By Invitation: Professor B A Marples, Mr W P J Maunder, Dr R B Wilcockson, Dr D R Green, Mr P Wheeler and Mr C Rhodes (for items 5-8)
In Attendance: Mr J S Wilcox
The Sub-Committee received specifications for modules to be taught in the period 1998/2000 in LUSAD in conjunction with the existing degree programmes. For this reason the modular weights were multiples of 12. The specifications were receiving consideration because they were intended to replace unitised specifications approved under LCAD procedures. It was noted that reading lists would be amended in the next few months and that further information regarding the assessable elements of the modules was available to students via learning contracts. The process of storing the entire range of unitised specifications was in hand, utilising the same codings as in the revised regulations. The proposals were APPROVED.
The Sub-Committee received regulations for programmes to be followed by students already registered in LCAD. These programmes would be concluded in the summer of 2000. The Sub-Committee noted the University's acceptance that, as a transitional arrangement, students would be classified for their degrees entirely by their final year marks. For this reason the regulations referred to Part B modules as "Developmental". Senate would be asked formally to accept these modules as being at degree level for the purpose of meeting the minimum degree requirements stipulated in GRUA. The meeting was content to recommend the regulations to Teaching and Learning Committee.
The Sub-Committee received regulations for students within LUSAD, with effect from October 1998. LUSAD was recommended to add reference to employability of graduates in the section of the application dealing with vocational programme objectives. The meeting was content to recommend the regulations to Teaching and Learning Committee.
The Sub-Committee received specifications for modules to be taught within LUSAD to students registering from September 1998 onwards. The approval of module specifications was routinely delegated to the appropriate Associate Dean (Teaching) but that was not thought to be appropriate given the large number of modules which were not only new to LU but also different in kind from most module specifications seen to date.
A number of improvements to the specifications were requested. Modules with similar titles but differing weights should be differentiated so as to justify the relative weightings. Assessment processes should be stated explicitly and the relative importance of each assessment component should be stated. In relation to this point, the Sub-Committee was informed that the information was currently available via Learning Contracts. The process of negotiating a module and its assessment should be clarified. It was important that the language used in module specifications should be used with precision and the departmental handbook should be used to define closely important terms and concepts encountered in the module specifications. The specification for any optional module which required students to incur heavy personal expenditure should mention this point.
The Secretary would take responsibility for arranging the storage of module specifications within the Oracle database. Target dates would be the end of June, July and August for levels A, B and C respectively. It was AGREED that the Associate Dean (Teaching) would give final approval to revised specifications.
In concluding this item the Sub-Committee wished to record its deep appreciation of the considerable efforts undertaken by LCAD staff in converting their degree programmes and unit specifications to conform to the university's styles and standards.
The Sub-Committee was unable to accept the proposal to introduce the M Eng variant of the Electronic & Computer Systems Engineering degree programme. The objection was that although the pro-forma stated that the necessary consultations with teaching departments had been carried out, the signed consultation forms were not produced. In addition, it would be necessary to consult with Computing Services and with Pilkington Library. The Sub-Committee would be happy to reconsider the case at a future meeting with the appropriate documentation. If the matter was urgent then the department would have to make a case directly to Teaching and Learning Committee.
Very considerable disquiet was expressed upon hearing that the proposed programme had been allocated UCAS codes and was in the process of recruiting students for entry in October 1998. It was suggested that Teaching and Learning might wish to comment further upon this.
The Sub-Committee was unable to accept the proposal for a B Eng variant of the Systems Engineering degree. The objection was that a B Eng degree should be of three years duration and should include 360 modular weights in total. The Associate Dean (Teaching) would assist the department in producing a new proposal.
The Sub-Committee AGREED to recommend the proposed LPC programme to Teaching and Learning but subject to some minor changes. These were that the full title "Mechanical and Electrical" not "M&E" should be used in formal documents and the module specifications required more detail about the assessment processes. Where there was more than one assessment activity then the relative importance of each should be given. Approximate lengths of submitted work (eg 2000 words) should be given where appropriate. The changes could be monitored by the Associate Dean (Teaching) and need not delay consideration by Teaching and Learning.
The Sub-Committee was largely content with the proposal for the new programme in Manufacturing Management. However, it noted with concern that two critical items on the covering form had not been completed and therefore reserved final approval. The two items were the Learning Objectives and the Vocational Objectives. It was agreed to request a written supplement supplying the missing information.
Additional changes were requested. Paragraph 2.1 of the draft programme regulations should be omitted and in various module specifications the relative weighting of different assessment components should be given together with an indication of the hours assigned to lectures and tutorials.
It was AGREED to recommend the proposal to Teaching and Learning but only if the Associate Dean (Teaching) was satisfied that the objections had been met.
The Sub-Committee noted that the proposal was no more than a part-time variant of the programme recently recommended to Teaching and Learning. It was AGREED to recommend that the proposal should be considered by Teaching and Learning in parallel with the full time programme.
The Sub-Committee was content with the proposal to convert the Retail Automotive Management (Ford) programme from full time to part time, noting the additional flexibility which this would confer upon the students. One minor amendment to the regulations was required, to remove two modules from the list of compulsory modules and instead show them as optional modules.
It was AGREED to recommend the proposal to Teaching and Learning but only if the Associate Dean (Teaching) was satisfied that the amendment had been made.
The Sub-Committee noted that discussions between the Faculty and Operations Sub-Committee continued in regard to the additional student numbers required for the proposed programme. The Sub-Committee was content with the academic proposal and AGREED to recommend the proposal to Teaching and Learning.
The Sub-Committee was unable to accept the proposal for the new postgraduate degree programme in Exercise Physiology. The fatal objection was the realisation that the same modules appeared in this proposal and also in the scaling proposals for existing programmes. However, in the scaling proposals the modules had a weight of 15 and in the new programme they had a weight of 20. The department might need to develop new modules with a 20 weight but they would have to differ significantly in workload, content and assessment from the 15 weighted analogues. Possibly the modules should be 15 weighted in which case further modules would need to be added to the programme. The Sub-Committee noted that the department would not be permitted to introduce entirely new modules of 15 weight.
A number of less serious features of the proposal required amendment. The draft regulations should omit the second sentence of paragraph 1.1 and omit paragraph 2.1.1 and omit all the paragraphs which were inappropriate in a programme with no modular choice. In paragraph 2.6 the department should nominate precisely who would sanction the release of project information outside the University. The coursework/examination split should be omitted and the word "credit" should be avoided where "modular weight" or "weight" was intended. In the draft module specifications, there were some inadequate descriptions of the assessment process - the relative importance of each assessment component should be stated, contact hours for lectures, tutorials and laboratories should be identified separately. The word length of PEP001 should be in the module specification, not in the regulations.
The Sub-Committee was content with the proposal to modify the regulations for the Certificate in Education for Graduates (Primary) and AGREED to recommend these to Teaching and Learning.
The Sub-Committee required one change in the proposed programme regulations for the undergraduate programme in Ergonomics. The word "credit" should be avoided where "modular weight" or "weight" was intended.
It was AGREED to recommend the proposal to Teaching and Learning but only if the Associate Dean (Teaching) was satisfied that the amendment had been made.
The Sub-Committee AGREED to recommend to Teaching and Learning that with immediate effect the degrees awarded in Materials Engineering and Materials with Business Studies should become B Eng.
It was AGREED to approve proposals to meet the requirement of a 180 total modular weight in postgraduate programmes with effect from 1998/99 by a process of increasing every modular weight by 50%.
It was AGREED to approve a revised form to be used by departments when seeking approval for programme regulation changes at their annual review. It was AGREED to approve a postal process for considering any major proposals which required approval before the beginning of the next academic year.
Author - Mr J S Wilcox
Date - May 1998
Copyright (c) Loughborough University. All rights reserved.