Learning and Teaching Committee
LTC06-M2
Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 8
June 2006
Present:
Morag Bell (in the Chair), Simon Austin, Paul Byrne, John Dickens, Becky
Dicks, John Harper, Martin Harrison (ab), Katie Hyslop (ab), Lawrence Leger,
Anne Mumford, Jennifer Nutkins, Iain Phillips, Jan Tennant (ab), David Twigg,
Andrew Wilson (ab)
Apologies: Katie Hyslop, Jan Tennant, Andrew Wilson
In attendance: Robert Bowyer
06/18 Opening Remarks
The Chair welcomed John Harper to his first meeting as Director of the
The Chair
drew attention to the fact that the University had moved up to 6th
place in the latest Times ‘league table’, which was in part due to
its strong showing in the 2005 National Student Survey.
06/19 Business of the
Agenda
No items were unstarred.
06/20 Minutes
LTC06-M1
The Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 9
February 2006 were confirmed.
06/21 Matters Arising from the Minutes not otherwise appearing on the
Agenda
21.1 Open source VLE (M.06/04)
There was agreement from Operations
Sub-Committee to the adoption of an open-source VLE, though the DISS staffing
support had still to be considered. The
sub-committee would consider a bid from DISS amongst other proposals for
spending from the Strategic Fund following the Senate/Council Strategic
Planning Day. Resources and Planning
Committee had received a paper noting that the development of an open source
VLE was a major priority in this area.
21.2 Timetabling (M.06/05)
The Director of Media Services
reported that she had attended meetings of the departmental administrators and
of the SSH Directorate to speak on timetabling, and encountered a mixed range
of views. She had presented the case for
a move to central timetabling to the LUSI Steering Group, which had accorded
the project lower priority than other items including the migration to an open
source VLE. A business case had
nevertheless been included with other DISS expenditure proposals for consideration
by Operations Sub-Committee against the Strategic Fund.
21.3 QAA Consultations (M.06/16)
It was noted that responses had been
made by the University to CL15/05 (programme specifications) and CL01/06
(interim reviews).
21.4 Senate Actions
It was noted that Senate had approved the recommendations
of the committee in the following other matters:
(i)
Condonement (M.06/06)
(ii)
New programmes and strategic changes (M.06/09)
(iii)
PG Cert/ PG Dip awards on MRes programmes
(M.06/11)
06/22 Strategic
Planning
The Chair informed the Committee that members of Senate and Council
would be participating in an ‘away day’ on 19 June, as a first step
in a strategic planning process leading to the production of a revised
institutional strategic plan by the end of the year. The Chair drew attention to some of the key
factors that would need to be considered in respect of learning and teaching,
against a background of major changes in the external context, particularly the
introduction of higher tuition fees.
06/23
John Harper, who had taken up his appointment as Director on
1 June, presented a report outlining proposed priorities and directions for the
(i)
Review
of the new route PhD
(ii)
Development
and academic leadership of generic training for PGR students
(iii)
Drawing
on PG admissions tutors as a resource (away-days planned)
(iv)
PG
Open Day, for PGT and PGR
(v)
Policy
regarding PG fees
(vi)
Facilitating
the development of new PG programmes and partnerships (bridging the gap between
the International Office and departments)
(vii)
Improved
presentation of current opportunities – web pages, brochure
(viii)
Review
of PGT provision (in consultation with the AD(T)s) including the role of the
new Research Schools
(ix)
Development
of acceptable system for monitoring PGR progression (QAA review)
(x)
Extension
of support for PG students, eg scholarships, conference fund.
It was noted that for the time being, the Director was
operating out of his own office.
06/24 Annual Programme Reviews
The Committee considered reports from the AD(T)s on the
Annual Programme Reviews in their respective Faculties. The following points were noted in the course
of discussion:
24.1 Engineering
LTC06-P14
(i)
Chemical Engineering
(a)
The
Director of Media Services reported that the state of entrance foyers in shared
buildings was being looked into.
(b)
There
was concern over the viability of covering the subject area with a small body
of staff.
(ii) Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
(a)
It
was noted that discussions were taking place between the HoDs of Mechanical and
Manufacturing Engineering, IPTME, Design and Technology and LUSAD about the
teaching of design within the University and the way it was marketed.
(b)
It
was felt the concern about the non-attendance at lectures of students with
special needs was part of a broader issue concerning non-attendance amongst
students generally. It was agreed that
DANS should emphasise when providing note-takers that the students themselves were
expected to attend lectures.
(iii) Electronic and
Electrical Engineering
It
was noted that the department would still consider applicants without A-level
Maths but felt it weakened its market position to advertise the option.
(iv) General
There
were concerns about the number of first attempt assessment failures, although
it was pointed out that it had not been agreed within the University what would
generally be considered an ‘acceptable’ failure rate. It was also the case that, whilst progression
statistics were monitored through APR/PPR, it was in practice quite difficult
to identify a true drop-out rate for a specific intake cohort. The Committee recognised that resit rates and
failure rates were different issues, as many students redeemed initial failure
at reassessment. Reasons for students
failing to progress at the first attempt were various and there was not an easy
way of addressing the issue.
24.2 Science
LTC06-P15
(i)
Chemistry
It was noted that the department was now using the
(ii)
Physics
In the view of the Committee it was not realistic to expect
the department, in view of its size, to expand its PGT portfolio without
collaboration with other departments.
24.3 Social Sciences and Humanities
LTC06-P16
(i)
The
(ii)
General issues
(a)
Departments
had been reminded again of the importance of using the full marking scale to
help address the relatively low number of first class honours awarded.
(b)
There
were some departments within the Faculty concerned about the suitability of
physical resources (Design and Technology, English and Drama and LUSAD).
(c)
At
PG level, there were departments interested in developing new programmes, in
collaboration with other departments in the University, or internationally in
conjunction with institutions in, for example, Singapore or China.
(d)
Attention
was drawn to the need to provide accommodation for PG students revising or
writing up. It was pointed out that
there was a suitable room in the
06/25 Curriculum Sub-Committee – 4 May/24 May
2006 (A)
LTC06-P17, LTC06-P17A, LTC-P17B
The Committee considered a report from the Curriculum
Sub-Committee concerning proposals from the Department of Electronic and
Electrical Engineering for the introduction of an EngD in Systems Engineering.
The Committee received a paper from the AD(T) of Engineering
indicating that he had received revised documentation from the department since
the meeting of CSC on 24 May and that the issues identified by the
sub-committee (M.42.4) had been addressed to his satisfaction. The department had agreed that the MSc award
should initially be in Systems Engineering.
The Committee also received a response from the Research
Team to other points raised by CSC (M.42.3), as the Research Committee had not
met again since the 24 May meeting of CSC.
The Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering had also
commented on these issues in its submission to the AD(T). The Committee was concerned to ensure that,
since the current programme specification covered only the taught element of
the EngD, a document would be produced for the programme of study as a whole,
within which there would be a clear specification of the doctorate submission
options and requirements that applied.
ACTION: Department,
JGD
Subject to this assurance, it was resolved to recommend to
Senate that the proposals for a new EngD programme in Systems Engineering, with
an MSc in Systems Engineering as an exit award, and the possibility of
submitting a research thesis for the doctorate, be approved for introduction in
October 2006.
The Committee noted that amendments to the Regulations for
Higher Degrees by Research were required.
It was understood that the Research Student Office had these in hand for
submission to Senate.
The Committee considered it essential to address the issue
of how future EngD proposals, or any like proposals with a research and
curriculum element leading to a taught award, should be routed, in order to
avoid the prolonged and complex iterations that the current set of proposals
had been through. It was noted that
these had been unusually complex because they broke away from the existing EngD
format as enshrined in RHDR. It was proposed
that in future CSC invite a member of Research Committee to offer advice and
input to its discussions on like proposals ; and that LTC have responsibility
subsequently for making recommendations to Senate on the advice of CSC.
06/26 Academic Misconduct 2004/05
LTC06-P18, LTC06-P18A
The Committee considered the
report of the Academic Misconduct Committee on incidents of academic misconduct
in 2004/05.
26.1 Calculators
The Committee noted the
observation that a large number of cases of exam hall misconduct involved
students being found with notes written on the inside of their calculator case,
and the suggestion that the University consider supplying a stock of electronic
calculators for exam hall use to avoid this.
It was resolved to ask the Academic Registry to explore the feasibility
of this proposal at a future date.
ACTION: JCN
26.2 Academic referencing and
plagiarism
The Committee endorsed the
recommendation that all academic departments provide a compulsory briefing on
referencing and plagiarism for new students.
26.3 Penalties
The Committee endorsed the
proposal that, in order to broaden the range of sanctions available to it, the
Academic Misconduct Committee be empowered to cap reassessment marks where a
module mark is reduced to zero but reassessment is allowed. Capping should be permitted at a lower mark
than would normally be the case on reassessment, down to whatever minimum mark
the student needs to progress. It was
noted that this proposal had the concurrence of the PDQ Team. It was noted that an appropriate amendment to
Regulation XVIII would be required.
ACTION: CD
06/27 Report on Student Appeals under Regulation
XIV, 2005
LTC06-P19, LTC06-P19A
The Committee considered a report
on student appeals under Regulation XIV in 2005.
The Committee endorsed the
proposal that the University’s ‘Policy and Procedures on Impaired
Performance’ be amended to state specifically (a) that IP submissions
would be dealt with in confidence as far as possible, taking into account the need
for appropriate staff to consider the circumstances described, and (b) that
concerns of this kind would not normally be taken to constitute good cause for
not submitting a timely IP claim.
ACTION: CD
It was the expectation of the
Committee that details of IP claims would normally remain confidential to
members of the relevant Impaired Performance Panel and not need to be shared
with the Programme Board.
06/28 Periodic Programme Review
–
LTC06-P20, LTC06-P20A
The Committee considered the
report of a PPR of validated programmes in the area of Sport Exercise and
Fitness at
The Committee sought assurances
that the expansion of HE in the College was supported by appropriate
developments in its organisational structure and that professional development
opportunities for the larger number of College staff involved in HE had kept
pace. It was also suggested that more
information should be sought from the College concerning its future HE
strategy, particularly in the light of the panel’s reservations
concerning the future expansion of programmes.
It was agreed that these matters should be pursued with the College.
ACTION: RAB
It was noted that the panel had
recommended that the University review and clarify the relationships between
SSES and the SDC and the College, to ensure that the mutual interests of both
the University and the College were being served effectively. It was resolved to invite the Dean of SSH to
convene a meeting of interested parties within the University, including Professor
Biddle, Dr Earle, and the PVC(T).
ACTION: TK
The Committee also noted the
panel’s recommendation that the University review the Library access
rights of
ACTION: RAB
06/29 Validation of Programmes at
29.1 Revalidation of existing
programmes in the area of Sport, Exercise and Fitness
LTC06-P21
In the light of the Periodic Programme Review undertaken in
March 2006, and the College response, it was resolved to recommend to Senate
that the University’s validation of the Foundation Degree in Sports
Science and the Foundation Degree in Sports Science with Sports Management be
extended for a further period to 31 July 2011 and that the validation of the
one-year BSc Honours programme in Applied Sports Science be extended to the
same date.
The Committee expected actions being taken by the College to
address the issues identified in the PPR Report to continue to be monitored
through the APR process. The Committee
also noted that the College had been alerted to the intention of the University
to review several specific QA procedures in the context of the validated
College provision, such as those for handling impaired performance claims, late
coursework submission, academic misconduct and student appeals against
assessment decisions.
ACTION: RAB
29.2 Proposals for the
validation of new FD programmes
LTC06-P22, LTC06-P22A
The Committee considered the report and subsequent recommendations
of a Validation Panel in respect of proposed FD programmes in
·
Sports
Coaching
·
Sports
Performance (Motorsport Driving).
It was noted that the College had responded to issues
identified by the panel in its original report by submitting revised documentation
for both programmes. This had been
scrutinised independently by the members of the panel and the subject advisers;
their comments had been drawn together by the AD(T) of SSH and the PDQ
Team Manager and discussed with the PVC(T) as panel chair. A summary of outstanding issues had been
produced and forwarded to the College for further action.
(i)
Sports Coaching
The
Committee was informed that the outstanding issues on Sports Coaching were
minor points which would involve further adjustments to the programme
documentation.
It was therefore resolved to recommend to Senate that the
proposed programme leading to a Foundation Degree (FDSc) in Sports Coaching be
validated for an initial period of five years from 2006/07, subject to the
College making final adjustments to the programme documentation as requested,
to the satisfaction of the AD(T) SSH.
ACTION: College, PLB
(ii)
Sports Performance (Motorsport Driving)
The Committee was informed that similar adjustments to the
programme documentation would be required in the case of Sports Performance
(Motorsport Driving), but in this case there was also a small number of more
substantive issues requiring further attention (for example, the suitability of
certain methods of learning, teaching and assessment for DL students, and
arrangements for reassessment at the end of Part A). It was proposed that there be further
discussions between the AD(T) of SSH and the PDQ Team Manager on behalf of the
panel with the College programme team to ensure that these were appropriately
resolved.
ACTION: PLB, RAB
The Committee considered it particularly important to
monitor the standards of the Motorsport element of the programme, which was to
be delivered by the Race Drivers’ Academy, and resolved that the
validation of the programme should be subject to review after the first cohort
of students had completed the programme.
(It is expected that students will normally complete the programme in
three years.)
The Committee was not prepared to approve the proposed
programme title and resolved that the College be asked to amend the title to
Sports Performance (Motorsport). It was
noted that the College had indicated the intention of bringing forward further
versions of the FD in Sports Performance, in fields such as
It was resolved in the light of the discussion, therefore,
to recommend to Senate that the proposed programme leading to a Foundation
Degree (FDSc) in Sports Performance (Motorsport) be validated initially for
four intake cohorts, starting with the 2006 intake, the extension of which will
be subject to a satisfactory review to be conducted early in 2009/10. This recommendation is subject to the College
making further adjustments to the documentation and addressing the issues
identified by the panel as requested, to the satisfaction of the AD(T) SSH and
the PVC(T).
ACTION: College,
It was resolved that the College be asked to address as many
points as possible before the Senate meeting on 28 June 2006 and to give an
assurance at that stage that all points will be attended to before the end of
July 2006 at the latest.
The Committee wished to record its concern that the
validation process be amended in order to provide the opportunity in future for
the Committee to consider points of principle at an earlier stage.
ACTION: MB, RAB
06/30 LU/Nanyang
LTC06-P23
The Committee considered the report of a
review of the one-year BA Hons programme in Graphic Communication based at
NAFA,
It was resolved in the light of the
review to recommend to Senate that
validation of the LU/NAFA BA Honours programme in Graphic Communication be
extended for a further two years, to the end of academic year 2008/09.
It was noted that the operating budget for the programme was being
revisited and that LUSAD would have further discussions with NAFA concerning
the residential study visit.
ACTION: MM
The Committee expressed a measure of disappointment that LUSAD had not
acted more quickly on the proposed collaboration with NAFA in the delivery of
the MA in Art and Design (Studio Practice), which was expected to start in
2007.
06/31 The
LTC06-P24, LTC06-P24A
The Committee received a report on the University’s
proposed involvement with the
It was reported that costings were currently being prepared
by the Bursar.
In terms of validating undergraduate programmes at BUE, it
was the expectation that the process would involve an institutional validation
followed by validations at the subject level.
The Committee noted the subject areas in which BUE would initially be
seeking programme validation. It was not
known at this point whether relevant Loughborough departments would be prepared
to co-operate.
The Committee noted the intention to formulate a
comprehensive international strategy as part of the forthcoming strategic
planning process.
06/32 Student Diversity Working Group
It was reported that the meeting of the Student Diversity
Working Group scheduled for 6 June 2006 had not taken place and an alternative
date was being sought.
06/33 UCU (AUT/NATFHE)
Industrial Action
[No document]
Following the cessation of
industrial action pending a national ballot on the pay offer, efforts were now
being made within the University to ensure that student assessment procedures
were completed on time. There was a need
to offer guidance to departments on the handling of impaired performance
claims. It was suggested this be
discussed further at the next PDQ Team meeting.
ACTION: PDQ Team
06/34 Curriculum Sub-Committee – 4 May 2006
(B)
LTC06-P26
It was resolved to recommend new programme proposals and other strategic changes to Senate on the advice of Curriculum Sub-Committee.
06/35 Impaired
Performance Claims
LTC06-P27
It was resolved to approve
amendments to the ‘Guide for Staff’ as recommended by the PDQ Team.
06/36 Student Committees in Departments
LTC06-P28
It was resolved to endorse
recommendations from the PDQ Team, made following consultation with
departments, for submission to Senate.
06/37 Skills Award
LTC06-P29
The Committee noted and endorsed
actions taken by the PDQ Team in relation to the possible introduction of a
‘skills award’.
06/38 Curriculum Sub-Committee – 4 May 2006
(C)
LTC06-P30
Further discussions of the Sub-Committee were noted.
06/39 Outcome of QAA Special Review
of Postgraduate Research Programmes
LTC06-P31
The Committee noted the key points from the draft QAA
report. It was noted that a response was being compiled in the Research Student
Office.
06/40 National Student Survey 2006
LTC06-P32
Loughborough’s response rate of 69.98% was noted. This compared with a figure of 75% in 2005.
06/41 Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund 2006/07
– 2008/09
It was noted that HEFCE had announced details of funding
available to support institutions in enhancing the quality of their learning
and teaching for the next three years. Loughborough’s allocation was
£380116 pa. A submission was required to
release the allocation, discussions on which were being led by the PVC(T).
See http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2006/06_11/
06/42 Professional
Standards Framework for Teaching and Supporting Learning in HE
LTC06-P33
To note the publication of the above by the
and proposals from Professional Development endorsed by the
PDQ Team.
06/43 Consultations
Recent
national consultation papers were noted:
(i)
QAA
Draft Handbook for the revised institutional audit process, CL03/06 http://www.qaa.ac.uk/news/circularletters/CL0306.asp
(ii)
UUK
Proposals for National Credit Arrangements http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/consultations/universitiesuk/
The
University had responded to both consultations.
06/44 QAA
Institutional Audit
It was noted that the QAA had proposed that the next
Institutional Audit take place in spring 2008; the University had requested
that it not take place until spring 2009, but the QAA had written within the
last few days turning down the request.
06/45 Academic
Practice Awards and Mini-Projects
LTC06-P34
The
Committee noted awards made in the latest round
06/46 Dates of
Meetings for 2006/07
9 November 2006
15 February 2007
7 June 2007
All Thursdays at 9.30am
06/47 Valedictory
The Chair thanked Becky Dicks, who was attending the
Committee for the last time, for her lively and energetic contribution to the
work of the Committee on behalf of the Students’ Union during the year.
Author – Robert Bowyer
Date – June 2006
Copyright © Loughborough University. All rights reserved