The course is organized in two modules:

Theoretical module: where participatory masterclasses are combined with problem-based learning sessions where theoretical concepts are worked through the resolution of practical cases.

Seminar Module: through collaborative learning, students analyze different aspects of experimental designs found in current scientific articles. At the beginning of the course, following the guidelines set by the teaching staff, students choose a project related to the field of genetic engineering of microorganisms, which they will use to create a poster. The schedule of activities—defining the classroom work sessions, the presentation and debate of the work done, as well as the submission deadlines for the proposed tasks—will be provided by the teaching staff at the start of the course.

Annotation: within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.

Seminar module evaluation

The assessment of the seminars is carried out through the evaluation of different activities related to a project from which a poster will be developed. The following will be assessed:

a) The initial and follow-up submissions, with a maximum grade of 2 points out of 10.

b) The poster, with a maximum grade of 5 points out of 10.

c) The defense of the poster during the classroom presentation, with a maximum grade of 2 points out of 10.

d) The self-assessment, with a maximum grade of 1 point out of 10.

To pass this assessment module, the student must obtain a grade equal to or higher than 5.

Theoretical module evaluation

The assessment for this activity is carried out through a written individual exam, which will account for 80% of this module.

During the theoretical module sessions, assessment activities worth up to 20% of this module may be conducted.

To pass this module, it is necessary to obtain a score of 5 points or higher.

If the grade obtained in the written individual exam is less than 5, a make-up exam may be taken.

To be eligible for the retake process, the student should have been previously evaluated in a set of activities equaling at least two-thirds of the final score of the course or module.

Students who have passed the module may submit to a grade improvement test waiving the grade obtained previously in the individual written exam. The scheduled date for the second chance test is that of the second chance examination. Students wishing to take the grade improvement test must communicate it by mail to the teacher responsible for the subject at least 72 hours before the day scheduled for the second chance examination.

The final grade of the course will be theaverage of the grades obtained in both modules, being necessary to have passed separately each of them.

The student will be graded as \"Non-evaluable\" if the weight in of all conducted evaluation activities is less than 67% of the final score.

Single assessment

The evaluation of the theoretical module consists of a single test that will be the same as that of the type of continuous assessment, this test will account for 50% of the final grade for the subject and the same system of evaluation will be applied for the recovery than for continued evaluation.

The evaluation of the activities of the seminar module will mean 50% of the final grade for the subject. The students who take advantage of the single evaluation may deliver all the evidence together (including the oral presentation) on the same day as the one set for the synthesis test. The single assessment test will be carried out coinciding with the same date set in the calendar for the last continuous assessment test.

Use of AI

For this course, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies is permitted exclusively for support tasks, such as literature or information searching, text correction, translations, etc. Students must clearly identify which parts have been generated using this technology, specify the tools used, and include a critical reflection on how they influenced the process and the final result of the activity. A lack of transparency regarding the use of AI in this evaluable activity will be considered a lack of academic honesty and may result in a partial or total penalty on the activity's grade, or more severe sanctions in serious cases.

The commission of any irregularity in an evaluation activity (academic fraud, plagiarism, or improper use of AI, unless such use is expressly authorized in the course guide), which may lead to a significant variation in the grade, means that this activity will be graded with a 0. In the event that the course guide stipulates that obtaining a minimum grade in this evaluation activity is an essential requirement to pass the course, or if several irregularities occur in the evaluation activities of the same course, the final grade for the course is 0. Regardless of this, a disciplinary proceeding may be initiated against the student who incurs any of these irregularities.