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)
