Learning and Teaching Committee

LTC11-M4

Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 27 October 2011

Members: Prof. Morag Bell (in the Chair) Dr Jane Horner

Dr Keith Pond Dr Robert Hamilton

Dr John McCardle Prof. Michael Kong

Prof. Memis Acar Prof. Ray Dawson

Dr Ruth Kinna Prof. Fred Yeadon

Dr Brian Jarvis Dr Jennifer Nutkins

Jan Tennant Dr Phil Richards

In attendance: Rob Pearson, Nigel Thomas

Apologies: Prof. John Feather, Prof. Simon Austin, Jayde Savage, Tim Price

11/58. Minutes

LTC11-M3

1. The Minutes of the Meeting of the Committee held on 29 September 2011 were confirmed.

11/59 Matters Arising from the Minutes not otherwise appearing on the Agenda

11/49 National Student Survey 2011

1. Meetings with School SMTs to discuss the 2010 NSS were under way and were producing helpful and constructive dialogue.

2. Several themes were being identified in the NSS discussions which would require further consideration, either institutionally or within Schools. These included:

· The management of joint degrees

· Brought-in teaching

· Contact time between staff and students

· Student access to learning resources

11/50 Annual Programme Reviews and Periodic Programme Reviews

1. The APR data sets would shortly be sent to Schools. It was noted that due to the timing of programme boards, postgraduate taught progression data and external examiner reports would be considered by Schools later in the session. However, where data was available PGT programmes should be included in APR.

11/51 Programme Presidents

1. Schools were encouraged to discuss the Students’ Union Programme President proposal at their next SSLC, noting that the proposal was subject to formal approval at Senate on 16 November. While LTC supported the proposal, it was important to ensure that arrangements in Schools that worked effectively should not be compromised by the Programme President system.

11/60 Review of Attendance Monitoring Procedures

Received: LTC11-P43

1. It was agreed that it appropriate to use the term ‘student participation’ within the context of the procedures.

2. The committee approved the revised protocol, subject to minor amendments.

3. It was noted that the Academic Registry was in regular dialogue with School administrators to ensure the process worked efficiently.

11/61 Pool Teaching Room Development Proposal

Received: LTC11-P44

1. It was agreed that the School proposals for the use of HEFCE teaching and learning capital investment funding should be recommended for approval by Operations Committee.

2. It was anticipated that, if approved by Operations Committee, the bids would need to be considered by Facilities Management for further scrutiny to ensure that the proposals would be deliverable and that the funding stream and projections were appropriate.

Action:

3. Morag Bell to submit proposals to Operations Committee.

11/62 Report from the Teaching Partnership Sub-Committee

Received: LTC11-P45

1. Revisions to section 12 of the AQPH: Validation and External Collaboration were approved, subject to minor amendments. This included the identification of sources of guidance and support for Schools in regard to collaborative activity.

11/63 Report from Curriculum Sub-Committee

Received: LTC11-P46

1. Revisions to section 3 of the AQPH: Programmes of Study were approved subject to clarification of the role of the School AD(T) in approving minor revisions.

11/64 Key Information Set

Received: LTC11-P47

1. From September 2012 all institutions would be required to annually publish Key Information Sets (KIS) for each of their undergraduate courses.

2. The Academic Registry and IT Services would co-ordinate collation of the data and make the submission to HEFCE.

3. It was agreed that AD(T)s would work with appropriate administrators in co-ordinating the collection of data within their Schools.

4. It was agreed that the definitions of teaching and learning activity used by HESA encompassed the variety of activity at Loughborough, subject to further work to refine the associated definitions.

11/65 Curriculum Sub-Committee – 6 October 2011

Received: LTC11-P48

1. It was agreed to recommend new programme proposals and other strategic changes to Senate on the advice of Curriculum Sub-Committee, as set out in the report.

2. It was agreed that Chair’s Action would be taken to approve the programmes for which there remained issues to be resolved, as noted at the meeting.

11/66 Academic Standards and Procedures Sub-Committee, 3 October 2011

Received: LTC11-P49

1. ASPSC had approved the appointment of independent panels that would adjudicate when Schools and the Counselling & Disability Service were unable to reach agreement about appropriate adjustments for students with disabilities. However, Schools had raised concerns that there were tensions about what constituted a reasonable adjustment.

2. It was agreed that CDS would be asked to present an overview report to the committee detailing, amongst other things: criteria for recommended adjustments; the recommendations that are proving contentious; the volume of adjustments over time.

Action:

3. Nigel Thomas to ask CDS to produce a report for a future committee meeting.

11/67 Curriculum Sub-Committee, 6 October 2011

Received: LTC11-P50

11/68 Dates of Meetings 2011/12

Dates of remaining meetings:

16 Feb.2012, 9.30 am

29 March 2012, 2.00 pm

3 May 2012, 9.30 am

14 June 2012, 9.30 am

11/69 Ethical approval for new and amended modules

Received: LTC11-P51

1. Ethical Advisory Committee (EAC) had recommended an amendment to the annual update process to identify changes to modules or new modules which raised potential ethical issues.

2. Members felt the definition of ‘human participants’ was ambiguous as it was unclear whether it referred solely to where research was undertaken by students during their studies or also included student participating in the module as part of the curriculum.

Action:

3. RP to ask EAC to clarify expectations.

Author – Rob Pearson

Date – October 2011