Specialized seminar (BSc) I WM-CH-SEM-I

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.

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 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.

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.

Information on level of this course, year of study and semester when the course unit is delivered, types and amount of class hours - can be found in course structure diagrams of apropriate study programmes. This course is related to the following study programmes:

• Chemistry - full-time first-cycle studies

Additional information (registration calendar, class conductors, localization and schedules of classes), might be available in the USOSweb system:

• Description of WM-CH-SEM-I in USOSweb