Learning and Teaching Committee

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

Origin Unconfirmed Minutes of the Meeting on 10 May 2007

Learning and Teaching Committee is invited to note the following items from the meeting of Curriculum Sub-Committee held on 10 May 2007.

1. Matters Arising from the Minutes

.1 It was noted that all recommendations to Learning and Teaching Committee, and subsequently to Senate where appropriate, had been approved. The relevant minute of Senate was noted.

.2 Minute 07/2.2 Module Specifications

It was noted that:

(a) Module Specifications were now live on the LUSI system (an example of an 07 printed version was presented).

(b) Proposals on Credit Levels had been approved by Senate. There was a credit level field in the LUSI module specification which was automatically populated from the module code.

.3 Minute 07/14 Curriculum Map

The Curriculum Map, which was now part of the documentation required for new programme proposals, for major changes to Programme Regulations and for Periodic Programme Review, was noted.

2. External Input to Programme Approval

.1 A paper from Robert Bowyer was considered. It was noted that the Sub-Committee currently required programme proposers to invite at least one external senior academic to write a letter in support of their proposal, but gave no guidance as to what the external reviewer should be asked to comment on. In view of the rigorous approach already undertaken by the Sub-Committee to the scrutiny of new programme proposals, members saw no additional value in adding further complexity and likely delay to the programme approval process with more stringent requirements as to external input to the approval process. However, it was agreed that guidance as to the questions to be asked of external reviewers would be helpful to both the proposers and external reviewer and provide a more structured response for the Sub-Committee. Members were of the view that External Examiners should and could be fully trusted to provide an independent academic view on proposals, and indeed their understanding of the department involved could be useful to the process. In terms of the paperwork to be sent to the external reviewer, it was felt to be inappropriate for them to receive the full operational paperwork which would anyway be scrutinised by the Sub-Committee, and agreed that they should receive information on the rationale for the programme and a draft Programme Specification, so that their comments could contribute to the programme development process. In regard to proposers seeking an industrial/commercial viewpoint on new programme proposals, it was agreed that such a requirement would depend on the nature of the programme. Guidance on the questions to be asked would again be valuable, though it was acknowledged that these might vary with discipline. In some cases input from a departmental Advisory Board having industrial members might be sufficient.

.2 The Sub-Committee AGREED the following:

(a) That the seeking of comments from a senior external academic on a new programme proposal as part of the preparation for the operational approval phase should continue to be a requirement. The External Examiner should normally be approached for this purpose unless there was good reason why an alternative senior academic should be approached.

(b) The academic External Reviewer should be sent a copy of the draft Programme Specification with a covering letter which included the information provided in sections 7 and 14 of the proposal form. A pro-forma for the letter would be made available for downloading from the Template Shop.

(c) Guidance would be provided to departments on the questions to be asked of academic and industrial reviewers. In view of her experience as an external programme reviewer, Dr Jane Horner would draft 3 / 4 questions to be asked of academic reviewers and 2 / 3 to be optionally asked of industrial reviewers, for circulation to AD(T)s for initial comment and then to members for further comment prior to approval by the Chair.

(d) The revised procedure would become operational from 2007/08.

(e) The implications of External Examiners’ involvement in the process on their contract with the University should be explored. If the responsibility was outside the requirement of their contract, the contract might need to be reviewed for future appointments.

3. Major Changes to Programme Regulations

It was AGREED to approve the following procedure for the approval of major changes to Programme Regulations for the period to October 2007. Proposals should receive Curriculum Sub-Committee consideration by post at the discretion of the Chair. Where concerns were raised a second circulation would summarise these and invite a formal decision. The Chair would be empowered to determine whether the replies constituted a consensus.

4. PGCE/PGDip/MSc in Education with Qualified Teacher Status in Design and Technology/Science/Physical Education: Changes to Programme Regulations and Award arrangements

Further to Minute 06/27 of the meeting on 4 May 2006, it was noted that:

.1 The Chair had approved the removal of credit from the teaching practice element of the PGCE. The PGCE would therefore be awarded on the basis of 60 credits, in line with the University’s other PG Certificate awards.

.2 Senate had agreed that students entering Year 2 of the programme having completed the PGCE element should be permitted to retain their PGCE award.

5. BA English and Sports Science: Reinstatement

Further to Minute 05/51 of the meeting on 13 October 2005, it was noted that reinstatement of the BA in English and Sports Science had been approved by Chair’s action with immediate effect.

6. Annual Update of Module Specifications and Programme Regulations/Specifications

The Sub-Committee noted:

.1 The memorandum circulated to departments on 6 March 2007 (without Annexes).

.2 The proposal forms for Module Specification and Programme Regulation/Specification changes for 2007/08.

.3 Validated Programmes: The procedure and timetable for revision and approval of Module Specifications and Programme Regulations/Specifications for 2007/08.

Author – Jennie Elliott

Date – May 2007