 |
 |
My apologies, it was never my intention to question the individuals submission but to raise the point of word count in the evaluative statement. Helen March UBHT, Bristol ________________________________ From: list for CILIP members working towards MCLIP status [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Martin Sent: 07 April 2006 13:21 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: RE Chartership Submission Please direct any questions regarding the submission to the CILIP office. This candidate has kindly allowed us to use her application to help training and development but she should not be discussed on the list. Thank you Michael Michael Martin Adviser, Qualifications & Professional Development CILIP -----Original Message----- From: list for CILIP members working towards MCLIP status [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of March, Helen Sent: 07 April 2006 13:02 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: RE Chartership Submission Hi everyone, I am also registered under the 2002 regulations and submitting under the 2005 regulations. While it is very useful to have an example of a new submission as I understood it the evaluative statement could only be 1000 words, how was Jaqueline allowed to add in the Training and Development Programme Analysis? Is this part of the word count or part of the evidence? Could anyone clarify this? Regards, Helen Helen March Deputy Learning Resource Services Manager Learning Resource Centre Level 5, Education Centre Upper Maudlin St Bristol BS2 8AE 01173420103 01173420128 (FAX)