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.
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)
