Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw - Central Authentication System
Strona główna

Specialized seminar (BSc) I

General data

Course ID: WM-CH-SEM-I
Erasmus code / ISCED: (unknown) / (unknown)
Course title: Specialized seminar (BSc) I
Name in Polish: Seminarium specjalistyczne I (licencjat)
Organizational unit: Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. School of Exact Sciences.
Course groups:
ECTS credit allocation (and other scores): 1.00 Basic information on ECTS credits allocation principles:
  • the annual hourly workload of the student’s work required to achieve the expected learning outcomes for a given stage is 1500-1800h, corresponding to 60 ECTS;
  • the student’s weekly hourly workload is 45 h;
  • 1 ECTS point corresponds to 25-30 hours of student work needed to achieve the assumed learning outcomes;
  • weekly student workload necessary to achieve the assumed learning outcomes allows to obtain 1.5 ECTS;
  • work required to pass the course, which has been assigned 3 ECTS, constitutes 10% of the semester student load.
Language: (unknown)
(in Polish) Dyscyplina naukowa, do której odnoszą się efekty uczenia się:

chemical sciences

Subject level:

elementary

Full description:

Specialist seminar I (bachelor's degree) is the first scientific seminar given by a student during the first-degree studies. Its aim is to teach the student an oral presentation, assisted by audiovisual means, of the latest scientific achievements in the selected field of chemistry and in the subject of the BA thesis.

Bibliography:

1. Literatura podstawowa

G. Królik, Autoprezentacja. Podręcznik., Wydawnictwo Uczelniane Akademii Ekonomicznej w Katowicach, 2004.

2. Literatura uzupełniająca

B. Lunden, L. Rosell, Techniki Prezentacji, BL Info Polska, 2006.

3. Literatura specjalistyczna

Monografie oraz oryginalne i przeglądowe publikacje naukowe wskazane przez opiekuna naukowego.

Efekty kształcenia i opis ECTS:

Educational outcomes.

EO1. The student presents information taken from the scientific chemical literature.

EO2. The student delivers a presentation, in which he (she) briefly and clearly presents the issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the indicated topic of the bachelor thesis and answers the questions, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation.

EO3. The student participates in the discussion and tries to explain the problems he (or she) does not understand.

EO4. The student cares for a reliable way of presenting the achievements of his (her) predecessors and other research groups.

EO5. The student is aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry.

ECTS description.

1. Class attendance: 15 h.

2. Preparation for classes: 1 h.

3. Preparation for verification: 9 h.

4. Consultation with the instructor: 5 h.

----------------------------------------------------

Total: 30 h, i.e., 1 ECTS points.

Assessment methods and assessment criteria:

EO1.

Rating 5 (very good). The verification shows that the student presents information taken from specialist literature without any tangible shortcomings.

Rating 4.5 (good plus). The verification shows that the student presents information taken from specialist literature almost fully, but he or she does not fulfill the criteria for a higher rating.

Rating 4 (good). Verification shows that the student presents information from specialist literature to a large extent, but does not meets the criteria for a higher rating.

Rating 3.5 (satisfactory plus). Verification shows that the student largely correctly but inconsistently presents information from the literature

specialist, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

Rating 3 (satisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases the student presents information taken from specialist literature, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

Rating 2 (unsatisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases the student presents information taken from specialist literature, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

EO2.

Rating 5 (very good). Verification shows that, without noticeable shortcomings, the student prepares a presentation, in which in a concise and clear manner presents issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the bachelor thesis, and answers the questions, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation.

Rating 4.5 (good plus). Verification shows that the student prepares a presentation almost fully correctly, in which he or she presents, in a concise and clear manner, issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the bachelor thesis and answers the questions, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 4 (good). Verification shows that the student prepares the presentation to a large extent, in which he or she, in a concise and clear manner, presents issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the bachelor thesis and answers the questions, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3.5 (satisfactory plus). Verification shows that to a large extent correctly but inconsistently prepares a presentation in which in a concise and

clearly presents the issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the BA thesis and answers the questions asked by the students related to the topic of the presentation, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3 (satisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases it prepares a presentation in which in a concise and clear manner presents issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the bachelor thesis and answers the questions, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 2 (unsatisfactory). Verification does not show that the student is preparing a presentation in which he presents in a concise and clear manner the issues related to the state of knowledge relating to the selected topic of the thesis and answers the question, asked by the audience, related to the topic of the presentation, or that he meets the criteria for a higher grade.

EO3.

Rating 5 (very good). Verification shows that the student takes part in the discussion without tangible shortcomings, and strives to explain problems he does not understand.

Rating 4.5 (good plus). Verification shows that the student takes part in the discussion almost fully, strives to clarify problems that are incomprehensible to him or her, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 4 (good). Verification shows that the student participates correctly in the discussion to a large extent, aims at explaining problems that are incomprehensible to him or her, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3.5 (satisfactory plus). Verification shows that, to a large extent, the student correctly but inconsistently participates in the discussion, strives to clarify problems incomprehensible to him or her, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3 (satisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases the student takes part in the discussion, and aims to clarify problems that are incomprehensible to him or her, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 2 (unsatisfactory). Verification does not show that the student takes part in the discussion, and aims to clarify problems that are incomprehensible to him, or that he or she meets the criteria for a higher grade.

EO4.

Rating 5 (very good). Verification shows that, without tangible shortcomings, the student cares for a fair presentation of the achievements of its predecessors and other research groups.

Rating 4.5 (good plus). Verification shows that the student cares almost fully for a reliable way of presenting the achievements of his or her predecessors and other research groups, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

Rating 4 (good). Verification shows that to a large extent the student correctly cares about the reliable way of presenting the achievements of his or her predecessors and other research groups, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3.5 (satisfactory plus). The verification shows that to a large extent the student correctly but inconsistently cares about the reliable way of presenting the achievements of his or her predecessors and other research groups, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3 (satisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases the student cares for a fair way of presenting the achievements of his or her predecessors and other research groups, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 2 (unsatisfactory). Verification neither demonstrates that the student cares for a fair presentation of the achievements of his or her predecessors and other research groups, nor that it meets the criteria for a higher grade.

EO5.

Rating 5 (very good). The verification shows that without any tangible shortcomings, the student is aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry.

Rating 4.5 (good plus). The verification shows that the student is almost fully aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 4 (good). Verification shows that the student is largely correctly aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3.5 (satisfactory plus). The verification shows that the student is largely correctly but inconsistently aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 3 (satisfactory). Verification shows that in most test cases the student is aware of the need to master the English language as a tool enabling access to the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry, but does not meet the criteria for a higher grade.

Rating 2 (unsatisfactory). The verification neither shows that the student is aware of the necessity to master the English language as a tool to access the current state of knowledge in the field of chemistry, nor that it meets the criteria for a higher grade.

The final grade x is computed from the value

st(w) = 5 if 4.5 < w; st (w) = 4.5, if 4.25 < w ≤ 4.5; st (w) = 4 if 3.75 <w ≤ 4.25; st (w) = 3.5, if 3.25 <w ≤ 3.75; st (w) = 3 if 2.75 <w ≤ 3.25; st (w) = 2 if w ≤ 2.75

and based on the following rule:

● x is determined from the formula x = st(z), where z is the weighted average of the grades from the verifications carried out, in which the exam grade weights are 2, and the grades for other forms of verification weights are equal to 1.

Classes in period "Winter semester 2021/22" (past)

Time span: 2021-10-01 - 2022-01-31
Selected timetable range:
Navigate to timetable
Type of class:
Conversatorium, 15 hours more information
Coordinators: Maciej Cieplak, Włodzimierz Kutner, Karol Makuch, Piyush Sindhu Sharma
Group instructors: Włodzimierz Kutner
Students list: (inaccessible to you)
Examination: graded credit
(in Polish) E-Learning:

(in Polish) E-Learning (pełny kurs) z podziałem na grupy

Classes in period "Winter semester 2022/23" (past)

Time span: 2022-10-01 - 2023-01-31
Selected timetable range:
Navigate to timetable
Type of class:
Seminar, 15 hours more information
Coordinators: Włodzimierz Kutner
Group instructors: Włodzimierz Kutner
Students list: (inaccessible to you)
Examination: graded credit
(in Polish) E-Learning:

(in Polish) E-Learning (pełny kurs) z podziałem na grupy

(in Polish) Opis nakładu pracy studenta w ECTS:

CH1_W19, CH1_W22, CH1_U01, CH1_U03, CH1_U05, CH1_U11, CH1_U12, CH1_U13, CH1_U17, CH1_U19, CH1_U21, CH1_K04, CH1_K05.

Bibliography:

1. Literatura podstawowa

G. Królik, Autoprezentacja. Podręcznik., Wydawnictwo Uczelniane Akademii Ekonomicznej w Katowicach, 2004.

2. Literatura uzupełniająca

B. Lunden, L. Rosell, Techniki Prezentacji, BL Info Polska, 2006.

3. Literatura specjalistyczna

Monografie oraz oryginalne i przeglądowe publikacje naukowe wskazane przez opiekuna naukowego.

Classes in period "Winter semester 2023/24" (past)

Time span: 2023-10-01 - 2024-01-31
Selected timetable range:
Navigate to timetable
Type of class:
Conversatorium, 30 hours more information
Coordinators: Dominik Kurzydłowski
Group instructors: Dominik Kurzydłowski
Students list: (inaccessible to you)
Examination: graded credit
(in Polish) E-Learning:

(in Polish) E-Learning (pełny kurs) z podziałem na grupy

(in Polish) Opis nakładu pracy studenta w ECTS:

CH1_W19, CH1_W22, CH1_U01, CH1_U03, CH1_U05, CH1_U11, CH1_U12, CH1_U13, CH1_U17, CH1_U19, CH1_U21, CH1_K04, CH1_K05.

Type of subject:

obligatory

(in Polish) Grupa przedmiotów ogólnouczenianych:

(in Polish) nie dotyczy

Bibliography:

1. Literatura podstawowa

G. Królik, Autoprezentacja. Podręcznik., Wydawnictwo Uczelniane Akademii Ekonomicznej w Katowicach, 2004.

2. Literatura uzupełniająca

B. Lunden, L. Rosell, Techniki Prezentacji, BL Info Polska, 2006.

3. Literatura specjalistyczna

Monografie oraz oryginalne i przeglądowe publikacje naukowe wskazane przez opiekuna naukowego.

Classes in period "Winter semester 2024/25" (future)

Time span: 2024-10-01 - 2025-01-31
Selected timetable range:
Navigate to timetable
Type of class:
Conversatorium, 30 hours more information
Coordinators: (unknown)
Group instructors: (unknown)
Students list: (inaccessible to you)
Examination: graded credit
(in Polish) E-Learning:

(in Polish) E-Learning

Type of subject:

obligatory

(in Polish) Grupa przedmiotów ogólnouczenianych:

(in Polish) nie dotyczy

Course descriptions are protected by copyright.
Copyright by Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw.
ul. Dewajtis 5,
01-815 Warszawa
tel: +48 22 561 88 00 https://uksw.edu.pl
contact accessibility statement USOSweb 7.0.2.0-1 (2024-03-12)