desk research is not
considered as it is covered by the usual rules for reference and acknowledgment. For ethical
guidance, see the Social Research Association’s Ethical Guidelines, published 2003, at
www.the-sra.org.uk; and the ESRC’s Research Ethics Framework, published in 2005, at
www.esrc.ac.uk. See also the University’s research ethics guidance and procedures at
www.admin.ox.ac.uk/curec.

Empirical work in social policy takes many forms, and is subject to the universal tension in
social research between the desire for knowledge and the need to respect the subjects of
research whether they are organisations, professionals, or vulnerable individuals. The
overriding aim must be to do no harm. There is also a legal framework governing issues of
confidentiality and consent in empirical research at Annexe A, which sets out the key
elements of the Human Rights Act 1998, Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of
Information Act 2000; see also the University’s guidance (on the CUREC website) on the
Mental Capacity Act 2005. Good practice is unlikely to cause any legal problems. But it may
be helpful to think of the Data Protection Act as designed to ensure proper management of
data sets, and to understand that the Human Rights Act would only be invoked if an
individual felt that they had suffered harm as a result of some disclosure.

When undertaking research as a student in the Department it is important always to uphold

the principles of best research practice. Research participants, the research community and
the general public will rightly judge the Department according to the research standards
adhered to by student researchers as well as by faculty and research staff. Students should
view themselves as undertaking research as part of a research team comprising themselves
and their personal tutor or supervisor. Tutor’s and supervisor’s advice should be sought
whenever issues of research ethics or good practice are confronted and student researchers
should ensure that all university research ethics forms are co-signed with their personal
tutors or supervisors.

Level of risk
The notion of ‘level of risk’ underpins research ethical scrutiny – that is, potential risk to
participants and potential risk to researchers. Work with some age groups or particular
groups of people may be considered ‘risky’: young children are one example. Some topics
may be considered ‘risky’: HIV/AIDS, domestic violence, drug use, contact with children
after separation or divorce are examples. Applications dealing with this sort of topic will
receive close attention. But ‘risk’ here should be considered more in the context of the
proposed research design and methodology than the topic as such. For example,
interviewing children individually, say in a school, in the sight of an appropriate adult, when
information about the study has been provided and consent agreed, is not necessarily to be
considered risky. So for some ‘risky’ topics or age groups it will be possible to design
protocols which set out appropriate procedures and safeguards.

45
Consent
As far as possible research should be based on the freely given consent of those studied.
The researcher is responsible for explaining as fully as possible, in terms meaningful to the
participants, what the research is about, why it is being undertaken, who is funding it, and
how it is to be disseminated. Participants should be made aware of their rights to refuse
participation, and not be given the impression that they are required to participate. In some
situations access to a research setting is via a gatekeeper. In these situations researchers
should adhere to the principle of obtaining informed consent (which may need to be
renewed during the course of a lengthy or developing project) directly from participants,
while at the same time taking account of the gatekeeper’s interest. Participants must have
the capacity to consent, e.g. children under 18 will need the consent of someone with
parental responsibility. Where an individual is unable through age or infirmity to participate,
proxy respondents may be used, but care must be taken not to disturb the vulnerable
individual or the relationship between the individual and the proxy respondent. Note that
different arrangements may be required under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, for example,
when interviewing elderly or ill participants at risk of diminishing mental capacity. The
Information Commissioner has advised that under the Data Protection Act 1998 there
should be some active indication that consent has been given. However, there may be
research situations (for example, participant or non-participant observation) where
obtaining consent is impracticable; a thorough case here needs to be made.

Confidentiality
The anonymity and privacy of those who participate in the research process should be
respected. Personal information concerning participants should be kept confidential. In
some cases it may be necessary to decide whether it is appropriate to record certain kinds
of sensitive information. Individual respondents should be given an identifier, and names
kept separately and securely, bearing in mind the obligations of data managers under the
Data Protection Act. Guarantees of confidentially given to participants must be honoured
except in extreme circumstances (e.g. the safety of a child). There may be less compelling
grounds for extending guarantees of confidentiality to public organisations or other groups
though it is good practice not to identify research sites, but guarantees once given must be
honoured unless there are overriding reasons to do otherwise. Care must be taken to
prevent data being published or released in a form which would permit the actual or
potential identification of research participants or organisations. Withholding names may
not be sufficient. It is possible for jigsaw identification to take place, whereby a number of
separate pieces of information may permit identification. In qualitative work the principle of
redaction may be helpful, whereby all information which would enable a neighbour or work
colleague to identify an individual should be withheld or disguised.

The research process

There are four key elements in any research project:
Selecting a sample
Data collection
Data recording and analysis
Dissemination of findings

46
Sampling
When approaching participants directly informed consent can be requested. When
approaching individuals through a sampling frame such as an institutional set of records, the
institution (e.g. a hospital or court) may act as a post box. Respondents will be required to
give consent, either by opting in to the research, or for non-sensitive research, by opting
out. A letter of invitation to participate should give clear information about the project, why
it is being undertaken, by whom, and what form of dissemination is planned, making clear
that there is no pressure to take part. Confidentiality guarantees should be offered and
explained.

Data Collection
Data should only be collected from individual participants if it cannot be obtained in some
other way, e.g. from records or previous studies. Questions to participants either in person
or on paper must be sensitively framed, and asked without pressure to respond. Any written
or recorded primary material must be stored securely and any information which has not
been anonymised must be destroyed after completion of the project. Interviews must not
be too long. A research participant may feel wronged if research is inappropriately
intrusive, if it raises false hopes, if his/her reputation is affected, or if he/she experiences
anxiety or distress.

Data analysis
Secondary data analysis, including systematic reviews and research synthesis should be
undertaken in a way that is consistent with the respondent consent given in the original
study, where this can be ascertained. Primary data must be analysed in a way which is
consistent with the undertakings given when seeking consent to participate.

Publication and Dissemination

Care must be taken in discussing preliminary findings with colleagues or tutors that
information is not individually identifiable. Draft and final reports must be carefully checked
for identifiable information. If quotations are to be used, this should have been agreed in
principle with the respondents at time of interview, and alterations should be made as
necessary to avoid identification. Note that in using survey data there are risks in including
full post codes for rural areas as these can have the effect of identifying individuals or
households.

A booklet outlining the Department’s ethics procedures will be provided in due course, for
information and up to date ethics forms please see: http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/curec/

47
7. Transferring from One Degree Course to Another

Masters students may apply to the Graduate Studies Committee to transfer from MSc to
MPhil. (Note: the MSc and MPhil courses are exactly the same for the first two terms and then
diverge). Masters students may also apply for transfer to Probationer Research Student status
before taking the MSc final examinations. Where such applications are accepted, the Graduate
Studies Committee would normally make a ‘conditional offer’, dependent on a student’s
performance in the MSc. A student considering such applications should first consult their
supervisor, after reading the notes below, as the supervisor’s endorsement is required.

From MSc to MPhil

Students who wish to transfer from the MSc to the MPhil can follow one of two routes:

1) Before they have been formally entered for the MSc exams, by application for change
of programme which will be considered by the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC). The
GSC will take into consideration the student’s progress to date and the research
proposal in coming to their decision. The GSC is only likely to permit such transfers
where students have already established themselves as likely to do very well in the MSc
and have a clear idea of the thesis topic that would justify the longer MPhil
requirements and are judged capable of handling this topic. Such students are not
required to complete the MSc thesis but go straight to MPhil status, the deadline for
completing this process is week 8 of Hilary Term.

2) After they have been formally entered into the examinations, by application for
transfer to the GSC. In these cases the GSC is likely to require the student to take the
MSc exams and require any transfer of status approval to be conditional on the
outcome of these exams. These will then be regarded as the qualifying test for the
MPhil. In these circumstances the student should complete the MSc thesis but should
not proceed to take the MSc degree (i.e. they should not formally graduate).

In both cases a research proposal is required with the application.

From MSc to DPhil

If you are currently studying for a taught course at Oxford and applying to carry on to a
research programme with no break in your study, you can do so on a re-admission form and
will be exempt from paying the application fee. If there is any break in your study (even if
only for a term) you will not be able to use a re-admission form and will need to submit an
application form for graduate study and pay the application fee.

Re-admission forms are available via OSS Student Self Service

https://www.studentsystem.ox.ac.uk and will be pre-populated with details that the

48
University currently has on record for you, such as your personal details and your previous
qualifications, but you will need to enter details of the programme you intend to study and
any changes to the data we hold on your record.

You will need to submit your re-admission form together with the following supporting
materials:

• a research proposal
• a reference from your current supervisor
• a reference from your proposed supervisor if different from your current one
• two samples of recent written work

A conditional offer may be made depending on a student’s performance in the MSc. To

continue to a research degree, students must have shown consistent evidence of high
performance in the MSc degree, and there must be a supervisor willing to supervise, and
capable of supervising the topic.

49
8. Study Resources and Facilities

Weblearn

Weblearn is the University’s online resource giving students virtual access to teaching
information and resources. The Department of Social Policy and Intervention has its own
section for all graduate and undergraduate teaching. Within this, the MSc and MPhil degree
courses have their own sections containing information such as reading lists, timetables and
lecture and / or seminar notes. Please visit Weblearn to see what is available to you online.
The main Weblearn website is http://www.weblearn.ox.ac.uk/site/. From there, click on
Social Sciences Division, followed by Department of Social Policy and Intervention, and then
MSc in Comparative Social Policy. In order to access Weblearn, you will need to use the
same username and password that gives you virtual access to your Oxford University email
address.

Libraries

The Bodleian Libraries

The Bodleian Libraries form the integrated library service of the University of Oxford,
offering over 9 million volumes, 26 site libraries, 3,800 study places, 48,000 online journals,
hundreds of research databases, document supply services, information skills training
programmes and world-class staff expertise: www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/.

To search the collections, locate items, access online resources, reserve or renew books,
and for the library’s instant chat service, please use SOLO (Search Oxford Libraries Online):
solo.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/. For off-site access to online resources log-in to SOLO with your
Single-Sign-On. Once you have received your University Card, please set-up your library
password in order to log-in to library PCs or connect your laptop to the Bodleian Libraries
network: https://register.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/. An extensive range of guides to resources and
services are available online, libguides.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/, including details of forthcoming
training, libguides.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/workshops.

The Bodleian Social Science Library (SSL) is the main library for Oxford University’s Social
Sciences Division and particularly supports the Departments of: Economics, International
Development, Politics & International Relations, Sociology, and Social Policy & Intervention,
and the Centres for: Criminology, Refugee Studies, Russian & East European Studies, and
Socio-Legal Studies. The SSL is housed on the ground floor of the Manor Road Building,
www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/ssl.

50
Opening Hours

Note that opening hours may sometimes change at short notice. If travelling to visit a library
you are advised to check with the library to confirm details.

Term time: Weeks 0 to 9: Mon to Fri 9.00 to 22.00, Sat 10.00 to 18.00, Sun 12.00 to
18.00:
Vacation: Weeks 0 and 9: Mon to Fri 9.00 to 22.00, Sat 10.00 to 18.00, Sun 12.00 to
18.00; Full vacation: Mon to Fri 9.00 to 19.00, Sat 10.00 to 18.00 (Christmas
and Easter Vacations); 10.00 to 16.00 (Summer Vacation)

The Library offers a variety of study spaces including graduate study rooms, individual study
carrels, and two group discussion rooms which are available for booking. For answers to
FAQs (Which password do I use? How do I print, copy and scan? How do holds work? etc.),
please see the SSL Getting Started webpage:
http://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/ssl/gettingstarted.

For information about library services for readers with disabilities please contact the SSL
Reader Services Librarian, shona.mclean@bodleian.ox.ac.uk. To request new library
materials for purchase, email the details to ssl-orders@bodleian.ox.ac.uk.

In addition to the SSL, there are separate social science libraries for Anthropology, Business,
Education and Law. Area studies are well-served by the Vere Harmsworth Library, Rhodes
House Library, the Oriental Institute Library, the Latin American Centre Library, the Bodleian
Japanese Library, the Institute for Chinese Studies Library and the Indian Institute
collections.

Oxford College Libraries offer collections and services to their own members. Nuffield
College also offers reference access to its library to all postgraduate members of the
University, and hosts and supports the Data Library with a Data Officer who specializes in
supporting graduates needing to create or use qualitative data.

Computers

Colleges provide workspaces for Masters students. There are also computers available for
use between 9am and 6pm in the Student Computer room located in the basement of
Barnett House. Masters students also have access to printers, CD writers and scanners.
Machines networked to the Department and / or University normally have a basic suite of
Microsoft programmes, typically Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer and E-mail facilities.
They may also have SPSS or other software packages, including EndNote. The department
also has Wireless access and students wishing to make use of this will need to have VPN
software installed. This can be done through IT Services, Banbury Road for a minimal cost.

51
IT Services is the main computer services department for IT in the university, though its
facilities can often be accessed without physically going there. IT Services provides registration
for email and other services, a computer shop, computer lab facilities, a wide range of
computer courses and access to a limited number of terminals and other IT resources (some
for 24 hours a day). For more information http://www.it.ox.ac.uk/

PLEASE NOTE: Students are not permitted to load any additional software on to any open
access machine in the Department, except when specifically authorised to do so by the IT
Officer. All machines should be covered by up to date anti-virus software. However,
students need to be aware that there are new viruses continually emerging. Students need
to exercise extra caution about getting e-mails with attachments that include any unusual
wording or detail, even when these come from known contacts. Importing viruses or
‘Trojans’ into the department or University system can damage not just the student’s work,
but also potentially a wide range of other people’s research and create additional burden on
IT staff. Please report any possible virus or unusual computer events directly to the IT
Officer or David McLennan.

PLEASE NOTE: The University regards computer misuse as a serious matter, which may
warrant disciplinary action, the outcome of which might include the withdrawal of access to
computer services or even expulsion. Unauthorised use of computers and IT networks may
also result in legal proceedings under the Computer Misuse Act 1990 (see appendix 2).

Photocopying and printing

There are photocopiers available in the Bodleian Social Science Library which can be used by
purchasing a common photocopy card from the library issue desk.

Students have the use of the photocopier on the ground floor, for which is activated by
scanning their Bod Library card over ‘laser’ pad. Each student has an allocation of 500
sheet/copies each black and white only and you will be able to check your usage. The
department will monitor this on a regular basis, any copies over the limit may be charged
for.

Facilities for students with disabilities

Within the Department there is a lift which operates between the basement and ground
floor giving access to both lecture rooms and the seminar room. There is a disabled toilet in
the basement and disabled access/car parking space close by on the Walton Street side of
the building.

Students with specfic learning requirements/needs may contact either their supervisor or
the Courses Administrator or, alternatively the University also has an Equality and Diversity
Unit based in Worcester Street who will be more than willing to provide assistance.

52
Teaching, study and common rooms
Teaching mainly takes place in two lecture rooms and two seminar rooms in the
Department, with some teaching taking place at Manor Road Social Science Building and
other departments within the University. Students may book the seminar rooms for their
own seminars, timetable permitting (enquiries to the Department Receptionist).

There is a single common room for staff and students in the basement. It has two small
kitchens - both are equipped with a fridge and microwave oven. Access to the garden is via
the back door. The department provides tea, coffee and milk for students to use.

Language classes

All students must ensure that their standard of English is sufficient for successful completion
of the degree course. The Oxford University Language Centre provides resources and
services for members of the University who need foreign languages for their study, research
or personal interest. Full time registered students have free access to: language courses; a
library collection of audio/video cassettes; and books and computer programs covering 130
languages. Those in possession of a valid University Card must present it when they register
at the Centre. Prospective users without a University Card must present a letter from their
College or Departmental Administrator indicating their status within the University.
Some of the courses provided by the Language Centre include:
• Academic writing
• English for Social and Academic Purposes
• Advanced English
For further information see: http://www.lang.ox.ac.uk/

Keeping in touch

Students are kept updated with – and able to access - most information relating to their
specific degree course via email, Weblearn and the Department Website. Noticeboards,
situated adjacent to the basement lecture room, also give general information on University
Lectures and on particular courses. There is a further board in the main entrance for official
or urgent messages only. Hard copies of letters and/or notices will be delivered to masters
students via their pigeonholes in the Student Computer room in the basement.

Emergencies

Fire
Should the fire alarm ring (a continuous high pitched wailing siren), those on the ground,
first and second floors should make their way to the grassy area at the front of Barnett
House and the main University buildings, Wellington Square, as soon as possible. Those in
the basement should exit via the nearest emergency exit (in the Lecture Room, the Common
Room or underneath the stairs) and make their way via Walton Street and Little Clarendon
Street to the grassy area at the front of Barnett House and the main University buildings,
Wellington Square. Do not re-enter the building until the ‘all clear’ is given by an authority
(usually the fire service or the Administrator). Please familiarise yourself with the

53
instructions for evacuation displayed in all areas of the Department on the fire action
notices.

Safety and first aid

Our first aid officers are:
Sarah Bryant
Susan Sentance

Security Alarms
Please note that parts of the building are alarmed at night and some emergency exits (which
are very clearly marked) are also alarmed (at all times). Anyone in the building outside the
working day (9am – 5pm) needs to familiarise themselves with the alarm system to make
sure that they do not set it off accidentally. This alarm rings in the department and outside
(as a pulsing burglar alarm) and also in the university central security control room.

54
9. Other Important/Useful Information

Residential requirements

Students are required to live in Oxford during term time. For details on residence requirements
please see the section on ‘Regulations for Residence in the University’ contained in the ‘Grey
Book’.

Fees

Students are charged fees for each term that they are working towards a graduate
qualification, whether or not they are working in Oxford. Even if a student is dispensed from
any part of the residence requirements, they remain liable for fees for each term from
admission until the course is completed or the maximum fee liability is met. The only
circumstance in which the series of fee payments is broken is when a candidate's status is
formally suspended by the Graduate Studies Committee. The maximum fee liability for Masters
students is six terms; the maximum fee liability for DPhil students is nine terms (but students
can count fees paid for a Masters degree course towards this liability – see the ‘Grey Book’
for the exact and changing rules).

College fees are also payable: students should consult their college and note that college fee
liability can continue after the end of University fee liability – this is a matter for colleges.

Suspension of status

With the support of his or her supervisor and college, students may apply to the Graduate
Studies Committee for suspension of their status for a specified period. If the application is
approved, the student will not be liable to pay fees during the period of suspension and will
automatically resume their former status at the end of the period. The Graduate Studies
Committee may consider applications for suspension on the following grounds:

1. Where the student is effectively prevented from pursuing his or her course of study in
circumstances which are outside his or her control though there are good grounds for
believing that he or she will be able to resume work within a reasonable period (e.g.
cases of unforeseeable financial difficulty, and physical or mental incapacity, including,
if necessary, maternity leave and unexpected domestic crises).

55
 Note: Where suspension of status is requested on the ground that the candidate is in
unforeseeable financial difficulty, the Committee will require certification from the
candidate's college that it was fully satisfied, when the candidate was first admitted,
that his or her financial position was at that time sufficiently secure to enable the
candidate to complete his or her studies, but that since then an unforeseeable
deterioration has occurred which makes it impossible for the candidate to continue his
or her studies for a limited period. An increase in University fees will not normally be
regarded as a sufficient ground for granting suspension of status.

2. Where it is desirable that a candidate should give up his or her work for a limited period
in order to concentrate on some other project which cannot reasonably be deferred
until his postgraduate work is completed; or to take up temporary work which is likely
to be relevant to his or her subsequent career and the opportunity for which is unlikely
to recur.

Illness

Students whose work is unavoidably interrupted by illness are encouraged to apply for
suspension of status. A candidate for the MSc whose illness is not serious enough or of too
short duration to justify suspension of status may nevertheless feel that it is likely to have an
adverse effect on his or her performance in the examination. In this case the student must ask
his or her doctor to given written confirmation and ask the Senior Tutor of their college to liaise
with the Proctors, who have the option, at their discretion, of writing to the examiners and
asking that the candidate's illness be taken into account. Students should not write direct to
the examiners, who cannot take account of pleas which do not arrive through the official
channels.

Harassment

The department harassment officers are:

Dr Stuart Basten
Professor Frances Gardner
(See also Appendix 1).

Other problems and advice

Academic or administrative
Students who have other problems, academic or administrative, and who are uncertain of the
proper way to go about solving them should begin by contacting their own academic
supervisor. If this fails to resolve the problem students have several possible courses of action
open to them:

56
 • Consult their supervisor or the Director of Graduate Studies, who will if necessary
consult the appropriate authorities on their behalf
• At their colleges consult the Senior Tutor, the Tutor for Graduates or their own College
Supervisor, who will give similar help
• Consult their elected student representative who will give what help and advice they
can
• Consult the Graduate Studies Office in the University Offices, which will advise on the
obtaining of necessary forms, submission of applications, dates and deadlines, deposit
of theses, etc.

Personal issues
Any student can contact the Student Counselling Service in complete confidence. For more
information see the Student Health and Welfare webpage on the main University of Oxford
website: http://www.ox.ac.uk/students/welfare/counselling/

The University Website

The university website is an important source of up to date information on university
policies, procedures and resources for handling individual student issues and concerns.
Follow the links for ‘current students’ at http://www.ox.ac.uk/ and then use the menu or
search facility.

The Proctors
The Proctors are responsible for making sure that the University operates according to its
statutes. They serve on a number of key decision-making committees; ensure regulations
are implemented; and deal with formal complaints. For more information please see
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/proctors/

The ‘Grey Book’

While this informal handbook seeks to answer your questions or guide you to places that
might, please remember that any formal questions have to be settled by reference to the
Examination Decrees and Regulations (the ‘Grey Book’)

57
APPENDICES

58
Appendix 1 Code of Practice Relating to Harassment

Council has issued the following code of practice, which has been drawn up in consultation with the Proctors'
Advisory Panel (for which see paras 4 (b) and 10 below). The new code supersedes the previous Code of Practice
relating to Sexual Harassment, issued by Council on 23 February 1989 (Statutes, 1991, p. 692).

Principles and Definition

Harassment is an unacceptable form of behaviour. The University is committed to protecting members, staff, and
any other person for whom the University has a special responsibility from any form of harassment, which might
inhibit them from pursuing their work or studies, or from making proper use of university facilities. Complaints of
harassment will be taken seriously and may lead to disciplinary proceedings.

For the purposes of this code, harassment may be broadly understood to consist of unwarranted behaviour
towards another person, so as to disrupt the work or reduce the quality of life of that person, by such means as
single or successive acts of bullying, verbally or physically abusing, or ill-treating him or her, or otherwise creating
or maintaining a hostile or offensive studying, working, or social environment for him or her. Harassment relating
to another's sex, sexual orientation, religion, or race is among the forms of harassment covered by this code.
Unacceptable forms of behaviour may include unwelcome sexual advances, unwelcome requests for sexual
favours, offensive physical contact or verbal behaviour of a sexual nature, or other hostile or offensive acts or
expressions relating to people's sex, sexual orientation, religion, or race. The abuse of a position of authority, as for
example that of a tutor or supervisor, is an aggravating feature of harassment. Those protected by this code may
appropriately seek advice in relation to harassment even if the conduct in question is not sufficiently serious to
warrant the institution of disciplinary proceedings.

Being under the influence of alcohol or otherwise intoxicated will not be admitted as an excuse for harassment,
and may be regarded as an aggravating feature.

Note on confidentiality
It is essential that all those involved in a complaints procedure (including complainants) observe the strictest
confidentiality consistent with operating that procedure; an accusation of harassment is potentially defamatory.

Advice

Advice may be sought or complaints pursued through any appropriate channel. In addition to other officers, the
following people have been specially appointed to give advice in this connection and to answer questions (whether
or not amounting to a complaint):
(a) departmental or faculty `Confidential Advisers', appointed by heads of department or the
equivalent. Their names will be publicised within the institution;
(b) members of the `Advisory Panel', serving the whole University. The Advisory Panel consists of senior
members appointed by the Proctors with special expertise or interest in relevant aspects of staff and
student welfare. Members of the panel may be approached on a number specially designated for
this purpose (Tel. (2)70760);
(c) special college advisers or Advisory Panels where colleges have established these.

Any of these may be approached in the first instance; those approached will direct inquirers elsewhere, if that
seems most likely to meet the inquirer's needs.

Those protected by this code may appropriately seek advice in relation to harassment even if the conduct in
question is not sufficiently serious to warrant the institution of disciplinary proceedings. Any of the advisers
listed above may be approached in the first instance; those approached will direct enquirers elsewhere, if that
seems most likely to meet the enquirer's needs.

59
Enquiries about harassment will be responded to promptly. University advisers (whether Confidential Advisers
or members of the Advisory Panel) will discuss the range of options available to enquirers on an entirely
confidential basis and whenever possible assist them in resolving the problem informally in the first instance.
College advisers will be guided by college rules.

It is emphasised that the role of advisers is advisory and not disciplinary. All disciplinary matters lie in the hands of
the relevant disciplinary bodies.

Discipline

If a complaint is not resolved on an informal basis the complainant may refer the matter to the relevant
authority which will determine whether there is a prima facie case under the relevant disciplinary provision
and, if appropriate, set in motion disciplinary procedures. In respect of members of the University subject to
the jurisdiction of the Visitatorial Board, the relevant procedures are those described under Tit. XVI of the
University's Statutes. The disciplinary procedures which apply to non-academic staff are set out in the
Handbook for Non-Academic Staff and Handbook for Non-academic Staff in Clinical Departments, as
appropriate. Complaints against junior members shall be dealt with in accordance with the procedures
contained in Tit. XIII of the University's Statutes (also set out in the Proctors' Memorandum and reproduced at
the end of this Code of Practice). Colleges may have their own forms of disciplinary provision.

It may be that a complaint either against a member of staff or against a Junior Member could potentially be
heard by more than one disciplinary body. When the person complained against is a Junior Member, the
complainant will be expected to choose whether to pursue disciplinary procedures through his or her college
or through the Proctors. If a complainant has previously brought or is in the process of bringing a complaint
against the same person, founded wholly or in part upon the same matter, before any other disciplinary body,
he or she is responsible for revealing that fact when seeking to institute disciplinary procedings. It is also
incumbent upon a disciplinary body to attempt to ascertain, for example by direct enquiry of the complainant,
or by consulting other relevant authorities, whether any such other complaint has been instituted; if so, that
body must consider whether it is appropriate for the same matter to provide a basis for two separate
disciplinary hearings.

Institutional Arrangements

The appointment of Confidential Advisers within each department or faculty is the responsibility of the head of
department, or equivalent, who must designate two such advisers, one of each sex, return the names of those
appointed to the Equal Opportunities Officer (or such other officer as may be designated by the Registrar from
time to time), and ensure that the Code of Practice and the names of the Confidential Advisers are adequately
publicised within the department or faculty. Confidential Advisers will receive general advice and information
bulletins from the Advisory Panel; they will be expected to make annual returns to the panel as to the number and
general character of complaints they have dealt with. They may refer inquirers to members of the panel, or
themselves seek advice either about university provisions on harassment in general or about possible ways of
handling individual cases.

The appointment of members of the Advisory Panel is the responsibility of the Proctors. Members of the panel will
give advice on request both to those troubled by harassment, and to other advisers. The panel is responsible for
supporting, co-ordinating, and monitoring the effectiveness of the University's arrangements for dealing with
harassment. Members of the panel may be contacted on a number specially designated for this purpose (Tel.
(2)70760).

The provisions of this code supplement and do not supersede or override college arrangements.

Nothing in this code shall detract from the position and jurisdiction of the Proctors or the right of free access to
them by all junior and senior members of the University.

***********************************************************************************

60
If you are aware that someone is unhappy with your behaviour and is contemplating a formal complaint, an
adviser can discuss with you the possibility of reaching an informal resolution. In the first instance, this may
involve offering a verbal or written apology to the complainant, and/or explaining that you had not realised
the effect of your behaviour, and giving an undertaking not to repeat the behaviour in future. You should keep
a factual record of what you say, a copy of any letter you write and a note of the response of the complainant.
This will be useful to you if a formal complaint is subsequently made and an investigation undertaken.

Not every allegation of harassment is well-founded. Malicious or vexatious allegations may give grounds for
disciplinary proceedings against the complainant, but this will not include ill founded allegations which were
nonetheless made in good faith.

61
Appendix 2 University Rules for Computer Use
Details of the University rules which govern all use of IT and network facilities can be found on website
http://www.ict.ox.ac.uk/oxford/rules/. It is important that these are read through carefully.

ICTC Regulations 1 of 2002

Made by the ICTC on 6 June 2002

Approved by Council on 24 July 2002

Amended on 2 October 2003, 23 October 2003, 16 February 2006, 1 June 2006, 3 June 2010 and 19 July 2012

1. In these regulations, unless the context requires otherwise, 'college' means any college, society, or
Permanent Private Hall or any other institution designated by Council by regulation as being permitted to
present candidates for matriculation.

2. University IT and network facilities are provided for use in accordance with the following policy set by
Council:

(1) The University provides computer facilities and access to its computer networks only for purposes directly
connected with the work of the University and the colleges and with the normal academic activities of their
members.

(2) Individuals have no right to use university facilities for any other purpose.

(3) The University reserves the right to exercise control over all activities employing its computer facilities,
including examining the content of users' data, such as e-mail, where that is necessary:

(a) for the proper regulation of the University's facilities;

(b) in connection with properly authorised investigations in relation to breaches or alleged breaches of
provisions in the University's statutes and regulations, including these regulations; or

(c) to meet legal requirements.

(4) Such action will be undertaken only in accordance with these regulations.

3. These regulations govern all use of university IT and network facilities, whether accessed by university
property or otherwise.

4. Use is subject at all times to such monitoring as may be necessary for the proper management of the
network, or as may be specifically authorised in accordance with these regulations.

5. (1) Persons may make use of university facilities only with proper authorisation.

(2) 'Proper authorisation' in this context means prior authorisation by the appropriate officer, who shall be the
Chief Information Officer or his or her nominated deputy in the case of services under the supervision of IT
Services, or the nominated college or departmental officer in the case of services provided by a college or
department.

62
(3) Any authorisation is subject to compliance with the University's statutes and regulations, including these
regulations, and will be considered to be terminated by any breach or attempted breach of these regulations.

6. (1) Authorisation will be specific to an individual.

(2) Any password, authorisation code, etc. given to a user will be for his or her use only, and must be kept
secure and not disclosed to or used by any other person. Exceptions may be made for accounts set up
specifically to carry out business functions of the University or a unit within it, but authorisation must be given
by the head of the unit.

7. Users are not permitted to use university IT or network facilities for any of the following:

(1) any unlawful activity;

(2) the creation, transmission, storage, downloading, or display of any offensive, obscene, indecent, or
menacing images, data, or other material, or any data capable of being resolved into such images or material,
except in the case of the use of the facilities for properly supervised research purposes when that use is lawful
and when the user has obtained prior written authority for the particular activity from the head of his or her
department or the chairman of his or her faculty board (or, if the user is the head of a department or the
chairman of a faculty board, from the head of his or her division);

(3) the creation, transmission, or display of material which is designed or likely to harass another person in
breach of the University's Code of Practice on Harassment;

(4) the creation or transmission of defamatory material about any individual or organisation;

(5) the sending of any e-mail that does not correctly identify the sender of that e-mail or attempts to disguise
the identity of the computer from which it was sent;

(6) the sending of any message appearing to originate from another person, or otherwise attempting to
impersonate another person;

(7) the transmission, without proper authorisation, of e-mail to a large number of recipients, unless those
recipients have indicated an interest in receiving such e-mail, or the sending or forwarding of e-mail which is
intended to encourage the propagation of copies of itself;

(8) the creation or transmission of or access to material in such a way as to infringe a copyright, moral right,
trade mark, or other intellectual property right;

(9) private profit, except to the extent authorised under the user's conditions of employment or other
agreement with the University or a college; or commercial purposes (including advertising commercial
services) without specific authorisation;

(10) gaining or attempting to gain unauthorised access to any facility or service within or outside the
University, or making any attempt to disrupt or impair such a service;

(11) the deliberate or reckless undertaking of activities such as may result in any of the following:

(a) the waste of staff effort or network resources, including time on any system accessible via the university
network;

(b) the corruption or disruption of other users' data;

(c) the unauthorised access, transmission or negligent loss of data;

63
(d) the violation of the privacy of other users;

(e) the disruption of the work of other users;

(f) the introduction or transmission of a virus or other malicious software into the network;

(12) activities not directly connected with employment, study, or research in the University or the colleges
(excluding reasonable and limited use for social and recreational purposes where not in breach of these
regulations or otherwise forbidden) without proper authorisation.

8. Software and computer-readable datasets made available on the university network may be used only
subject to the relevant licensing conditions, and, where applicable, to the Code of Conduct published by the
Combined Higher Education Software Team ('CHEST').

9. Users shall treat as confidential any information which may become available to them through the use of
such facilities and which is not clearly intended for unrestricted dissemination; such information shall not be
copied, modified, disseminated, or used either in whole or in part without the permission of the person or
body entitled to give it.

10. (1) No user may use IT facilities to hold or process data relating to a living individual save in accordance
with the provisions of current data protection legislation (which in most cases will require the prior consent of
the individual or individuals whose data are to be processed).

(2) Any person wishing to use IT facilities for such processing is required to inform the University Data
Protection Officer in advance and to comply with any guidance given concerning the manner in which the
processing may be carried out.

11. Any person responsible for the administration of any university or college computer or network system, or
otherwise having access to data on such a system, shall comply with the provisions of the 'Statement of IT
Security and Privacy Policy'.

12. Users shall at all times endeavour to comply with policies and guidance issued from time to time by IT
Services to assist with the management and efficient use of the University's ICT facilities.

13. Connection of any computer, whether college, departmental, or privately owned, to the university network
is subject to the following additional conditions:

(1) (a) Computers connected to the university network may use only network identifiers which follow the
University's naming convention, and are registered with IT Services.

(b) The University's Trade Mark and Domain Name Policy specifies, inter alia, that all university activities (other
than those within OUP's remit) should be presented within the ox.ac.uk domain. Any exception to this requires
authorisation as defined in that Policy.

(2) (a) Owners and administrators of computers connected to the university network are responsible for
ensuring their security against unauthorised access, participation in 'denial of service' attacks, etc. In particular
they are responsible for ensuring that anti-virus software is installed and regularly updated, and that rules and
guidelines on security and anti-virus policy, as issued from time to time by IT Services, are followed.

(b) The University may temporarily bar access to any computer or sub-network that appears to pose a danger
to the security or integrity of any system or network, either within or outside Oxford, or which, through a
security breach, may bring disrepute to the University.

64
(3) (a) Providers of any service must take all reasonable steps to ensure that that service does not cause an
excessive amount of traffic on the University's internal network or its external network links.

(b) The University may bar access at any time to computers which appear to cause unreasonable consumption
of network resources.

(4) (a) Hosting Web pages on computers connected to the university network is permitted subject to the
knowledge and consent of the department or college responsible for the local resources, but providers of any
such Web pages must endeavour to comply with guidelines published by IT Services or other relevant
authorities.

(b) It is not permitted to offer commercial services through Web pages supported through the university
network, or to provide 'home-page' facilities for any commercial organisation, except with the permission of
the Chief Information Officer (IT Services); this permission may require the payment of a licence fee.

(5) Use of file-sharing technology and participation in distributed file-sharing networks may be subject to
additional regulation and restriction in order to prevent excessive use of university network resources, or the
use of those resources for purposes unconnected with the University. If a user has any reason to suppose that
an application employs peer-to-peer (p2p) or other file-sharing technology, they should seek the advice of the
IT officer responsible for the college or departmental network on which they propose to use the software.

(6) (a) No computer connected to the university network may be used to give any person who is not a member
or employee of the University or its colleges access to any network services outside the department or college
where that computer is situated.

(b) Certain exceptions may be made, for example, for members of other UK universities, official visitors to a
department or college, or those paying a licence fee.

(c) Areas of doubt should be discussed with the Head of IT Services.

(7) Providing external access to University network resources for use as part of any shared activity or project is
permitted only if authorised by the IT Committee (ITC), and will be subject to any conditions that it may
specify.

(8) If any computer connected to the network or a sub-network does not comply with the requirements of this
section, it may be disconnected immediately by the Network Administrator or any other member of staff duly
authorised by the head of the college, section or department concerned.

14. (1) If a user is thought to be in breach of any of the University's statutes or regulations, including these
regulations, he or she shall be reported to the appropriate officer who may recommend to the appropriate
university or college authority that proceedings be instituted under either or both of university and college
disciplinary procedures.

(2) Access to facilities may be withdrawn under section 42 of Statute XI pending a determination, or may be
made subject to such conditions as the Proctors or the Registrar (as the case may be) shall think proper in the
circumstances.

65
Appendix 3 Regulations Relating to the Use of the Facilities of the University
Library Services

Regulations relating to the use of the University Library Services can be found on
http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/statutes/regulations/201-052.shtml

66
Appendix 4 Complaints and Academic Appeals within the Department of
Social Policy and Intervention
1. The University, the Social Science Division and the Department of Social Policy and Intervention all hope
that provision made for students at all stages of their programme of study will make the need for complaints
(about that provision) or appeals (against the outcomes of any form of assessment) infrequent.
2. However, all those concerned believe that it is important for students to be clear about how to raise a
concern or make a complaint, and how to appeal against the outcome of assessment. The following guidance
attempts to provide such information.
3. Nothing in this guidance precludes an informal discussion with the person immediately responsible for the
issue that you wish to complain about (and who may not be one of the individuals identified below). This is
often the simplest way to achieve a satisfactory resolution.
4. Many sources of advice are available within colleges, within faculties/departments and from bodies like
OUSU or the Counselling Service, which have extensive experience in advising students. You may wish to take
advice from one of these sources before pursuing your complaint.
5. General areas of concern about provision affecting students as a whole should, of course, continue to be
raised through Joint Consultative Committees or via student representation on the faculty/department’s
committees.
Complaints
3.1 If your concern or complaint relates to teaching or other provision made by the department, then you
should raise it with the chairman of the Teaching Committee (Professor Mary Daly for Comparative Social
Policy, Professor Frances Gardner for Evidence Based Social Intervention and Policy Evaluation) or with the
Director of Graduate Studies Dr Erzsebet Bukodi) as appropriate. Within the department the officer concerned
will attempt to resolve your concern/complaint informally.
3.2 If you are dissatisfied with the outcome, then you may take your concern further by making a formal
complaint to the University Proctors. A complaint may cover aspects of teaching and learning (e.g. teaching
facilities, supervision arrangements, etc.), and non-academic issues (e.g. support services, library services,
university accommodation, university clubs and societies, etc.). A complaint to the Proctors should be made
only if attempts at informal resolution have been unsuccessful. The procedures adopted by the Proctors for
the consideration of complaints and appeals are described in the Proctors and Assessor’s Memorandum
[http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/proctors/pam/] and the relevant Council regulations
[http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/statutes/regulations/]
4. If your concern or complaint relates to teaching or other provision made by your college, then you
should raise it either with your tutor or with one of the college officers, Senior Tutor, Tutor for Graduates (as
appropriate). Your college will also be able to explain how to take your complaint further if you are dissatisfied
with the outcome of its consideration.
Academic appeals
5. An appeal is defined as a formal questioning of a decision on an academic matter made by the
responsible academic body.
6. For undergraduate or taught graduate courses, a concern which might lead to an appeal should be
raised with your college authorities and the individual responsible for overseeing your work. It must not be
raised directly with examiners or assessors. If it is not possible to clear up your concern in this way, you may
put your concern in writing and submit it to the Proctors via the Senior Tutor of your college. As noted above,
the procedures adopted by the Proctors in relation to complaints and appeals are on the web
[http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/statutes/regulations/].
7 For the examination of research degrees, or in relation to transfer or confirmation of status, your
concern should be raised initially with the Director of Graduate Studies. Where a concern is not satisfactorily
settled by that means, then you, your supervisor, or your college authority may put your appeal directly to the
Proctors.
8. Please remember in connection with all the cases in paragraphs 5 - 7 that:

67
(a) The Proctors are not empowered to challenge the academic judgement of examiners or academic
bodies.
(b) The Proctors can consider whether the procedures for reaching an academic decision were properly
followed; i.e. whether there was a significant procedural administrative error; whether there is
evidence of bias or inadequate assessment; whether the examiners failed to take into account special
factors affecting a candidate’s performance.
(c) On no account should you contact your examiners or assessors directly.
9. The Proctors will indicate what further action you can take if you are dissatisfied with the outcome of a
complaint or appeal considered by them.

68
Appendix 5 Regulations for the Investigation by the Proctors of Complaints
under Section 22 of Statute IX
The following is an Extract from the Regulations for the Investigation by the Proctors under Section 22 of
st
Statute IX which come into effect from 1 October 2002. Reprinted from the Oxford University Web Site,
rd
updated 3 December 2007.

Procedures for Handling Complaints (including academic appeals) submitted to the Proctors

What the procedures cover

1. The procedures set out below relate to complaints concerning a student's relationship with the University or
with clubs, societies, or other organisations which are subject to the supervision of the Proctors.

2. The procedure under Part A may be used to pursue complaints about matters concerning teaching and
learning (e.g. teaching facilities, supervision arrangements, etc.), and non-academic issues (e.g. support
services, library services, university accommodation, university clubs and societies, etc.). It does not cover
appeals and other matters referred to below. A complaint to the Proctors under Part A should be made only if
attempts at an informal resolution, or under local complaints procedures published by the department,
faculty, or unit in question, are unsuccessful.

3. The procedure under Part A may also be applied in the event of complaints by members of staff.

4. The procedure under Part B may be used where a student or a member of staff wishes to challenge a
decision relating to an academic matter which has been made by an academic committee or body ('an
academic appeal'). It should be noted that the Proctors are empowered to consider complaints about the
process that has led to a decision being made by an academic body such as a board of examiners, faculty
board, or graduate studies committee (e.g. that an administrative or procedural error may have occurred, that
there has been bias or inadequate assessment in the examination process, that the examiners failed to take
into account special factors affecting a candidate's performance).

What the procedures do not cover

5. The procedures do not cover staff grievances in respect of which procedures are provided in the staff
handbook for the category of staff concerned, or any staff grievance to which Part F of Statute XII applies.

6. The procedures do not cover complaints concerning an individual's relationship with his or her college,
which shall be made under the relevant college procedures.

7. The procedures do not cover allegations of breaches of the Disciplinary Statute and Regulations, which must
be investigated by the Proctors under regulations made under that statute.

8. The procedures do not cover complaints or allegations to which procedures under the University's Codes of
Practice on Fraud, Public Interest Disclosure, Academic Integrity in Research and the Freedom of Information
Act apply. (Copies of the University's Policies and Codes of Practice in relation to Harassment, Equal
Opportunities, Race Equality, Academic Integrity in Research, Public Interest Disclosure, and Fraud may be
obtained from the Clerk to the Proctors, or accessed respectively on:

www.admin.ox.ac.uk/eop/har/code.shtml; www.admin.ox.ac.uk/eop/eopolicy.shtml;
www.admin.ox.ac.uk/eop/rraa/rraaeop.shtml; www.admin.ox.ac.uk/rso/policy/conduct.shtml;
www.admin.ox.ac.uk/ps/staff/codes/pid.shtml www.admin.ox.ac.uk/finance/finregs/finregs.doc.)

69
9. The procedures do not cover appeals against decisions made by the Proctors under the relevant
Examination Regulations in cases where they have been asked to approve special arrangements (e.g. on
grounds of ill health) or to give a dispensation in respect of the academic progress or examination of an
individual candidate. These should be made to the Chairman of the Education Committee of Council.
Information is available from Senior Tutors and college offices.

10. The Proctors are not empowered to challenge the academic judgment of examiners or academic bodies.

Access to personal data

11. Any complainant is entitled to request access to personal data held in relation to the investigation under
the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998. Access request forms may be obtained from the Data
Protection Officer, University Offices, Wellington Square, or may be accessed in the University's Web site
(www.admin.ox.ac.uk/councilsec/oxonly/dp/policy.shtml). Complainants should note that there are some
exceptions to the right of access, and in particular that access may in some circumstances be restricted by
virtue of the duty of confidentiality owed to third parties.

PART A
Procedure applying to complaints about matters concerning teaching and
learning and non-academic issues

12. Any reference in these procedures to the Proctors includes a Proctor acting alone and any person
appointed under paragraph 16 below.

13. Complaints and appeals will be treated seriously and may be made without fear of recrimination.

14. No one investigating a complaint shall have had any prior involvement in the matter in hand, conflict of
interest in dealing with the complaint, or vested interest in the outcome.

15. If there has been prior involvement by one or both of the Proctors another individual or individuals will be
appointed by the Vice-Chancellor to act in their place, who shall have the same powers of investigation and
determination as the Proctors.

16. The Proctors may call on any person in or outside the University to provide specialist assistance in their
investigations.

Confidentiality

17. Complaints will be dealt with in a confidential manner. All those who are involved in procedures for
investigating an allegation, including witnesses, representatives, and persons providing evidence and/or
advice, have a duty to maintain confidentiality. For a complaint to be investigated fully, however, and action
taken, it will be necessary to disclose the identity of the person making a complaint to the person or body who
is the subject of the complaint and to others directly involved.

Malicious or vexatious allegations

18. If malicious or vexatious allegations are made, disciplinary action may be taken against the individual
concerned.

Procedure

19. Complaints should be made in writing. When making a written complaint, it is helpful to give as much
information as possible and set out the precise details of the complaint that is being made. This should explain
the steps that have been taken to pursue the complaint, mention any discussions that have already been held

70
about the matter, attach copies of any earlier correspondence, and state clearly what remedy, if any, the
complainant is seeking. Advice may be sought from sources such as OUSU, student common room, or trade
union officers, before making a written complaint.

20. Complaints shall be investigated fairly and expeditiously.

21. Complaints will be logged on receipt and complainants will be invited to provide details of their ethnic
origin, to facilitate monitoring under the University's equal opportunities policies. Information about ethnic
origin will be kept securely and separately unless it is pertinent to the complaint under consideration.

22. If at any time in the course of an investigation under this procedure the Proctors decide that the matter
should properly be considered under the disciplinary procedure applicable to the person or persons in
question, then the matter shall be referred for consideration under that procedure and the complainant shall
be informed accordingly.

23. The receipt of a written complaint will normally be acknowledged within five working days. If the Proctors
take the view that the complainant has not taken sufficient steps to resolve the complaint at a local level, they
may advise the complainant to do so before they agree to proceed further under these procedures.

24. If the complaint is trivial or repeats in substance a complaint already made and determined, the Proctors
may decline to consider it.

25. The Proctors may invite the complainant to attend a meeting to discuss the matter (or the complainant
may request a meeting).

26. Any individual(s) who is (are) the subject of a complaint will be given details of the complaint and will be
given a reasonable period in which to respond to matters covered in the complaint. That period will normally
be ten days, but may be extended at the request of the individual(s) or body concerned. The individual(s) or
body or the Proctors may request a meeting to discuss the complaint.

27. Any individual attending a meeting with the Proctors under these procedures may be accompanied by a
member of Congregation or, in the case of a member of staff, by a representative of his or her trade union or,
in the case of a student member, by another student member of the University.

28. Notes of any interview will be available for inspection by the interviewee(s).

29. Complainants and individuals or bodies who are the principal subject of the complaint will be kept
informed of the progress of the investigation.

30. The Proctors will determine the complaint as quickly as is consonant with a thorough investigation of the
matter, and normally within not more than thirty working days of receipt of a written complaint. The timescale
may be extended in cases of complexity or where a factor is beyond control of the Proctors (e.g. the non-
availability in Oxford of key contributors to an investigation).

31. The complainant will be provided with a written determination, which will summarise the investigation
that has been carried out and the reasons for the decision reached. The outcome will also be notified to any
individual who is the subject of a complaint and to those bodies within the University which need to be aware
of the determination.

32. Where a complaint is upheld, the Proctors will indicate what, if any, steps should be taken by the
responsible body to ameliorate the matter complained of. If the responsible body is unable or unwilling to act,
the Proctors may refer the matter to Council.

71
33. If the complainant wishes to seek clarification of the Proctors' decision or to raise further matters, the
Proctors will normally provide an opportunity for him or her to do so. At their discretion, the Proctors may
reopen the case in the light of new information.

34. If the complainant at any point withdraws his or her complaint, the Proctors may at their discretion
continue their investigation of matters complained about.

PART B
Procedure applying to complaints concerning academic appeals

Appeals concerning university examinations for taught courses

35. Any concern about the conduct of a taught-course examination should be discussed in the first instance
between the student and his or her college authorities, subject tutor, course director, supervisor, or, where
appropriate, the relevant director of graduate studies.

36. Concerns about the conduct of an examination must not be raised directly with the examiners, even in the
form of enquiries about factual information. Examiners are instructed to refer all such communications to the
Proctors.

37. It is open to a student, to a supervisor, or to college authorities acting on his or her behalf, or to any staff
member of the University who has concerns about the conduct of an examination, to make formal
representations in writing to the Proctors.

38. Any representation made by a student must be submitted through the Senior Tutor of his or her college,
whether or not it has the Senior Tutor's support.

39. Complaints concerning taught-course examinations will normally be considered by the Junior Proctor.

40. Complaints about examinations must be made to the Proctors in writing, giving as much information as
possible and setting out precise details. Complaints sent to local academic bodies or the Graduate Studies
Office will be forwarded immediately to the Proctors.

41. If the matter raised is one that can be resolved readily (e.g. by checking that all a candidate's scripts have
been accounted for and marked, or that marks have been accurately processed) the Proctors will make the
necessary enquiries on the candidate's behalf and inform the candidate via his or her college without
undertaking a full investigation under these procedures. If the Proctors are subsequently informed in writing
that the complainant remains dissatisfied, then they will consider undertaking a full investigation.

42. When investigating a complaint about a taught-course examination, the Proctors will normally obtain
information and/or comment from the chairman or other senior representative of the responsible academic
body (such as board of examiners, faculty board, or graduate studies committee). Where appropriate they will
also obtain information and/or comment from other individuals or officers responsible for the administration
of the examination that is the subject of the complaint (e.g. Head of Examinations and Assessments).

43. Complaints must be submitted to the Proctors as soon as possible and not later than three months after
the notification of the results of the examination concerned. (The time-limit is necessary because after three
months relevant records may cease to be available.)

44. The Proctors will also send notice of the receipt of a complaint to the chairman of the responsible
academic body concerned, to the responsible officer of the candidate's college, and to the candidate's
supervisor(s).

45. Subject to paragraphs 36–45 above, the procedure for consideration of the appeal will be as set out in Part
A.

72
46. The Junior Proctor will report annually to Council's Education Committee about the number and nature of
complaints investigated.

Appeals concerning higher degrees involving research

47. Any concern about the examination of a research student should be discussed in the first instance between
the student and his or her college authorities, supervisor, or a departmental officer such as the relevant
director of graduate Studies.

48. Concerns about the conduct of an examination must not be raised directly with the examiners, even in the
form of enquiries about factual information. Examiners are instructed to refer all such communications to the
Proctors.

49. It is open to a student, to a supervisor, or to college authorities acting on his or her behalf, or to any staff
member of the University who has concerns about the conduct of an examination, to make formal
representations to the Proctors.

50. Concerns about the procedures for, or the outcome of, exercises such as transfer or confirmation of status,
or other matters affecting a student's candidature (e.g. quality of supervision), may also be referred to the
Proctors, but should normally be raised in the first instance with his or her college authorities or a
departmental officer such as the relevant director of graduate studies. Candidates should not make direct
approaches to the assessors of their work.

51. Complaints concerning higher degrees involving research will normally be considered by the Senior
Proctor.

52. Complaints must be submitted to the Proctors as soon as possible and not later than three months after
the notification of the results of the examination concerned. (The time-limit is necessary because after three
months relevant records may cease to be available.)

53. The Proctors will also send notice of the receipt of a complaint to the chairman of the responsible
academic body concerned, to the responsible officer of the candidate's college, and to the candidate's
supervisor(s).

54. Subject to paragraphs 48–54 above, the procedure for consideration of the appeal will be as set out in Part
A.

55. The Senior Proctor will report annually to Council's Education Committee about the number and nature of
complaints investigated.

73
APPENDIX 6 Academic Integrity in Research: Code of Practice and Procedure
th
Taken from the University website updated 26 November 2007

Statement of Principle

1. The University expects all members of the University including staff and students, and those who are not
members of the University but who are conducting research on University premises or using University
facilities, to observe the highest standards in the conduct of their research. In pursuance of such high
standards, it is expected that they shall:

(a) take steps to acquaint themselves with available guidance as to `best practice' whether in relation to
matters of research policy, finance or safety relevant to their area of research; for example, the statement
`safeguarding good scientific practice' published by the Director General of the Research Councils and the
Chief Executives of UK Research Councils in December 1998;

(b) observe such legal and ethical requirements as are laid down by the University or such other properly
appointed bodies as are involved in their field of research;

(c) take steps to secure the safety of those associated with the research;

(d) report any conflict of interest, whether actual or prospective, to the appropriate authority;

(e) observe fairness and equity in the conduct of their research.

2. Failure to comply with the code may give rise to an allegation of misconduct. Misconduct in research may be
ground for disciplinary action, and if serious, for dismissal or expulsion.

Definition of misconduct

3. Misconduct for the purpose of this code means the fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or deception in
proposing, carrying out, or reporting results of research, and deliberate, dangerous or negligent deviations
from accepted practice in carrying out research. It includes failure to follow an agreed protocol if this failure
results in unreasonable risk or harm to humans, other vertebrates or the environment, and facilitating of
misconduct in research by collusion in, or concealment of, such actions by others. It also includes any plan or
conspiracy or attempt to do any of these things. It does not include honest error or honest differences in
interpretation or judgement in evaluating research methods or results, or misconduct (including gross
misconduct) unrelated to research processes.

Responsibility

4. All members of the University, and individuals permitted to work in University institutions, have
responsibility to report any incident of misconduct, whether this has been witnessed, or is suspected.
Suspicions reported in confidence and in good faith will not lead to disciplinary proceedings against the person
making the complaint. In the event, however, of a malicious allegation, appropriate action will be taken.

Confidentiality

5. All allegations will be investigated in the strictest confidence. All those who are involved in the procedures
for investigating an allegation, including witnesses, representatives and persons providing information,
evidence and/or advice, have a duty to maintain confidentiality. For an allegation to be investigated fully, and
appropriate action taken, it may, however, be necessary to disclose the identity of the person making the

74
complaint to the person who is the subject of the complaint. The person making the complaint will be advised
before such disclosure is made.

Advice

6. In the case of concerns regarding a person or persons other than students, information and advice may be
obtained from the head of department, or in the case of non departmentally organised faculties, the chairman
of the faculty board, provided that if the concerns relate to the holder of that office, advice should be sought
from the Proctors.

7. In the case of concerns regarding a student, information and advice may be obtained from the Clerk to the
Proctors.

Procedure in the case of suspected misconduct

8. These procedures are without prejudice to the normal operation of the relevant disciplinary procedure of
the University and in the event of any conflict between these procedures and the relevant disciplinary
procedure of the University, the latter shall prevail. They have been set out by way of guidance only and may
be varied to suit the circumstances of a particular case.

9. All members of the University, and individuals permitted to work in the University and institutions, have a
responsibility to report to the Registrar or the Proctors, in the case of complaints relating to staff or students
respectively, any incident of misconduct, whether this has been witnessed, or is suspected.

10. In the event that further investigation is required, the Registrar or a person duly authorised on his or her
behalf, or the Proctors, as the case may be, shall set up a small panel to enquire into the allegations. This shall
normally consist of two members namely a member of the department or faculty with relevant expertise and a
member of the University or a college from outside the department or faculty, again, if possible, with relevant
expertise. Where it is deemed appropriate by the Registrar, or the Proctors, as the case may be, one member
of the panel may be a person external to the University, but with relevant expertise. Members of the panel
must have no conflict of interest in the case and must be unbiased. The purpose of the preliminary
investigation is to evaluate the facts of the allegations in order to ascertain whether there is sufficient
evidence amounting to a prima facie case of misconduct.

11. The Registrar or the person duly authorised on his or her behalf, or the Proctors as appropriate, shall
require the production of such records as are necessary to enable the investigation to proceed and shall
secure their safe keeping.

12. The respondent shall be informed of the decision to set up the enquiry panel and of the membership of the
panel.

13. The panel may interview both the person making the allegation and the respondent, and any other
persons who may be regarded as witnesses. Any person attending for interview may be accompanied by
another person.

14. The panel shall prepare a report, setting out the evidence which has been evaluated, accounts of
interviews, if any, and its conclusions. The respondent shall have an opportunity to comment.

15. In the event that the panel has found no evidence of misconduct, the complaint shall be dismissed. In the
event that the panel concludes that prima facie evidence of misconduct exists, the report shall be referred to
the appropriate person for action (whether informal or formal) under the University's relevant disciplinary
procedure. In the event that the panel take the view that the allegations, if proved, would constitute good
cause for dismissal, and the allegations relate to a person subject to the provisions of Statute XII of the
University Statutes, the panel shall bring the report to the attention of the Registrar under the provisions of

75
Statute XII, Clause 19(1), or if the allegations relate to a person subject to the provisions of the University
disciplinary procedure for non-academic staff, the panel shall bring the report to the attention of the relevant
head of department responsible for employing the person. In the event that allegations relate to a Student
Member, the Proctors may take further action under the terms of Statute XI.

16. Subject to availability of personnel and to operational demands the investigation of the panel should
normally be completed within 20 working days of first notification of the allegation to the Registrar or Proctors
as appropriate.

17. In cases where the complaint concerns someone who is not subject to the University's disciplinary
procedure, the panel shall invite the Registrar to bring the report to the attention of the appropriate
disciplinary body.

18. Where the research is funded in whole or part by an outside grant, the University shall have regard to the
guidance issued by the relevant funding body and shall ensure that such body is given appropriate and timely
information as to the instigation and progress of an investigation.

76
APPENDIX 7 Public Interest Disclosure: Code of Practice and Procedure
th
Taken from the University website updated 20 June 2006

1. The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1999 provides employees with legal protection against being dismissed or
penalised by their employers as a result of disclosing certain serious concerns. It also requires employees who
wish to disclose such concerns and who wish to retain the protection offered by the Act to follow the relevant
internal procedure provided by their employer in all but the most exceptional circumstances. The following
procedure and associated guidance have been designed to assist employees who wish to make such
disclosures, and to secure their proper investigation. Although the terms of the Act offer protection specifically
to employees, this procedure is available to student members, members of Congregation and other members
of staff of the University.

2. The Proctors are empowered under the terms of the University's Statutes and Regulations to investigate
certain complaints made to them by members of the University. The University also has in place a number of
policies and procedures to address problems that may arise for its employees and students, including those
relating to grievance, harassment, discipline, and individual allegations of fraud. In many instances where
there is a suspicion of improper behaviour, allegations will be such as to be dealt with directly by reference to
these procedures, details of which are set out in the University Statutes and Regulations and summarised in
staff handbooks and in the Proctors' and Assessor's Memorandum. In addition, members of Congregation have
a right under the Statutes to ask a question in Congregation relating to any matter concerning the policy or the
administration of the University (Statutes, Statute IV, section 1).

3. However, the University places the greatest importance on the integrity of its operations and encourages
members of staff and students to raise genuine concerns about malpractice or impropriety at the earliest
possible stage. There may be occasions when an individual has concerns relating to matters in the public
interest which he or she believes merit particular investigation, and following code sets out the way in which
the University will address such concerns.

4. This code is intended to assist individuals who believe that they have discovered malpractice or impropriety.
It is not designed to address the following:

(a) to question financial or business decisions taken by the University;

(b) to reconsider any matters which have already been addressed under grievance or disciplinary procedures;

(c) to investigate an individual or collective personnel dispute for which there are established routes of
complaint and remedies;

(d) to investigate an academic dispute between a student and the institution (complaints of this nature should
be addressed to the Proctors for consideration under their published procedures).

Once a disclosure is being dealt with under this policy, it is reasonable to expect individuals to await the
conclusion of any investigation or review instigated under its terms before seeking to air their complaints
outside the institution.

5. Individuals are encouraged to bring to the attention of the University any matters referred to below about
which they are concerned.

Remit

77
6. This guidance is directed specifically at the disclosure of information which is in the public interest and
which in the reasonable belief of the person making the disclosure tends to show malpractice involving one or
more of the following:

(a) criminal activity, including fraud or financial irregularity, corruption, bribery, or blackmail;

(b) failure to comply with legal obligations;

(c) danger to health and safety;

(d) damage to the environment;

(e) academic or professional malpractice;

(f) a miscarriage of justice;

(g) failure to comply with the statutes, regulations and codes of practice of the University;

(h) attempts to conceal any of the above.

Protection

7. An individual making a disclosure relating to such matters to the appropriate person will not be penalised
provided the disclosure is made

(a) in good faith; and

(b) in the reasonable belief of the individual making the disclosure that the information disclosed, and any
allegation contained in it, are substantially true.

Confidentiality

8. The University will treat all such disclosures in a confidential manner.

Malicious allegations

9. In the event of malicious or vexatious allegations, disciplinary action may be taken against the individual
concerned.

Anonymous allegations

10. Action will not normally be taken in response to anonymous complaints.

Procedure

11. An individual who wishes to make a disclosure should do so to the Registrar, in the case of a disclosure
concerning an employee or employees of the University, or concerning both employees and students of the
University, or to the Proctors, in the case of complaints concerning a student or students. Reference to the
Registrar shall be taken to mean a Pro-Vice-Chancellor where the disclosure involves the Registrar.

12. Disclosures, which should normally be in writing, should provide as much supporting evidence as possible
about the grounds on which the disclosure is being made and about the grounds for believing that malpractice
has occurred.

78
13. The Registrar or Proctors as appropriate shall decide whether the concern is such as should be addressed
under other existing university procedures, for example in relation to harassment, grievance, discipline, or
fraud, or whether further investigation is required. If the Registrar or the Proctors are of the opinion that
further investigation is necessary, additional steps shall be taken as follows:

(a) Where the concerns relate to integrity in the conduct of research, investigation shall be carried out under
the provisions of the code of practice and procedure relating to academic integrity in research.

(b) Where the concern relates to the activities of Student Members of the University only, these shall be
investigated by the Proctors under their published procedures.

(c) In the case of other concerns, these shall be brought to the attention of the relevant head of department,
faculty board chair, head of division or Pro-Vice-Chancellor as appropriate, who shall, in consultation with the
Registrar, conduct an investigation or shall establish a small panel to conduct an investigation.

(d) The individual or panel conducting the investigation shall be entitled to draw on appropriate expertise
where necessary (for example in the event of allegations of financial irregularity).

(e) If any individual is associated with the matter under investigation, the Registrar shall appoint another to act
in his or her place.

(f) The Registrar shall provide the investigator or investigative panel with its terms of reference and shall
assure himself or herself that at least one of those who are asked to investigate a disclosure either have or are
able to acquire the necessary expertise and training to deal fully and properly with the subject matter of the
disclosure.

14. The Registrar or the Proctors, as appropriate, shall inform the person making the disclosure and, at an
appropriate stage, the subject of the disclosure of the nature of the investigation to be undertaken and the
likely timescale. Where a disclosure is made, the person or persons against whom the disclosure is made shall
normally be allowed to comment before any investigation, is concluded under this procedure.

15. Where the investigator or investigative panel believes that the investigation reveals prima facie evidence
of misconduct, the matter shall be referred to the appropriate body for disciplinary action under the terms of
the University's Statutes and Regulations.

16. In all cases, the matter shall be investigated as speedily as is consistent with thoroughness and fairness.
The Registrar or the Proctors, as appropriate, shall report in each case to the appropriate university committee
or other body the final outcome of any investigation and of any disciplinary action that might arise from it, and
shall draw to the attention of Council, via the appropriate committee, any issues of general importance.

Feedback

17. The action taken, including, in broad outline, the outcome of any investigation, shall be reported to the
person making the disclosure and in the event that no action is taken that person shall be given an
explanation. In the event that no action is taken, the individual should be allowed the opportunity to remake
the disclosure to a Pro-Vice-Chancellor. The Pro-Vice-Chancellor shall consider all the information presented,
the procedures that were followed, and the reasons for not taking any further action. The outcome of this will
either be to confirm that no further action is required or that further investigation is required, in which case
the procedures in 13 above, as appropriate, shall be followed.

79
APPENDIX 8 Notes of Guidance for Graduate Taught Courses

The Notes of Guidance have been approved by the University’s Education Committee as the framework of
expectations which the committee wishes to see underpin the provision of taught graduate courses within the
University.
Please see http://www.admin.ox.ac.uk/epsc/guidance/pgtcourse.doc.

80