Learning and Teaching Committee

Subject: Report of Curriculum Sub-Committee – Matters for Information

Origin Unconfirmed Minutes of the Meeting on 12 January 2006

Learning and Teaching Committee is invited to note the following items from the meeting of Curriculum Sub-Committee held on 12 January 2006.

1. Matters Arising from the Minutes

.1 It was noted that, with two exceptions (see minutes 06/4 and 06/5), all recommendations to Learning and Teaching Committee, and subsequently to Senate where appropriate, had been approved. The relevant minutes of Senate were noted.

.2 Minute 05/38.3 – BSc/MComp (DPS) Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence: New Programme Proposals

It was noted that Computer Science had decided not to proceed with the proposal to suffix ‘with Industrial Experience’ to the above programme title and that of other sandwich programmes in the Department. There had been insufficient evidence that changes of title would have a positive impact on application numbers.

.3 Minute 05/41 – Completion of Consultation Forms for New Programme Proposals

(a) The revised consultation form was noted.

(b) It was noted that the Autumn 2006 meeting of the committee would be scheduled a week later than the Autumn 2005 meeting.

.4 Minute 05/46 – MRes Proposals

It was noted that Senate had approved criteria for the award of Master of Research as recommended by Learning and Teaching Committee and that Council had approved the addition of the award to Ordinance IV.

2. Placement Modules

Further to Minute 05/40 of the previous meeting:

.1 The Sub-Committee received samples of transcripts for students who had/had not successfully completed their placement. It was commented that the transcript could make clearer to an employer the relationship between the placement Diploma award and the Part I section, and proposed that the following changes be made to the transcript template:

(a) Under Part I there should be listed ‘Examiners’ Decision’, which would either be ‘Diploma in ……. awarded’ or left blank.

(b) Credit for Part I should appear as ‘N/A’ rather than ‘0’.

.2 The Sub-Committee AGREED a proposal to make clear in the title of placement modules, as appropriate, that no credit would be awarded e.g. ‘Industrial Training Placement (DIS award, non-credit bearing)’.

.3 The Sub-Committee received examples of placement modules. The AD(T)s reported that though in some cases the assessment on placement modules tested Intended Learning Outcomes, in many cases it did not. The Sub-Committee acknowledged the special nature of the placement module and the lack of a structured way of assessing the ILOs. Students’ experience on placement could be highly variable and it could not be expected that every student would have the opportunity to achieve every ILO. The University was, however, at risk of criticism from accreditation bodies and the QAA if the assessment of ILOs was not clear. It was AGREED that departments be asked to review their placement modules and revise either or both the ILO and assessment fields to ensure that these were aligned (e.g. assuring that an ILO involving teamwork was assessed by the employer). In some cases ILOs might currently be too ambitious. Major restructuring of the module specification was not intended. The review would be undertaken separately from the Annual Update. Revised modules should be submitted to the AD(T)s for approval.

3. MRes Sustainability Management (in Engineering): New Programme Proposals

.1 Further to Minute 05/47 of the previous meeting, the Sub-Committee considered revised proposals from WEDC for a full-time programme with effect from October 2006. The Sub-Committee was concerned that Sustainability Management was potentially a vast subject area and if the proposers wished to focus on developing countries, as was suggested in the module specifications, this should be made clear in the title and aims of the programme. The Sub-Committee was also unconvinced that the Management and Professional Development modules should be classified as research skills, and as such considered that the programme was light on research skills modules for an MRes award. The greater emphasis appeared to be on Sustainability Management subject matter rather than research skills.

.2 The Sub-Committee felt unable to recommend the proposal in its current form. It was AGREED that the proposers be asked to rework the proposals for resubmission to the Sub-Committee only once the AD(T) was happy with them. It should be borne in mind that strategic approval for the programme was obtained in May 2005 and would need to be sought again if operational approval was not received by May 2006. A copy of the proposals already considered for the MRes in Human Biology/Ergonomics/Psychology would be provided to the proposers for guidance as an example of a satisfactory MRes submission. The proposers were requested to take the following other matters into account:

(a) The title of the programme should be reviewed in view of the above comments, and should be consistent across all the documentation. This title would appear on students’ transcripts and degree certificates, and should align with programme aims.

Programme Specifications

(b) A clearer set of aims was required which the ILOs would underpin. ‘Advanced training’ was not appropriate as an aim.

(d) ILOs listed under Knowledge and Understanding were more related to teaching, learning and assessment. Teaching/learning methods and strategies should describe how ILOs were met. The range of assessment methods was currently too vague.

(e) More than one subject-specific practical skill would be expected.

(f) The reassessment details should be in the Module Specification rather than the Programme Specification.

(g) The reference to 3 journal style papers in para 1.2.1 would appear to be incorrect

Module Specifications

(h) CVP213: ILOs should incorporate research design, methodology, and critical appraisal of published work. Explanation was required of the mini-project and its function.

(i) CVP227: This was the primary research skills module but appeared to focus on subject-specific content.

(j) CVP240/241: The skills were almost identical to those of the main project

(k) CVP228: There were many elements of assessment. Greater individual assessment should be explored.

(l) CVP240/241: These appeared to run over a period of three weeks. Clarification was required on the timing of the modules to reassure the Sub-Committee that students would not be overloaded with work at certain periods.

(m) CVP034/035: These Management and Professional Development modules had identical ILOs. The Sub-Committee was unclear as to their relevance to an MRes.

(n) Use of existing generic modules on research skills should be considered.

.3 It was AGREED that it would be useful to programme proposers generally for the proposal form to have a web link to a list of identified Programme Specification exemplars.

.4 It was AGREED that in the future the AD(T)s should decline to submit proposals to the Sub-Committee if there were unresolved matters with which they were unhappy. The Chair would provide any necessary support to the AD(T)s in such action.

4. Any Other Business

.1 It was AGREED that as the Assessment Matrix had proved most useful to the Sub-Committee, was now incorporated in the documentation for Periodic Programme Review and would prove useful to students, it should in future be included in the Programme Handbook provided to students.

.2 It was noted that the Department of Mathematical Sciences should now be referred to as the School of Mathematical Sciences.

Author – Jennie Elliott

Date – January 2006