European Master in Renewable Energy
Students Project Guidelines
Updated: 14 February 2019
Contents:
Project Regulations p. 2
Information for Project Host Companies or Research Centres p. 4
Project Proposal Form p. 5
Template thesis cover and format p. 7
Marking Scheme for Oral Project Presentations p.10
Marking Scheme for Project Dissertations p. 11
2
Project Regulations taken from the general programme
regulations:
www.master.eurec.be/en/About-the-Master/Regulations/
Arranging the project
11. The student is encouraged to arrange his/her own Project. The Project should complement the
knowledge that the Student has gained during his/her Specialisation, so, if necessary, the relevant
Specialisation Provider should offer assistance to the Student in finding a Project. If despite the best
efforts of the Student and Specialisation Provider, a suitable Project is not found, the Core Provider
shall propose a Project to the Student. However, the main responsibility for finding a project falls on
the student.
12. Each year, the Coordinator shall contact previous Project Hosts to see if they would host one or
more Students in the current Academic Year.
Approval
13. Students must fill in a standard form (‘Project Proposal Form ’) circulated by the Coordinator.
14. Each Student must obtain his/her Core Provider’s approval for the Project work (s)he wishes to
undertake. The Core Provider assesses Projects on the basis of the information contained in the
forms described in 13. Therefore, each Student must make sure his/her Core Provider receives the
Project Proposal Form.
15. Once approved by the Core Provider, each Student shall send his Project Proposal Form to his
Specialisation Provider, as well as to the Coordinator (EUREC).
Supervision
16. One month after beginning work on his/her Project, each Student should send a 1-2 pages
document to his/her Core and Specialisation Providers describing his/her Project in detail, the role
(s)he fulfils at the Project Host and setting out a timetable by when (s)he expects to complete
different stages of his/her Project work.
17. The regularity of progress reports to be sent by the Student during his/her project will be
determined by the Core Provider.
18. Core and Specialisation Providers will provide their Students with prompt feedback on the
messages the Students send them.
19. Core and Specialisation Providers reserve the right to impose further measures to ensure
adequate supervision of their Students.
20. The company or research centre at which the Students work during their Project is required to fill
an evaluation template and send it to the Student’s Core Provider and to the coordinator at least one
month before the Project Presentations.
Assessment
21. Project assessment will be in two parts: the Master Thesis and the Project Presentation. The
relative weighting between the Master Thesis and Project Presentation is 80% and 20% respectively.
3
22. The Steering Committee will ensure that all Students are marked according to a common
scheme.
23. If a Student fails the project, (s)he may redo this course section in the following Academic Year,
under approval and particular conditions of their Core provider University.
Handing in the Master thesis
24. Projects are assessed on the basis of six months of work.
25. Each Student is to send his/her Master Thesis by e-mail to his/her Core and Specialisation
Providers, and to the Coordinator no later than two weeks before the first day of the Project
Presentations. The files e-mailed should be in ‘doc’ or ‘pdf’ format.
26. If the Master Thesis is not handed in on time, the student will fail the Project unless he/she has
prior written permission (including by e-mail) from the designated supervisor at their Core provider.
The Coordinator will confirm receipt of each Master Thesis and their accompanying summaries by e-
mail.
27. If the project hosts wishes it, Students can request their thesis content to be treated confidentially
by indicating this on the cover of the thesis. In this case, the Coordinator undertakes not to allow
access to the Coordinator’s copy of the Student’s Master Thesis to anyone outside the Steering
Committee, aside from the Coordinator itself.
Presentations
28. The Steering Committee will decide well in advance the exact dates and venue for the Project
Presentations and the Coordinator will communicate this to the Students.
29. Each Student’s Project Presentation will be heard by a jury composed of a representative of that
Student’s Core and Specialisation Providers and the representative of another EUREC Master
Partner. The Steering Committee and Coordinator will select this jury. The marks awarded by this
jury will inform the mark that the Core Provider awards for the Project.
30. Each Student’s Project Presentation should last 15 minutes followed by 10 minutes of
questioning on his/her Project by the jury.
31. All Master students are requested to be physically present at the Master Presentation days in
Brussels. However, under exceptional circumstances and previous approval of the student’s core
university, students can have the possibility to present their Thesis in a conference call mode. In this
case, the Core provider should, at the latest two weeks before the Presentation Days, send an email
to EUREC approving the student’s request.
4
Information for Project Host Companies or Research
Centres
For the 17th year, the network of EUREC members involved in teaching the European Master in
Renewable Energy is educating young motivated engineers for their professional career in the RE
sector.
66 students from 31 different countries are following the courses at Loughborough University (UK),
Mines-ParisTech (FR), Oldenburg University (DE), Hanze UAS (NL) and Zaragoza University (ES).
From June to December, students are required to work on a practical project on the premises of a
company or a research centre. If you are interested in having a qualified trainee with you over
6 months, you can contact the programme coordinator to obtain a detailed list of students, or to
publish an internship offer on our website (secured area, only for EUREC students). The ad should
describe the technical aspects of the project and please indicate linguistic and educational
preferences for your trainee. Contact: Nathalie Richet, [email protected]
The academic directors of the participating universities will make sure the technical level of the
project is high enough to be a challenge to our students.
The students are specialising in the following areas:
3 students in Solar Thermal
12 students in PV
17 students in Wind energy
16 students in Grid Integration
10 students in Ocean energy
8 students in Sustainable Fuel Systems for mobility
The project host company or institute is expected to support the student in form of an allowance.
This allowance is meant to cover at least the cost for accommodation of the student. This can be
done by offering housing as an in-kind contribution to the student or in form of a small remuneration.
Basically, 750 EUR should be an indicative minimum for this. If this is a problem, a company can still
offer a project and wait and see if a student is accepting to work for free on the project.
The project host must supervise the student. Students are required to work on a comprehensive
project; they are writing their project thesis based on their practical experience. The company does
not have to read or evaluate the thesis, though.
The students have a supervisor at their core university, as this institution is ultimately responsible for
issuing the diploma and thus has to evaluate the students project work.
The host company has to make sure the student is covered by insurance while working on the
company's premises. The host company will usually draw up a traineeship agreement with the
student and the University at which the student is registered.
The company or research centre at which the Students work during their Project is required to fill an
evaluation template and send it to the Student’s Core Provider and to the coordinator (EUREC)
before the Project Presentations. EUREC will send the evaluation template to students in October.
5
Project proposal form
STUDENTS HAVE TO FILL IN THE FORM, SEND IT FOR APPROVAL TO THEIR CORE PROVIDER UNIVERSITY AND,
ONCE APPROVED, SEND IT BACK TO EUREC.
EUREC MUST RECEIVE ALL PROPOSAL FORMS AT THE LATEST BY THE END OF JUNE
The Project Proposal
Project Title
Entity offering project
Objective and methodology
Introduction to set the context and reason for the development of the project
(max. 150 words)
Objectives - 4-6 measurable activities to meet the aims (max. 150 words)
Proposed scientific methodology How you are going to solve the problem and meet the
objectives (max. 150 words)
Main expected outcomes of the project (max. 150 words)
References 2 or 3 peer review journal articles related to the topic under investigation
(when applicable)
6
Contact person: _______________________________________
Address:
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Country: ______________________________________________
Tel: _________________________________________________
E-mail: ______________________________________________
The Student
Full name
Core and Specialisation
Universities
Name and contact details of the Supervisor in the Core University
Other relevant information: (dates/pay…)
Please return this form to [email protected] by the end of June.
EUREC EEIG,
Place du Champ de Mars, 2
1050 Brussels
Belgium
7
Academic year 2018-2019
Title: (Template thesis cover)
This thesis has to remain confidential upon specific request of the host
organisation
(Tick if appropriate - Delete if not confidential)
Full Name of Student: Name of student
Core Provider: Name of core University
Specialisation: Name of specialisation University
Host Organization: Name and address (+country) of company or research centre
Academic Supervisor:
Submission Date:
8
Cover: see the uniform cover template with EUREC Master logo (previous page)
Format: A4 portrait
Margins (left, right, top, bottom): 2,0 cm
Fonts: Arial
Title: Centered; Arial 16 Pt Bold
Headings: Arial 14 pt bold
Subheadings: Arial 12 pt bold
Text: Arial 12 pt normal
Caption: Arial 12 pt italic
Spacing: Line spacing: Single-spaced; Word spacing: Single-spaced
Reference: all at the end (use endnote with numbers). Times New Roman 12
Annexes: all at the end
Annex numbering: Annex 1: This annex is….
Figure / table numbering: Table 1, Table 2, Figure 1, Figure 2, etc.
Page numbers: bottom right 8
9
Title Arial 16 pt bold
Name of student, name and address of the core University
1. Headings Arial 14 pt bold
1.1. Subheading Arial 12 pt bold
Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12
pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal
Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12
pt
1.2. Subheading Arial 12 pt bold
Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12
pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal
Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12
pt
2. Headings Arial 14 pt bold
2.1. Subheading Arial 12 pt bold
Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12
pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal Text Arial 12 pt normal
Text
Table 1. Font Sizes
Size
Usage
8 points
Footnotes
12 points
Normal text
12 points bold
Subheadings
14 points bold
Headings
16 points bold
Title
Picture1. Empty figure
References
[1] C. V. Nayar and J. H. Bundell, “Output Power Controller for a Wind Driven
Induction Generator”, IEEE Trans. on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, Vol. AES-
23, No. 3, May 1987, pp. 388-401.
[2] P. S. Panickar, S. M. Islam, and C. V. Nayar, “A New Quasi-Optimal Control
Algorithm for a Wind-Diesel Hybrid System”, Wind Engineering, Vol. 22, No. 3,
1998, pp. 159-169.
10
Guidance marking scheme for EUREC Master Project thesis*
(comprehensive report, summary paper and presentation in Brussels)
Name of Student:
1. Introduction: (max 10)
Background and context of the topic
Objectives of the project
Research question
Literature research
/10
9-10
Outstanding
7-8
Good
5-6
Satisfactory
3-4
Below average
0-2
Unsatisfactory
2. Methodology: (max 10)
Clear description and justification of the method(s) applied
Soundness of methodology
Appropriateness of theoretical framework
/10
9-10
Outstanding
7-8
Good
5-6
Satisfactory
3-4
Below average
0-2
Unsatisfactory
3. Data analysis, discussion, conclusions (max 30)
Interpretation of the results and critical comparison with
theoretical models
Understanding of the results' practical implications
Correct and logical conclusions drawn from the analysis,
consistent with the activity's objectives
/30
25-30
Outstanding
20-24
Good
15-19
Satisfactory
9-14
Below average
0-9
Unsatisfactory
4. Report writing: (max 10)
Logical structure of report and literary accuracy
Use of paragraphs, headings, tables, figures, literature list,
appendices
Proper length (40 pages max, including references)
/10
9-10
Outstanding
7-8
Good
5-6
Satisfactory
3-4
Below average
0-2
Unsatisfactory
5. Project activity and student effort: (max 10)
Communication with project supervisor(s)
Project planning
Demonstration of initiative
Commitment and effort
/10
9-10
Outstanding
7-8
Good
5-6
Satisfactory
3-4
Below average
0-2
Unsatisfactory
SUB TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE REPORT
/70
6. 6-page summary: (max 10)
Completeness
Conciseness (6 pages max including references+ 20 max for
appendices)
Structure and language
/10
9-10
Outstanding
7-8
Good
5-6
Satisfactory
3-4
Below average
0-2
Unsatisfactory
SUB TOTAL SUMMARY PAPER
/10
SUB TOTAL PRESENTATION
(consolidated results from Steering Committee jury)
/20
Total mark report +
summary +
presentation
(max = 100)
/100
Date:
Assessed by:
Brief comments:
1 The first 4 boxes guide the assessor in providing marks for the specified aspects of the project as manifest in the written report (including the
Appendices where appropriate). The 5th box requires a mark for the organisation and effort put in by the student throughout the project that may or
may not be reflected in the written report itself.
*Supervisors will be responsible to assess the comprehensive report in the respect of the core University regulations
11
.
Project - Oral Presentations
Date:
Time
Name
Project Title
A
(100)
B
(100)
C
(100)
D
(100)
Marker’s Name .........................................................................
Marker’s Signature ..................................................................
KEY: A Structure/Logic/Communication; B Use of resources/timekeeping;
C Presentational style; D Response to questioning
Notes:
A Structure/Logic/Communication: A mark is awarded for how well a student structures
their presentation including the use of introduction, methodology, results and conclusions.
The mark also reflects the logic of the student’s methodology and conclusions, i.e. is it well
thought through. Finally, the mark reflects how well the student is able to communicate an
overview of their project through the oral presentation.
B Use of resources/timekeeping: The mark here reflects how well the student has used
audio/visual resources, e.g. are PowerPoint slides well laid out and clear. This mark also
reflects how well the student has kept to their allotted time if they run overtime, they can
expect to be penalised.
C Presentational style: This mark reflects how well the student is able to present
themselves. Do they speak clearly to their audience, do they interact well with their slides,
are they easy to understand, e.g. if they just read verbatim from notes, they can expect to
be penalised. Allowance should be made if English is not the student’s native language.
D Response to questioning: A final mark is given reflecting how well the student holds
up under questioning. Are they able to think on their feet? Questioning also teases out how
well the student has understood the aims, objectives and implications of their project, and
whether it is largely their own work. N.B. It is important that the ‘jury’ ask sufficient
questions to give a meaningful mark here.