|
|
|
Learning and Teaching Committee
Curriculum Sub-Committee
CSC04-M1
<P><hr>
Minutes of the Twenty-ninth Meeting of the Sub-Committee held on Thursday 15 January 2004
Membership: Professor S A Austin (Chair), Professor M Bell, Dr C Christie, Dr J L Horner, Mr M Hutton (ab), Dr D R Worrall
By invitation: Mr J G Dickens, Dr D R Green, Dr R H Hooper (for Minute 04/9), Mr W P J Maunder
In attendance: Dr J E M Elliott
Apologies for Absence were received from Mr Hutton
<P><hr>
04/01 Minutes
The minutes of the twenty-eighth meeting held on 9 October 2003 were confirmed and signed, subject to the following amendments:
Minute 03/36.1 – Undergraduate Programme in Chemical Sciences: New Programme Proposals
To read for ‘for introduction in Semester 1, 2004-05’.
Minute 03/37 – MSc Mobile Communications/MSc Networked Communications: New Programme Proposals
To read ‘the Chair of Curriculum Sub-Committee’ and not ‘the Chair of Learning and Teaching Committee’.
04/02 Matters
Arising from the Minutes
.1 It was noted that all recommendations to Learning and Teaching Committee, and subsequently to Senate where appropriate, were approved. The relevant minute of Senate was noted.
.2 Minute 03/32.3(iii) – Programme Specifications
The response of Learning and Teaching Committee was noted.
.3 Minute 03/34 – Principles for Programme Design
The relevant minute of Learning and Teaching Committee was noted.
.4 Minute 03/38 – MSc Plant Management: New Programme Proposals
The relevant minute of Learning and Teaching Committee was noted.
04/03 Degree Titles
.1 Further
to Minutes 03/35, 03/36 and 03/37 of the previous meeting, the Sub-Committee
noted the relevant minute of Learning and Teaching Committee.
.2 The
Sub-Committee received the relevant note of a subsequent meeting of the
Programme Development and Quality Team.
The PVC(T) reported that there had since been no further formal
discussion on this difficult matter with its competing concerns. It was commented that without the
prescription of a minimum difference in content between programme titles other
than the expectation that a project/dissertation undertaken by an individual
student be in a subject area reflected in their award title, in time the
situation could become worse. It was
AGREED that for the next twelve months the Sub-Committee would act on the
guidance of Learning Teaching Committee, and would require all new programme
proposals, as now, to be considered by the full Sub-Committee rather than adopt
a “fast-track” procedure. The
Sub-Committee would then review the position after that period. The Sub-Committee was concerned that the
terminology issues that had been identified should be resolved as soon as
possible to avoid confusion particularly for students, and requested that the
Programme Development and Quality Team be asked to take this matter forward
with some urgency.
ACTION: JEME, PVC(T)
04/04 Procedure for Handling New Programme
Proposals
.1 Further
to Minute 03/33 of the previous meeting, members considered further the
following comments of Learning and Teaching Committee in paper CSC03-P31:
“It was suggested that new programme proposals
should be accompanied by a module by module summary (on a single side of A4) of
the assessment requirements, which would show up any inconsistencies between
modules in terms of the assessment tasks required and the student effort
associated with them. It was agreed that
there should be a limit on the time allowed to elapse between obtaining
strategic approval for a programme proposal and the submission of the
operational detail. These matters were
referred to CSC for further consideration.”
.2 The
Sub-Committee AGREED that the time limit between strategic approval for a
programme proposal and submission of operational proposals to Curriculum
Sub-Committee should be one calendar year.
Outside that time limit the procedure for strategic approval would need
to be repeated.
.3 It
was considered that a module by module summary of the assessment requirements
for a proposed programme, and student effort associated with them, would prove
helpful for the Sub-Committee, for Departments and for students, and it was
AGREED that this be pursued. A
template, which would be a table, subdivided into Parts for UG programmes, with
columns for module code, title, weighting and whether optional/compulsory, exam
length and continuous assessment (e.g. essay length, lab report), together with
a worked example, would be provided to programme proposers. Where a proposed programme was composed of a
large number of optional modules the assessment information on those modules
could be indicative only.
ACTION: JEME
04/05 Structure of the Academic Year
.1 The
Sub-Committee considered proposals from the Committee to Review the Structure
of the Academic Year, with reference to paragraph 6(f) of the consultation
document. The Sub-Committee restricted
its discussion to matters directly of relevance to its area of
responsibility. Members were informed
that the review exercise so far had revealed preferences for each of the models
presented, reflecting the different patterns of assessment across the
University.
.2 During
discussion the following matters were raised:
(i)
Concern
that with Model C methods of assessment would be driven by the academic year
structure rather than ILOs, though recognition that to some extent that was
currently the case and would be the product of any change that might be
adopted.
(ii)
A move
towards more year-long modules without examination at the end of Semester 1
should be the trigger for the adoption of Model C.
(iii)
Weeks
12 – 15 of Semester 1 should not be a period of inactivity when coursework
could be set. Introduction of new
material during that period might be feasible where a programme did not include
examinations, but would be problematic if there were students on the module
from other examined programmes.
(iv)
For
year-long modules without examinations in Semester 1 the absence of formal
classes between week 11 of Semester 1 and the start of Semester 2 had been
identified as possibly an unduly long interruption. Current guidelines did not allow for the introduction of new
material during weeks 12 – 15 of Semester 1, though coursework could be set.
(v)
Students
would be concerned by bunched assessment at the end of Semester 2. Experience of a department reducing
examinations at the end of Semester 1 was of the addition of other assessment
tasks during the year rather than additional examinations at the end of
Semester 2, which had allayed students’ fears.
(vi)
The
13/15 week structure of Model C represented a loss of symmetry and simplicity
and had implications for students’ workload.
Required student effort for modules was unlikely to be reduced,
therefore students would be required to work more intensely.
(vii)
The
asymmetry of Model C and the likely effect on the structure of modules and
their assessment would make it difficult to move modules from one semester to
another. This could make arrangements
for study leave periods of one semester more problematic.
(viii)
The
absence of a revision week in Semester 1 of Model C would mean that students
would need to revise over the Christmas vacation without library facilities or
access to staff and when they might be in paid employment.
(ix)
The
reduced flexibility arising from joint programmes should not be allowed to
stifle creativity in teaching elsewhere.
(x)
Should
the University be restricted to only one Academic Year Structure?
(xi)
A
fourth model (D) of 14/15 week semesters, with week 12 of Semester 1 as a
revision week, would alleviate some of the difficulties with Semester 1
examinations identified for Model C.
Such a model could be adopted as an interim measure in anticipation of a
move to Model C.
.3 Those
attending the meeting voted on their preferred model as follows:
Model A : 5
Model B : 1
Model C : 0
Model D : 1
Absention : 1
It was AGREED to forward the Sub-Committee’s
comments to the Review Committee.
ACTION:
JEME
04/06 MSc Programmes in the Department of Economics: New Modules
.1 Further
to Minute 03/46 of the previous meeting, the Sub-Committee considered revised proposals for introduction during
2003-04, proposing Research Practice Seminars involving two modules as an
alternative to the dissertation. The Sub-Committee
was informed of the Department of Economics’ high student : staff ratio of 40 :
1 as background to the reasons for the proposal, and of the interest from
Economics departments in other institutions of the proposals as a pioneering
development.
.2 It
was commented that there was no formative assessment on the proposed new modules,
with assessment being totally by examination.
Whilst noting that assessment by examination only was very common for
Economics, the Sub-Committee suggested that the Department might reflect on the
possibility of introducing some continuous assessment in the future. It was AGREED to approve the proposals
subject to the following amendments to Module Specifications:
(i)
Reference
to be made in the MTLA field of personal/group tutorials as contact time
(ii)
ECP302:
amend item (iv) under Subject Specific Skills to read “interpret observational
data and apply ……”
.3 It
was requested that the Department provide a brief note of feedback to the
Sub-Committee during the next academic year on the operation of the new
modules. It was noted that the
Programme Development & Quality Team, which had received an interim version
of the revised proposals, had suggested that Professional Development staff be
invited to observe how the RPS approach developed, in order to capture good
practice for dissemination more widely.
ACTION: WPM, JEME
04/07 MSc Sports Nutrition (DL): New Programme Proposals
.1 Further
to Minute 03/39 of the previous meeting, the Sub-Committee considered revised proposals
for introduction during 2003-04. Whilst
the revised proposals had covered some of the issues raised at the last meeting
and by Operations Sub-Committee, several matters remained unresolved. The Sub-Committee was particularly concerned
that neither of the two staff running the programme had long-term links with
the School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, being an External Professor and a
Research Fellow, and with the risk to the running of the programme should one
of those staff become ill.
.2 It
was AGREED to recommend the proposals to Learning and Teaching Committee
subject to the approval of the
proposals by Operations Sub-Committee at its meeting on 26 January 2004 and to
the following matters being resolved to the satisfaction of the AD(T) and Chair
of Curriculum Sub-Committee, prior to the meeting of Learning and Teaching
Committee:
(i)
Reassurance
from the School of Sport and Exercise Sciences of long-term commitment to the
programme, the necessary level of support for Distance Learning and a contingency
strategy should one or both of the staff running the programme become
unavailable.
(ii)
The
provision of a document comparing and contrasting the content and ILOs of the
proposed DL programme and the existing MSc in Sport and Exercise Nutrition, as
requested at the last meeting. Such a
document might assist the School in responding to (i) above.
(iii)
Clarification
on the three concerns raised by the Distance Learning Co-ordinator in
Professional Development as follows:-
(a) the new technology mentioned in
point 14 is not specified; it is important to establish what this means and the
implications for support and interoperability
(b) the agreement with KSA and how
provision will be shared has not been defined
(c) the issue of where the intellectual
property rights reside remains unclarified.
(iv)
A
statement from the External Examiner of his views on the proposed programme.
(v)
The
removal of the prefix “Introductory Course/Core Course” from the module titles,
which was not in line with University terminology.
(vi)
A
breakdown of coursework elements in module specifications, with percentages.
(vii)
A
review of assessment requirements to ensure that these were comparable with
those for the MSc in Sport and Exercise Nutrition.
(viii)
Evidence
of the formal separation of Aberdeen University from the programme.
ACTION:
WPM, SAA, JEME
04/08 MSc Research Methods (European &
International Studies): New Programme Proposals
.1 The
Sub-Committee considered proposals for October 2004 entry. It was AGREED to recommend the proposals to
Learning and Teaching Committee subject to the following matters being resolved
to the satisfaction of the AD(T) and Chair of Curriculum Sub-Committee prior to
the meeting of Learning and Teaching Committee:
(i)
Reassurance
that material in the EUP modules did not duplicate that in the SSP modules
(e.g. SSP401 and EUP404).
(ii)
Reassurance
that if the identified need for a dedicated MSc work room was not met the
programme could proceed.
(iii)
Provision
of more detailed information in the Programme Specification on assessment tasks
in relation to ILOs.
ACTION: WPM, SAA, JEME
04/09 Masters Level Programmes in Ergonomics and
Human Factors: New Programme Proposals
.1 The
Sub-Committee considered proposals for October 2004 entry, noting that
exceptionally these were awaiting consideration by the Directorate and by
Operations Sub-Committee. Revised
Programme Specifications were tabled, which now identified aims and ILOs for
each programme. The proposals pulled
together five award titles, four of these being new, within a single set of
Programme Regulations as follows:
Ergonomics (Human Factors) (existing
programme)
Human Factors in Transport (new
programme)
Human Factors for Inclusive Design (new programme)
Forensic Ergonomics (new
programme)
Ergonomics for Health Professionals (new programme)
.2 Dr
Robin Hooper, one of the proposers, informed the Sub-Committee of the intention
that students would register from the outset on one of the programmes. It was conceivable that a student on the
Ergonomics (Human Factors) programme could take the same modules as a student
on the Human Factors in Transport programme, but the Department was looking to
increase its specialisation in Transport, and an Ergonomics student developing
a Transport theme would be encouraged to transfer to the Human Factors in
Transport Programme. It was observed
that removal of one of the Transport modules as an option on the Ergonomics
(Human Factors) programme could resolve the issue, but this was felt to be an
unnecessary restriction of student choice.
.3 No
evidence had been presented from potential employers of the market for the more
specialised programmes. It was reported
that information via relevant professional associations indicated that
ergonomics posts were currently difficult to fill. Some competing institutions were known to be developing more of a
portfolio approach to their provision, though a formal survey had not been
conducted. It was noted that marketing
issues would be a matter of consideration for Operations Sub-Committee. Members suggested that the Transport modules
might prove attractive options for programmes in Aeronautical and Automotive
Engineering, Civil and Building Engineering (Transport Group), and the MEng in
Systems Engineering, and that this should be explored.
.4 It
was AGREED to recommend the proposals to Learning and Teaching Committee,
subject to their approval by the Directorate and Operations Sub-Committee and
to the following matters being resolved to the satisfaction of the AD(T) and
Chair of Curriculum Sub-Committee prior to the meeting of Learning and Teaching
Committee:
(i)
Provision
of one Programme Specification only, identifying the aims and ILOs for each of
the five programmes. Common ILOs would
be expected, plus those specific to each programme.
(ii)
Revision
of the Content section in the Programme Regulations and Programme Specification
to refer to “compulsory” rather than “core” modules and to amend the credit
weighting for HUP130 in Semester 2 to 10.
The identification of optional modules which in effect were not options
should be removed.
(iii)
Provision
of a revised module specification for the Project which stated that individual
students’ projects should map closely to their programme title.
ACTION:
DRG, SAA, JEME
04/10 MSc
Automotive Retail Management: New Programme Proposals
.1 The
Sub-Committee considered proposals for October 2004 entry. Members were concerned that should the
programme as presented be approved the Business School would be offering both
an MSc in Retail Automotive Management and an MSc in Automotive Retail
Management which could prove confusing.
In addition the two titles could prove indistinguishable to those with
dyslexia and as such could be non-compliant with SENDA.
.2 Whilst
the Sub-Committee understood the history behind the two MSc programmes and
identified the difference in admission requirements and difference in structure
and apparent content of the programmes, it required a greater understanding of
why both MSc programmes were needed.
.3 It
was AGREED to recommend the proposals to Learning and Teaching Committee
subject to the approval of Operations Sub-Committee and to the following
matters being resolved to the satisfaction of the AD(T) and Chair of the
Curriculum Sub-Committee prior to the meeting of Learning and Teaching
Committee:
(i)
The
provision of a rationale for the two MScs, on the basis of content, mode of
study etc.
(ii)
Should
the need for the new MSc be clear, the provision of an alternative title e.g.
Vehicle Retail Management.
(iii)
Should
the need for the new MSc be clear, reassurance that programme material was of
an equivalent level to that on the existing MSc, and provision of comments from
the External Examiner (who ideally should also be the External Examiner for the
existing MSc).
ACTION:
WPM, SAA, JEME
04/11 BSc/MSc Ergonomics: Change of Title to Ergonomics (Human Factors)
CSC04-P13
It
was AGREED to ratify the action of the Chair on behalf of Curriculum
Sub-Committee in recommending to the Chair of Learning and Teaching Committee a
change of title to the BSc and MSc programmes in Ergonomics.
04/12 BA International Business: Change of Award to BSc
CSC04-P14
It
was AGREED to recommend to Learning and Teaching Committee a change of award
for the undergraduate programme in International Business from October 2004
entry.
04/13 BSc Mathematics: Major Programme Changes for 2004/05
It
was AGREED to recommend major programme changes to Learning and Teaching
Committee, with effect from 2004/05.
04/14 Discontinuation of Programmes
CSC04-P16
It
was AGREED to recommend to Learning and Teaching Committee discontinuation of
the following programmes [last intake shown in brackets]:
MSc
Construction Innovation and Management (Full-Time) (October 2002)
Professional
Diploma in Criminal Justice Studies (1999-2000)
04/15 Any Other Business
.1 The
Sub-Committee’s attention was drawn to the programme validation process at
another University which required a report on new programme proposals from a
paid External who was not an existing External Examiner for the University but
was of equivalent status to an External Examiner.
.2 The
AD(T) of SSH drew the Sub-Committee’s attention to a memo received from the
Undergraduate Programme Director in the Business School, requesting that the
Indicative Reading List field in module specifications be dropped. It was AGREED that this be forwarded to the
Programme Development & Quality Team and subsequently Learning and Teaching
Committee for consideration.
ACTION: WPM
04/16 Dates of Future Meetings in 2003/2004
Thursday
6 May 2004 (am)
Tuesday 25 May 2004 (am) (if required)
Author – Jennie Elliott
Date – January 2004
Copyright ã Loughborough
University. All rights reserved.