Research & Advocacy Methods
Module Code: LAW817 (72377)
Programme(s): LLM Human Rights & Transitional Justice
LLM Gender & Human Rights
LLM Human Rights
School of Law / Transitional Justice Institute
Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences
Notice
Please be aware the information provided within the module handbook is subject to change.
- Table of Contents
Welcome
1. Module Overview and Communication
2. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Graduate Attributes (GAs) in your module
3. Aim and Learning Outcomes
4. Assessment and Feedback
Coursework 1
Coursework 2
5. Learning Resources
Library’s Support Services
Blackboard Learning Support
IT Support
6. Organisation and Management
Seminars and Attendance
Teaching and Learning Plan
7. Student Voice and Support Services
UUSU Advice Bureau Service
UU Student Wellbeing Service
UU Student Success Centre
Welcome
Welcome to LAW817 Research & Advocacy Methods:
This module handbook should provide you with all the information you need to successfully prepare for and complete this module and prepare for your dissertation. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the course structure, reading lists and assessment requirements. It is important to note that you will be expected to engage in both directed and independent study in advance of our weekly classes. It is therefore essential that you refer to this handbook and the module Blackboard page regularly for weekly readings and questions/case studies to consider.
Throughout this module you will be introduced to a diverse range of research and advocacy methods to help you develop the research and writing skills needed to be able to produce rigorous pieces of research, including your dissertation, and prepare for professional stages and a career in human rights law, gender and/or transitional justice
We look forward to working with you all and to some stimulating discussions in the semester ahead.
Kind regards
1. Module Overview and Communication
|
Module Details |
Postgraduate Law Module |
||
|
Module Title |
Research & Advocacy Methods |
||
|
Module Code |
LAW817 |
Module Level |
7 |
|
Credit points |
20 |
Module Status |
Core |
|
Semester |
2 |
||
|
Delivery Mode: Face-to-Face |
|||
|
Contact Details and Communication Methods |
|||
|
General Information, Queries and Consultations |
If you require advice on any aspect of the module, please read the guidance provided here, in the Module Handbook. For General Queries, please utilise the class Discussion Board (if one has been made available in Blackboard Ultra). For Specific Queries or studies advice, you can avail of the ‘Drop-in Hours.’ Please contact me if you have questions relating to the module or wish to schedule an appointment. Please note, we aim to respond to emails within 48 hours during the working week. |
||
|
Module Announcements |
Key announcements will be presented during tutor-led activities. Out of class communication including notifications, reminders, etc will be distributed via the Blackboard Announcement tool. You will receive a duplication of the announcement direct to your student email inbox. It is essential that you check your emails and Blackboard Ultra regularly for new announcements. Blackboard is mobile responsive and will work on your phone browser, you can also download the ‘Blackboard’ App as an alternative to access these announcements, notifications and reminders as well as content. |
||
2. Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Graduate Attributes (GAs) in your module
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
The UN SDGs are a comprehensive set of global goals to end poverty, protect our planet and improve living conditions of the Global Population. You are encouraged to think critically and reflect on SDGs in the context of this module.
The following SDGs are relevant in the context of this module:
Graduate Attributes (GAs)
Ulster University’s Graduate Attributes are a high-level set of competencies, developing universal understandings, skills, qualities, and values.
As a result of engaging with this module you will have opportunities to develop and practise the following selected attributes:
|
Thriving Individual |
D |
A |
|
Engaged Learner |
D |
A |
|
Enhancing Potential Confidence and Resilience Well-being Growth Mindset |
|
Subject Specialist Creative Problem Solver Researcher Critical Thinker |
||||
|
Collaborative Professional |
D |
A |
|
Active Citizen |
D |
A |
|
Responsible Team Player Effective Communicator Enterprising Innovator Digital Fluent Professional |
|
Citizen with Integrity Inclusive Citizen Sustainable Citizen Future Thinker |
KEY:
D = Developed
A = Assessed
3. Aim and Learning Outcomes
Module Rationale
Anyone undertaking an advanced Masters programme can be expected to demonstrate an ability to investigate, analyse and report on a particular issue in a coherent and systematic manner that integrates law, policy and practice where appropriate. This module provides a full range of skills which students need to be able to produce rigorous pieces of research as part of their dissertation, and prepare for professional stages and a career in human rights law, gender and/or transitional justice. The module introduces students to key issues in advocacy such as navigating parliamentary systems and writing consultation responses. The module attempts to bridge the gap between academic and practical law. The understanding of sources of domestic law and public international law and study techniques including transferable skills in areas such as performing UN- research and time-management are fundamental skills. This understanding can then be applied to help support a practical approach to learning.
Module Aim
The module aims to:
- Provide students with an overview of relevant research skills and methodology such that they understand the range of available sources and methodologies which they can use and apply to a human rights law and/ transitional justice, gender, conflict and human rights problem.
- Provide students with guidance on how to identify and find relevant sources and materials.
- Enable students to extract the essential points from those sources and materials
- Enable the students to acquire confidence in exploring their research ideas and the skill to formulate a research proposal.
- Introduce students to the research guidance.
- Introduce students to key issues in advocacy such as navigating parliamentary resources and writing consultation responses.
- Provide students with the skills to research and to write up a dissertation following guidance regarding presentation, word limit, time-management; and relations with their supervisor/s.
Learning Outcomes
|
What you should be able to do by the end of this module? |
Successful participants will be able to:
1) Understand and analyse complex legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues
2) Synthesise and evaluate legal, theoretical, methodological and policy arguments
3) Locate and understand and apply a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources and apply these appropriately and with judgment
4) Communicate complex ideas with clarity, accuracy and precision, in a structured manner, attending to referencing requirements, spelling and grammar
Using Gen AI Tools in this Module
Ulster University encourages the thoughtful and ethical use of Generative Artificial Intelligent (Gen AI) tools to enhance your learning and assessment while maintaining academic integrity. Ethical use means being transparent about when and how AI is used and never submitting AI-generated work as your own. Misuse of AI is considered a breach of Ulster’s academic integrity policies.
All use of AI must align with Ulster University’s guidance on the responsible and ethical use of AI in education and comply with the specific expectations set out for this module. If you are unsure about what is permitted, always speak with your module coordinator. For full details, refer to the University’s Guidance on the Use of AI.
How to Acknowledge the Use of Generative AI
Comprehensive guidance on the use of AI tools in learning and assessment, including how to appropriately acknowledge, reference, or cite Generative AI in assessments, is available on the Guidance on use of AI for students
4. Assessment and Feedback
|
What you need to do to demonstrate achievement of learning? |
Summary Assessment Information
This module will be assessed via two items of assessment
|
Type |
Assessment method Submission date, time and submission method |
Percentage (%) and word count equivalent |
Feedback due date |
|
Coursework 1
|
7.5-minute Video Presentation (1,000 word equivalent) DATE: Friday 13th March 2026 TIME: By 12PM (NOON) Submit via Blackboard |
25% |
20 working days post submission date (via Blackboard Ultra) |
|
Coursework 2
|
3,000-word Research Proposal DATE: Monday 11th May 2026 TIME: By 12PM (NOON) Submit via Blackboard |
75% |
20 working days post submission date (via Blackboard Ultra) |
Assessment Guidance
1) Word count includes the title and contents pages but excludes footnote referencing, bibliography, tables and appendices.
5) Your work should include references to journal articles and other relevant publications and should be properly laid out using the OSCOLA system of referencing.This is through the use of footnotes followed by a bibliography and guidance will be provided throughout the module. More detailed guidance is available in the Subject Guides.We encourage you to make good use of all the support services offered by your Campus Librarian, further details are in the Learning Support Services Section.
6) You should refer to the assessment criteria to provide fuller details of the marking criteria for each classification band.
7) In addition, you should refer to the standard assessment guidelines as presented in your Programme Handbook/Support Area, this includes guidance and policies on referencing style, plagiarism, etc.
8) Marks are awarded for content, quality of analysis, and effective use of referencing. To achieve high marks, students will be expected to demonstrate a familiarity with the wider literature in the subject area. Higher marks will also be awarded to students who provide strong analysis and critical evaluation of the various concepts and techniques identified and their application to real world situations.
9) Coursework must be submitted by the dates specified. Coursework submitted after the deadline, without prior approval, is not normally accepted. For further guidance on the late submission of coursework, please see the Programme handbook.
10) Assessments must be submitted as per the assessment brief.
Please note: Words in excess of +10% of the word count will not be marked
Coursework 1
Assessment Task
7.5-minute (1,000 word equivalent) Video Presentation
Coursework 1 – BRIEF
Create a 7.5 minute (1,000 word equivalent) video presentation outlining your proposed research topic. The presentation should clearly address:
- The chosen topic and its significance
- A brief background and context
- The purpose of the research and key research questions
- Core concepts, including relevant theories and key authors
- The proposed methodology
a) Detailed assessment guidance will be made available in your Blackboard Module Assessment Folder.
b) This coursework accounts for 25% of the overall module assessment.
c) Completed assignments must be submitted using the Panopto Student Submission tool via your Blackboard Module Area by the specified date and time outlined in the Summary Assessment Information table above.
d) All submitted assignments should have the file name:
i) “SurnameFirstNameBNumber”
ii) e.g. BrownJohnB00001234_AssignmentOne.
Coursework 1 – FEEDBACK
Written feedback on the assessment will be provided via Blackboard 20 working days post-submission
Coursework 2
Assessment Task
3,000-word Research Proposal
A good research proposal should include the following; a suitable title, an introduction, a statement of the purpose, research questions, a statement on the significance of the study (also referred to as a justification), a literature review, methodology, methods, ethics and a statement on how the study is organized (basically a breakdown of proposed chapters).
Approximate word counts for each section are provided below, though depending on the project you may be justified in writing more or less in each section.
1. The Title
The title should be brief and incorporate key words that focus attention on the objectives of the proposed research. It should aim to interest potential readers in your study.
2. Introduction Approx 300 words
The purpose of the introduction is to provide background information regarding the problem under investigation. The introduction should provide readers with a brief summary of literature and research related to the problem being investigated, and should lead up to the statement of the purpose of the project. It narrows the focus of the study and provides a brief rationale for why the study is worth pursuing.
3. Purpose of the Project Approximately 150 words
The purpose of the study is stated in this section. The statement of purpose is a critical part of the research proposal and dissertation because it provides focus and direction for the remainder of the study. A well-written statement of purpose defines the problem and helps identify the variables that will be investigated in the study. The purpose should be stated succinctly and should be expressed in not more than two brief sentences. The following examples illustrate commonly used formats that are acceptable:
- This study will compare, contrast, investigate, determine, examine, develop, clarify, or evaluate the issue being studied.
- This study is designed to investigate faculty of law students’ perception regarding the approaches of different lecturers to examinations with a view to advising students on which courses to avoid.
Since you are writing a dissertation in law, it is critical that your purpose addresses a legal or sociolegal or legal philosophical issue; this can be done through different disciplinary perspectives but there must be some issue of law or law’s effects involved.
4. Research Questions Approximately 150 words
The purpose is further explicated in this section. Research questions emerge from the purpose and operationalize it in terms of specific variables and relationships to be examined and reported. Normally there are a small number of research questions, though you might have one main question and then 2-4 sub questions.
‘What’ type questions tend to yield descriptive answers. While they have a role in a proposal, consider using ‘how’ or ‘why’ questions to develop the analysis.
(Some guides on dissertations suggest using hypotheses rather than or in addition to research questions. As a general rule, hypotheses are stated when the research design is experimental or quasi-experimental in nature. Conversely, survey research and non-experimental research are generally limited to research questions. Hypotheses are tested, while research questions are answered.)
5. Significance of the Study Approximately 150 words
This section addresses the ‘so what?’ of the study. It describes or explains the potential value of the study and findings to the discipline and society at large. It should therefore identify the audience for the study and state how the results will be beneficial to them. Remember, research is conducted to add to the existing knowledge base and/or solve a problem-how your particular research will do these should be articulated in this section.
6. Literature Review Approximately 1350 words
The purpose of the literature review is to provide the reader with a review of the literature related to the problem under investigation. It could contain theories relevant to the problem, a historical overview of the problem, current trends related to the problem, and significant research (data) published about the problem.
The literature review should discuss what others have done thereby setting a benchmark for your study. It is called a literature review because it is based on published academic material on the subject. A thorough literature review is essential because it shows that you have studied rigorously what others have done. This lends credibility when you state the purpose of the dissertation is addressing, and when you provide reasons as to why obtaining a solution is significant.
7. Methodology (Theoretical Framework / Approach) Approximately 150 words
In this section you should explain what the framework is that you are using to approach the project. This is closely related to the methods you will use but not identical. The methodology or framework might be a doctrinal blackletter approach and then the method used will be legal analysis and interpretation and you might want to explain your approach to interpretation. You may want to adopt a sociolegal or empirical approach and then you may want to collect empirical, historical, or quantitive data form different sources. Or you may be adopting a critical, comparative, feminist etc framework and then the methods will have to be considered in the light of that.
8. Methods Approximately 300 words
In this section, you should explain how you will conduct the research in as much detail as possible.
The methods will depend on your research questions and methodology (theoretical framework or approach). Consider what sources (legal and extra-legal, primary or secondary) you will look at and how you will examine them. Provide as much detail as possible at this stage. (As the project is underway you might find the need to revise your methodology, explore new types of source material, and/or adopt new methods of gathering and processing data. If this happens, revise this section of the proposal)
9. Research ethics and integrity Approximately 150 words
Here you need to consider any issues of research ethics and integrity raised by the research. All research raises issues of ethics and integrity, though to differing degrees.
10. Provisional Outline of the Study (draft table of contents) Approximately 300 words
This section summarizes the contents of each of the chapters that will comprise the study. This section is essential as it helps the writer to organize his or her thoughts regarding how to organize and logically present the study. Please include indicative word counts for each chapter and a date for completing the first draft of each chapter. It might be helpful to present this in a table.
11. Bibliography
Include a bibliography of all the primary and secondary sources you have referenced in your proposal. This should separate primary and secondary sources. Secondary sources should be listed alphabetically by author surname.
NB: Your footnote referencing and bibliography are not included in the word count.
Coursework 2 – BRIEF
a) The assignment must take the form of an individual word-processed essay.
e) Detailed assessment guidance will be made available in your Blackboard Module Assessment Folder.
f) Completed assignments must be submitted in .doc or .docx Word format via your Blackboard Module Area by the specified date and time outlined in the Summary Assessment Information table above.
g) All submitted assignments should have the file name:
i) “SurnameFirstNameBNumber”
ii) e.g. BrownJohnB00001234_AssignmentTwo.
Coursework 2 – FEEDBACK
Written feedback on the assessment will be provided via Blackboard 20 working days post-submission.
ASSESSMENT 1 RUBRIC/MARKING PROFORMA
|
Criterion |
Fail (0 – 39%)
|
Marginal Fail (40 – 49%)
|
Pass (50 – 59%) |
Commendation (60 – 69%) |
Distinction (70 – 79%) |
High Distinction (80– 100%) |
|
LO1 Understand and analyse complex legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues (25%) |
Little or no understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological or policy issues. |
Limited and inadequate understanding of legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues. Contains many mistakes or omissions. |
Adequate understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues. Some mistakes and omissions may be present. Engagement with the issues may be limited. |
Good understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, with only minor mistakes or omissions at most. |
Strong understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, including complex ones, with no non-trivial mistakes or omissions. |
Exceptional and original understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, including complex ones, with no mistakes or omissions. |
|
LO2 Synthesise, evaluate and develop legal, theoretical, methodological and policy arguments (25%)
|
Little or no efforts at developing an argument or offering any evaluation or synthesis. |
Limited and inadequate efforts at developing an argument or offering any evaluation or synthesis. Critical analysis is superficial at best. Little overall argument. |
Adequate. Some critical analysis is present but underdeveloped. Overall effort at synthesis, evaluation and argument may be lacking coherence, nuance, depth or breadth. |
Good critical appraisal approach which develops a coherent argument. Critical analysis is well-developed. Overall argument has demonstrates good coherence, nuance, breadth and depth. |
Strong synthesis, evaluation and development of argument. Critical analysis is insightful. Overall argument has excellent coherence, nuance, breadth and depth. |
Exceptionally sophisticated and original synthesis, evaluation and development of argument. Arguments and insights presented are worthy of publication. |
|
LO 3 Locate and understand and apply a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources and apply these appropriately and with judgment (25%) |
Very limited or no references to appropriate sources. |
Limited references to appropriate sources. |
Inclusion of relevant primary and/or secondary sources. May lack primary sources or may lack secondary sources. Possible overuse of inappropriate or low-quality sources. |
Very good use of both relevant primary and secondary sources. Demonstrates diligent effort to locate relevant sources. May have minor omissions. Very good understanding of arguments presented in these sources. |
Excellent use of up-to-date primary and secondary. Demonstrates diligent effort to locate relevant sources. May have (very few) minor omissions. Excellent understanding of arguments contained in sources. Demonstrates careful, thorough reading of the material. |
Sophisticated use of a wide range of up-to-date primary and secondary sources. Demonstrates comprehensive effort to locate relevant sources. No significant omissions. Very thoughtful understanding of the key arguments presented in these sources. Demonstrates careful, thorough and deep reading of the material. |
|
LO 4 Communicate complex ideas with clarity, accuracy and precision, in a structured manner, attending to referencing requirements, spelling and grammar (25%) |
Very poor presentation, structure, grammar. Language is very vague, wordy or confusing. |
Weak presentation and structure, Language is vague, wordy or confusing. |
Orderly presentation. Competently structured. Language is reasonably clear. |
Good presentation. Logically structured – each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Good use of transition and signposting language. Language is clear, precise and concise. |
Excellent, well-directed presentation. Logically structured – each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Excellent use of transition and signposting language. Language is clear, precise and concise. |
Exceptional presentation which makes the overall argument clear and persuasive. Logically structured– each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Exceptional use of transition and signposting language Language is clear, precise and concise and conveys the meaning with elegance. |
ASSESSMENT 2 RUBRIC/MARKING PROFORMA
|
Criterion |
Fail (0 – 39%)
|
Marginal Fail (40 – 49%)
|
Pass (50 – 59%) |
Commendation (60 – 69%) |
Distinction (70 – 79%) |
High Distinction (80– 100%) |
|
LO1 Understand and analyse complex legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues (25%) |
Little or no understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological or policy issues. |
Limited and inadequate understanding of legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues. Contains many mistakes or omissions. |
Adequate understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues. Some mistakes and omissions may be present. Engagement with the issues may be limited. |
Good understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, with only minor mistakes or omissions at most. |
Strong understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, including complex ones, with no non-trivial mistakes or omissions. |
Exceptional and original understanding of the legal, theoretical, methodological and policy issues, including complex ones, with no mistakes or omissions. |
|
LO2 Synthesise, evaluate and develop legal, theoretical, methodological and policy arguments (25%)
|
Little or no efforts at developing an argument or offering any evaluation or synthesis. |
Limited and inadequate efforts at developing an argument or offering any evaluation or synthesis. Critical analysis is superficial at best. Little overall argument. |
Adequate. Some critical analysis is present but underdeveloped. Overall effort at synthesis, evaluation and argument may be lacking coherence, nuance, depth or breadth. |
Good critical appraisal approach which develops a coherent argument. Critical analysis is well-developed. Overall argument has demonstrates good coherence, nuance, breadth and depth. |
Strong synthesis, evaluation and development of argument. Critical analysis is insightful. Overall argument has excellent coherence, nuance, breadth and depth. |
Exceptionally sophisticated and original synthesis, evaluation and development of argument. Arguments and insights presented are worthy of publication. |
|
LO 3 Locate and understand and apply a wide range of relevant primary and secondary sources and apply these appropriately and with judgment (25%) |
Very limited or no references to appropriate sources. |
Limited references to appropriate sources. |
Inclusion of relevant primary and/or secondary sources. May lack primary sources or may lack secondary sources. Possible overuse of inappropriate or low-quality sources. |
Very good use of both relevant primary and secondary sources. Demonstrates diligent effort to locate relevant sources. May have minor omissions. Very good understanding of arguments presented in these sources. |
Excellent use of up-to-date primary and secondary. Demonstrates diligent effort to locate relevant sources. May have (very few) minor omissions. Excellent understanding of arguments contained in sources. Demonstrates careful, thorough reading of the material. |
Sophisticated use of a wide range of up-to-date primary and secondary sources. Demonstrates comprehensive effort to locate relevant sources. No significant omissions. Very thoughtful understanding of the key arguments presented in these sources. Demonstrates careful, thorough and deep reading of the material. |
|
LO 4 Communicate complex ideas with clarity, accuracy and precision, in a structured manner, attending to referencing requirements, spelling and grammar (25%) |
Very poor presentation, structure, spelling and grammar. Little or no referencing and bibliography. Language is very vague, wordy or confusing. |
Weak presentation and structure, acceptable spelling and grammar. Inadequate referencing and bibliography. Language is vague, wordy or confusing. |
Orderly presentation. Competently structured and acceptable spelling and grammar. Adequate referencing and bibliography with adequate use of OSCOLA referencing though not always precise, consistent or full. Language is reasonably clear. |
Good presentation. Logically structured – each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Good use of transition and signposting language. Uses correct spelling and grammar throughout. Appropriate referencing and bibliography using OSCOLA though possibly some lack of precision or consistency. Language is clear, precise and concise. |
Excellent, well-directed presentation. Logically structured – each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Excellent use of transition and signposting language. Uses correct spelling and grammar throughout. Comprehensive referencing and bibliography – OSCOLA used flawlessly and precisely with full references given. Language is clear, precise and concise. |
Exceptional presentation which makes the overall argument clear and persuasive. Logically structured– each paragraph develops one idea and follows logically from the previous one; sections follow logically. Exceptional use of transition and signposting language Uses correct spelling and grammar throughout. Excellent referencing and bibliography – OSCOLA used flawlessly and precisely with full references given. Language is clear, precise and concise and conveys the meaning with elegance. |
5. Learning Resources
|
A list of current learning resources specifically chosen to build your knowledge and understanding for this module |
|
Reading List Also available online via Key Links: https://ulster.keylinks.org/new-ui/ |
|
Books/Journal Article/Publications Required Reading (Must read) |
|
Please see the Teaching and Learning Plan |
|
Books/Journal Article/Publications Recommended Reading (Should read/Could read) |
|
Please see the Teaching and Learning Plan |
|
Useful Journals |
|
Please see the Teaching and Learning Plan |
|
Useful Library Databases and Websites |
|
Please see the Teaching and Learning Plan |
6. Organisation and Management
|
Types of learning activities that will make up your weekly timetable |
LAW817 is a 20-credit point module, this requires approximately 200 hours of your commitment, distributed through the following learning and teaching activities over the 15-week semester. For a description of the nature of the learning activities please refer to your Programme handbook.
Summary of Learning Activities
|
Learning Activities: Week 1-12 |
Indicative Weekly Hours |
Total Hours (200 hours) |
|
Lecture/Seminar and Class Activities |
3 hours |
36 |
|
Independent Study: Week 1-15 |
Indicative Guide |
|
|
Independent Study – including assigned reading, seminar preparation and assessment preparation |
13.66 hours |
164 |
The teaching and learning plan provides a more detailed overview of content on a weekly basis.
Module delivery will typically consist of a two-hour lecture and a one-hour seminar discussion although format may vary slightly between weeks/sessions.
Class will be held on Thursdays 14:15-17:15 in BC-03-104 however this may be subject to changes so please regularly check your Timetable via PUBLISH.
Seminars and Attendance
Please refer to the Teaching and Learning Plan below for details of seminar topics. Attendance at seminars is essential and will be monitored.
All students are expected to download the SEAtS Student Attendance App via the App Store or Google Play to register their attendance when they arrive for each class. Regular check-ins using the app help you stay on track with your studies and maintain an accurate attendance record.
You can find everything you need to know about checking into your classes—including user guides, video demonstrations, and FAQs—on the SEAtS attendance information page.
Teaching and Learning Plan
The teaching plan/order of weekly topics is subject to change. The list below provides an outline summary of weekly activities and further information is available on Blackboard Ultra in the relevant week’s folder. Students will be expected to engage in all prescribed activities that contribute towards final assessment.
|
Week/L&T Methods |
Curriculum Content/Topic Title |
Independent/Directed Study, includes: Required Reading, Seminar Preparation, and/or Assessment Preparation and due dates |
|
Week 1 CM & FH
|
Module Welcome This session will examine the process of diagnosis by which the student can more fully understand the research task ahead of them; planning research and strategies for gathering and organising information; developing argument and critical evaluation; tackling research proposals and dissertations; time -management; and relations with their supervisor. We will touch on the resources that are available for research and how to identify a researchable issue. Issues surrounding how to choose an appropriate topic, craft an introduction, problem statement, objectives and hypothesis will also be examined. In addition, we will look at how to identify gaps in literature and theories that could be used to address these gaps.
Activities: Prior to the class please take a look at the outline of a research proposal (‘Writing the Research Proposal’) in the handbook and start a draft. At this stage it is fine to ‘pass’ or leave blank most of the elements but it would be useful if you had an idea as to the possible title to give us a sense of the type of topic you might work on. Please be prepared to share this area briefly in class. Also please take a look at some of the sample dissertations available on the TJI Programmes area on blackboard. There is a folder called ‘Sample Dissertations’.
Questions:
|
Required Reading R O’Connell ‘Writing a postgraduate dissertation in Law` https://conlawfiles.org/dissertation/ Walliman, N. Your Research Project: A Step-by-Step Guide for the First-Time Researcher. (Sage 2003) Chapter 1, 4 and 9 (EBOOK) Sara Efrat Efron and Ruth Ravid, Writing the Literature Review: A Practical Guide (Guilford Publications 2018) Chapter 1 (EBOOK) OR Diana Ridley, The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students (Sage 2012) Chapter 2 (EBOOK)
Recommended Reading Stella Cottrell, Critical Thinking Skills: Effective Analysis, Argument and Reflection (Macmillan International Higher Education 2017) Chapter 1 Norman Blaikie, Designing Social Research (Polity 2009), Chapter Two Tom Clark, Liam Foster and Alan Bryman, How to Do Your Social Research Project or Dissertation (Oxford University Press, 2019) Chapter on Reviewing the Literature. Cottrell, S Dissertations and Project Reports: A step by step guide (Macmillan International Higher Education 2014) Salter M. and Mason J. (2007) Writing Law Dissertations: An Introduction and Guide to the Conduct of Legal Research. (Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education) Chapter 1. Emily Finch and Stefan Fafinski, Legal Skills (2nd Oxford University Press 2019) Chapter on ‘Dissertations’ Wayne C Booth, Gregory G Colomb, Gregory G Colomb, Joseph M Williams and Joseph M Williams, The Craft of Research (University of Chicago press 2003), Chapter Three ‘From Topics to Questions’ Rowena Murray, How to write a thesis (McGraw-Hill Education 2011) Patrick Dunleavy, Authoring a PhD: How to Plan, Draft, Write and Finish a Doctoral Thesis or Dissertation (Palgrave Macmillan 2003) Hanson, S. (2012 3RD ed) Legal Method, Skills and Reasoning. (London: Cavendish) Chapter 1. Hart, C. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. (London: Sage Publications) pages 26 -44. Naomi Creutzfeldt, Marc Mason and Kirsten McConnachie, Routledge Handbook of Socio-Legal Theory and Methods (Routledge 2020) Umberto Eco, How to Write a Thesis (MIT Press 2015)
|
|
Week 2 FH
|
Social Science Research Methods This session will examine some of the methodologies more commonly used across the broader social sciences disciplines and consider the advantages and disadvantages of different methods, including both qualitative and quantitative methods. Questions: Explain the following terms:
What are the benefits and disadvantages of qualitative and quantitative research?
What are the benefits and disadvantages of these different types of research method?
What are different types of interviews? What are their respective benefits and disadvantages?
What factors should you consider in choosing case studies?
|
Required Reading Sara Efrat Efron and Ruth Ravid, Writing the literature review: A Practical Guide (Guilford Publications 2019) Chapter 2 Judith Bell, Doing Your Research Project: A guide for first-time researchers (Open University Press 2018) Chapter ‘Approaches to Research’ (EBOOK) Cottrell, S Dissertations and Project Reports: A step by step guide (Macmillan International Higher Education 2014) Chapter 11, ‘Methodological Approaches’ Denscombe M, The Good Research Guide: for Small-scale Social Research Projects (Open University Press 2017) Chapter ‘Case Studies’ Sotirios Sarantakos, Social Research (Macmillan International Higher Education 2012) Chapter 12 ‘Interviews’ or Denscombe M, The Good Research Guide: for Small-scale Social Research Projects (Open University Press 2017) Chapter ‘Interviews’
Recommended Reading Bryman A, Social Research Methods (Oxford University Press 2021) Bryman A, Tim F Liao and Michael S Lewis-Beck, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods (Sage Publications, Incorporated 2004) Bryson A and Seán McConville, The Routledge Guide to Interviewing: Oral History, Social Enquiry and Investigation (Routledge 2014) Cottrell, S Dissertations and Project Reports: A step by step guide (Macmillan International Higher Education 2014) Chapters 15-20 Denscombe M, The Good Research Guide: for Small-scale Social Research Projects (Open University Press 2017) Dillon M, Introduction to sociological theory: Theorists, concepts, and their applicability to the twenty-first century (John Wiley & Sons 2020) Druckman D, Doing Research: Methods of Inquiry for Conflict Analysis (Sage publications 2005) King, G., Keohane, R. O., and Verba, S. Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1994) Tim May, Social Research: Issues, Methods and Process (Open University Press 2011) Sarantakos S, Social Research (Macmillan International Higher Education 2012) (Ebook) Seale C, Researching Society and Culture (Sage 2004) Silverman, D. Doing Qualitative Research: A Practical Handbook (London: Sage 2017)
Useful online resources: National Centre for Research Methods: https://www.ncrm.ac.uk/resources/ There are some really interesting podcasts available which may serve to provide some inspiration and food for thought for your research proposal. Harvard University, Committee on Degrees in Social Studies (resources): https://socialstudies.fas.harvard.edu/methods-resources Sage Research Methods: https://methods.sagepub.com/ Social Research Association, Good Practice Guides: https://the-sra.org.uk/SRA/SRA/Resources/Good-Practice.aspx?hkey=ccb6430d-24a0-4229-8074-637d54e97a5d
|
|
Week 3 CM
|
Sociolegal Research Methods
|
Required Reading Lisa Webley, `The Why and How To of Conducting a Socio-legal Empirical Research Project` in Marc Mason Naomi Creutzfeldt, and Kirsten McConnachie (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Socio-Legal Theory and Methods (Routledge 2019) Linda Mulcahy and Rachel Cahill-O`Callaghan, `Introduction: Socio-legal Methodologies` (2021) 48 (s1) Journal of Law and Society S1-S9
Recommended Reading Naomi Creutzfeldt, Marc Mason and Kirsten McConnachie, Routledge Handbook of Socio-Legal Theory and Methods (Routledge 2019) Banaka, R. and Travers, M. (2005) Theory and Method in Socio-Legal Research. (Oxford: Hart, Onati International Series in Law and Society) Talesh, Shauhin, Elizabeth Mertz and Heinz Klug Research Handbook on Modern Legal Realism (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2021)
|
|
Week 4 RO’C
|
Doctrinal Legal Research We will discuss the main types of legal research and in particular the concepts of doctrinal or blackletter legal research. When discussing blackletter legal research we will consider different approaches to interpretation and key elements to look out for when reading cases.
Questions
In this seminar we will also review how to make effective use of different databases including Westlaw, Lexis, Bailii, HUDOC, OHCHR.
|
Required reading Christine Chinkin ‘Sources’ in Daniel Moeckli, Sangeeta Shah, David Harris and Sandesh Sivakumaran, International Human Rights Law (Oxford University Press 2022) Martin Scheinin, `The Art and Science of Interpretation in Human Rights Law` in B. Andreassen, H. O. Sano and Siobhán McInerney-Lankford (ed.) Research Methods in Human Rights: A Handbook (2017) (EBOOK) Christopher McCrudden, `Legal Research and the Social Sciences` (2006) Law Quarterly Review 632 David Feldman, `The Nature of Legal Scholarship` (1989) 52 Modern Law Review 498-517 Martha Minow, `Archetypal Legal Scholarship – A Field Guide` (2013) 63 Journal of Legal Education 65 Hutchinson ‘Doctrinal Research: Researching the Jury’; and Cownie and Bradney ‘Socio-Legal Studies: a challenge to the doctrinal approach’ Watkins D and Burton M. Research Methods in Law, (Routledge 2018) chapters 1 and 2 Statute of the International Court of Justice, article 38 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 1969, Part III and esp article 31
Recommended Reading Mathias M Siems and Daithi Mac Sithigh, `Mapping Legal Research` (2012) 71 Cambridge Law Journal 651-676 M. Van Hoecke, Methodologies of Legal Research: Which Kind of Method for What Kind of Discipline? (Hart 2011) Robert Cryer, Tamara Hervey, Bal Sokhi-Bulley and Alexandra Bohm, Research Methodologies in EU and International Law (Hart 2011) Salter M. and Mason J. (2007) Writing Law Dissertations: An Introduction and Guide to the Conduct of Legal Research. (Harlow, Essex, England: Pearson Education) chapters 4, 5 and 6 Terry Hutchinson and Nigel Duncan, `Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research` (2012) 17 (1) Deakin Law Review Rossana Deplano and Nicholas Tsagourias, Research Methods in International Law: A Handbook (Elgar 2020)
|
|
Week 5 FH
|
Feminist Legal Research This session examines the key features of feminist legal analysis. It explores the different schools of feminist thought and examines distinctive feminist legal methodologies.
Questions
|
Required Reading H. Charlesworth, C. Chinkin and S. Wright, `Feminist Approaches to International Law` (1991) 85 American Journal of International Law 621 Ekaterina Yahyaoui Krivenko, `The ICJ and Jus Cogens through the Lens of Feminist Legal Methods` (2017) 28 (3) European Journal of International Law 959 Gina Heathcote and Paola Zichi, `Feminist Methodologies` in Rossana Deplano and Nicholas Tsagourias (eds) Research Methods in International Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2021) Bartlett, KT `Feminist Legal Methods` (1990) Harvard Law Review 829-888 Bartlett KT, `Feminist Legal Scholarship: A History through the Lens of the California Law Review` (2012) 100 California Law Review 381 Ní Aoláin F, `Advancing Feminist Positioning in the Field of Transitional Justice` (2012) 6 (2) International Journal of Transitional Justice 205-228 Gonzalez-Salzberg D, `5 A queer approach to the Advisory Opinion 24/2017 on LGBT rights` in Damian Gonzalez-Salzberg and Loveday Hodson (ed.) Research Methods for International Human Rights Law: Beyond the Traditional Paradigm (Routledge 2020)
Recommended Reading Charlesworth H, Gina Heathcote and Emily Jones, `Feminist Scholarship on International Law in the 1990s and Today: An Inter-generational Conversation` (2019) 27 (1) Feminist Legal Studies 79-93 Charlesworth H, `Feminist Methods in International Law` (1999) 93 (2) American Journal of International Law 379-394 Hodson L and Troy Lavers, Feminist Judgments in International Law (Bloomsbury Publishing 2019) Hilary Charlesworth and CM Chinkin, The Boundaries of International Law: a Feminist Analysis (Juris Pub. : Manchester University Press 2000) Nancy Levit, Robert RM Verchick and Martha Minow, Feminist Legal Theory: A Primer (NYU Press 2016) Wright, Shelly `Economic Rights and Social Justice: a Feminist Analysis of Some International Human Rights Conventions` (1992) 12 (1) The Australian Year Book of International Law Online 241-264 Andrew Byrnes, `Women, Feminism and International Human Rights Law–Methodological Myopia, Fundamental Flaws or Meaningful Marginalisation–Some Current Issues` (1988) 12 Aust. YBIL 205 Rosemary Hunter, `Feminist Approaches to Socio-legal Studies` in Naomi Creutzfeldt, Marc Mason and Kirsten McConnachie (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Socio-Legal Theory and Methods (2021)
|
|
Week 6 |
READING WEEK – NO CLASSES |
Please take the time to work on assessments |
|
Week 7 CM
|
Critical Methods We continue our discussion of different critical methodologies by considering approaches such as Marxism, critical legal studies (CLS), postcolonial, postmodern. We conclude by discussing some specific challenges in areas like Human Rights and Transitional Justice Scholarship
Questions
Activity In addition to the required readings, everyone should also select one of the other recommended readings and be prepared to explain (in 3 minutes or less) the author’s approach to methodology. There are a range of different methodologies – Marxist, postmodern, postcolonial etc so feel free to read the one most interesting to you.
|
Required reading Bal Sokhi-Bulley, `Alternative Methodologies: Learning Critique as a Skill` (2013) 3 (2) Law and Method 6-23 Anghie A, `The Evolution of International Law: Colonial and Postcolonial Realities` (2006) 27 Third World Quarterly 739-753 Balkin JM, `Deconstructive Practice and Legal Theory` (1987) 96 Yale Law Journal 743 Knox R, `2 A Marxist Approach to RMT v United Kingdom` in Damian Gonzalez-Salzberg and Loveday Hodson (eds.) Research Methods for International Human Rights Law: Beyond the Traditional Paradigm (Routledge 2020) F. Grünfeld, M.T. Kamminga and F. Coomans, `Methods of Human Rights Research: A Primer` (2010) 32 (1) Human Rights Quarterly 179-186
Recommended Reading Overview Robert Cryer, Tamara Hervey, Bal Sokhi-Bulley and Alexandra Bohm, Research Methodologies in EU and International Law (Hart 2011) Rossana Deplano and Nicholas Tsagourias, Research Methods in International Law: A Handbook (Elgar 2021) Bartl, Marija and Jessica C Lawrence The Politics of European Legal Research: Behind the Method (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2022) e-book
Critical Karl Marx, `On the Jewish Question` in E. Easton and K. Guddat (ed.) Writings of the Young Marx on Philosophy and Society (Doubleday Books 1967, 1843) Tanja Aalberts and Ben Golder, `On the Uses of Foucault for International Law` (2012) 25 (03) Leiden Journal of International Law 603-608 Krasmann S, `Targeted Killing and its Law: On a Mutually Constitutive Relationship` (2012) 25 (3) Leiden Journal of International Law 665-682 Koskenniemi M, `The Politics of International Law–20 Years Later` (2009) 20 (1) European Journal of International Law 7-19 Koskenniemi M, The Politics of International Law (Hart 2010) Bauman, R W Critical Legal Studies: A Guide to the Literature (Routledge, 2021) Ben Golder, `Foucault’s Critical (Yet Ambivalent) Affirmation: Three Figures of Rights` (2011) 20 (3) Social & Legal Studies 283-312
Human Rights Damian Gonzalez-Salzberg and Loveday Hodson, Research Methods for International Human Rights Law: Beyond the Traditional Paradigm (Routledge 2020) McConnell L & Smith R, Research Methods in Human Rights (Routledge 2018) Andreassen BA, Hans-Otto Sano and Siobhán McInerney-Lankford, Research Methods in Human Rights: A Handbook (Edward Elgar Publishing 2017) Dembour MB, Who Believes in Human Rights? Reflections on the European Convention (Cambridge University Press 2006) Bardo Fassbender and Knut Traisbach, The Limits of Human Rights (Oxford University Press 2019) Susan Marks, A False Tree of Liberty: Human Rights in Radical Thought (Oxford University Press 2019) Hugo van der Merwe and M Brinton Lykes, `Racism and Transitional Justice` (2020) 14 (3) International Journal of Transitional Justice 415-422 Landman, T, Studying Human Rights. (Routledge 2006). Chapter 4 McInerney-Lankford S, `3. Legal methodologies and human rights research: challenges and opportunities` in B. Andreassen, H. O. Sano and Siobhán McInerney-Lankford (eds) Research Methods in Human Rights: A Handbook (2017)
|
|
DEADLINE |
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION DUE – COURSEWORK 1 DUE FRIDAY 13th MARCH 2026 AT 12NOON |
|
|
Week 8 CM & FH
|
Review of Presentations We will make the presentations available and people will have a chance to review and offer feedback.
|
No Reading Required
|
|
Week 9 CM
|
Comparative Methods Review (or write) your first draft of your research proposal and see what you mightamend, especially the methodology and methods sections.
Questions
|
Required reading Mark Tushnet, `The Possibilities of Comparative Constitutional Law` (1999) 108 (6) Yale Law Journal 1225 Gunther Frankenberg, `Critical Comparisons: Re-thinking Comparative Law` (1985) 26 Harvard International Legal Journal 411 Mathias M Siems, `The End of Comparative Law` (2007) 2 J. Comp. L. 133
Recommended Zweigert K and H. Kotz, An Introduction to Comparative Law (3rd Clarendon Press 1998) Jaakko Husa, A New Introduction to Comparative Law (Bloomsbury Publishing 2015) Günter Frankenberg, Comparative Law as Critique (Edward Elgar Publishing 2016) Mathias Siems, Comparative law (Cambridge University Press 2018)
|
|
Week 10 RO’C
|
Policy Work: Understanding Parliament and Regional Organisations; Evidence based analysis and consultation response.
|
|
|
Week 11 FH
|
Research Integrity and Ethics We open this session by discussing what is meant by research integrity and ethics. While many discussions on ethics focus on questions of handling interviews, we will consider that research integrity and ethics is much broader.
As part of the session we will aim to complete the ethics electronic module (so please bring a laptop or tablet computer!).
Questions
What is ‘research fatigue’? Is deception permitted in ethical research?
Activity – Research Integrity online course:
|
Required reading
Social Research Association https://the-sra.org.uk/SRA/Ethics/Ethics.aspx Judith Bell, Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-time Researchers (McGraw-Hill Education 2014) Chapter Four, ‘Ethics and Integrity in Research’ George Ulrich, `Research Ethics for Human Rights Researchers` in B. Andreassen, H. O. Sano and Siobhán McInerney-Lankford (eds) Research Methods in Human Rights (Edward Elgar Publishing 2017) Marie Breen-Smyth, `Interviewing Combatants: Lessons from the Boston College Case` (2019) Contemporary Social Science 1-17 Philipp Schulz, `Recognizing Research Participants’ Fluid Positionalities in (Post-) Conflict Zones` (2020) Qualitative Research Lucy Pickering and Helen Kara, `Presenting and Representing Others: Towards an Ethics of Engagement` (2017) 20 (3) International Journal of Social Research Methodology 299-309 https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/137082/1/137082.pdf
Recommended Reading David Mwambari, `Local Positionality in the Production of Knowledge in Northern Uganda` (2019) 18 International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1609406919864845 Cottrell, S Dissertations and Project Reports: A Step by Step Guide (Macmillan International Higher Education 2014) Chapter 12, ‘Ethical Considerations’ ‘Honesty and Research Ethics’ in Nicholas Walliman, Your Research Project: A Step-by-Step Guide for the First-Time Researcher (Sage 2005) Matt Henn, Mark Weinstein and Nick Foard, A Critical Introduction to Social Research (Sage Publications 2009) Chapter Four Alan Bryman, Social Research Methods (Oxford University Press 2016) Suki Ali and Moir Kelly, `Ethics and Social Research` in Clive Seale (ed) Researching Society and Culture (Sage 2018) Helen Kara, Research Ethics in the Real World: Euro-Western and Indigenous perspectives (Policy Press 2018) Chandra Lekha Sriram, John C King, Julie A Mertus, Olga Martin-Ortega and Johanna Herman, Surviving Field Research: Working in Violent and Difficult Situations (Routledge 2009) Daniel Druckman, Doing research: Methods of Inquiry for Conflict Analysis (Sage publications 2005) Paul Oliver, The Student`s Guide to Research Ethics (McGraw-Hill Education (UK) 2010) Geraldine Lee-Treweek and Stephanie Linkogle, Danger in the Field: Risk and Ethics in Social Research (Psychology Press 2000) Martin Tolich, `What can Milgram and Zimbardo Teach Ethics Committees and Qualitative Researchers about Minimizing Harm?` (2014) 10 (2) Research Ethics 86-96 James Connor, Simon Copland and Jill Owen, `The Infantilized Researcher and Research Subject: Ethics, Consent and Risk` (2018) 18 (4) Qualitative Research 400-415 Research Ethics Guidebook http://www.ethicsguidebook.ac.uk/index.html
|
|
Week 12 CM & FH
|
Writing For this session we will review some more nuts and bolts. We will consider what plagiarism is, the many forms it takes and how to avoid it. This leads to discussions of referencing and we will look at (again) the OSCOLA system of referencing. The final discussion will consider some issues of writing and writing style.
Questions
|
Required Reading: OSCOLA 4th Edition at https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/oscola_4th_edn_hart_2012.pdf OSCOLA – International Law section https://www.law.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxlaw/oscola_2006_citing_international_law.pdf Cottrell, S Dissertations and Project Reports: A Step by Step Guide (Macmillan International Higher Education 2014) Chapters 22-24 Rowena Murray, How to Write a Thesis (McGraw-Hill Education 2017) Chapter 3 Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing (Harvard University Press 2012) Chapter 6 Nicholas Walliman, Your Research Project: A Step-by-Step Guide for the First-Time Researcher (Sage 2005) ‘Preparing the Research Proposal and Starting to Write’ Patrick Dunleavy `How to write paragraphs in research texts (articles, books and PhDs)` [2017] Writing for Research 17 July 2017 Ben Durant `Why do academics and PhDers carefully choose useless titles for articles and chapters?` [2014] Writing for Research 31 January 2014
Recommended Reading Judith Bell, Doing Your Research Project: A Guide for First-time Researchers (McGraw-Hill Education 2014) Chapter 15 Rowena Murray, How to Write a Thesis (McGraw-Hill Education 2011) George Orwell, `Politics and the English Language` in Orwell (ed.) In Front of Your Nose (Harcour 1968 / 1946) Mark Tredinnick, Writing Well: the Essential Guide (Cambridge University Press 2008) Helen Sword, Stylish Academic Writing (Harvard University Press 2012) Steven Pinker, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person`s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century! (Penguin Books 2015) Howard S Becker, Writing for Social scientists: How to Start and Finish your Thesis, Book, or Article (ReadHowYouWant. com 2010) Peter Elbow, Writing with power: Techniques for Mastering the Writing Process (Oxford University Press 1998) Matt Henn, Mark Weinstein and Nick Foard, A Critical Introduction to Social Research (Sage Publications 2009) Chapter Nine Alan Bryman, Social Research Methods (Oxford University Press 2016) ‘Writing Up Social Research’ Rachael Cayley’s Explorations of Style https://explorationsofstyle.com/
|
|
Week 13 |
Revision Week |
|
|
Week 14-15 |
Assessment Period |
|
|
DEADLINE |
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION DUE – COURSEWORK 2 DUE MONDAY 11th MAY 2026 AT 12NOON |
|
7. Student Voice and Support Services
|
How we support you |
As a course team, we incorporate the key partnership principles set out in the joint UU & Ulster University Students’ Union Student Voice Guidelines and proactively engage with the democratic election of UUSU academic student reps (Faculty Reps, School/Dept Reps & Course Reps) to ensure that student opinion is heard at Ulster. We respect your views and welcome your honest and constructive feedback on the module.
There are several ways to do this:
You can contact your Module Coordinator about any queries related to your learning experiences on the module as/when you have them.
You can voice your opinions through the formal Staff/Student Consultative Committee process by contacting one of the elected UUSU Course Reps in your class.
You will have the opportunity to give feedback on the module through completing the online Student Module Feedback Survey.
UUSU Advice Bureau Service
If you are experiencing difficulties that are impacting your studies, you can contact the Advice Bureau in the Students’ Union (UUSU). You can get advice and guidance on issues such as – complaints, appeals, housing problems, disciplinaries, and info on various support providers available. To have a chat with the team, contact UUSU online.
UU Student Wellbeing Service
Ulster University’s Student Wellbeing team is here to help you manage a range of common challenges you may face during your studies. These include stress, academic or relationship issues, and financial or budgeting challenges.
The team also provides support for students who require reasonable academic adjustments due to a disability or specific learning difficulty, such as dyslexia.
There is no stigma in seeking help. Accessing the right support can make a real difference to your wellbeing and academic success at Ulster University.
UU Student Success Centre
Ulster University’s Student Success team has developed a series of academic and study skills training resources and workshops to help you succeed educationally and develop personally and professionally. You can access these resources via the Student Success website or you can contact the team directly via email.