Learning and Teaching Committee

 

Subject:          Modular MSc: Discussion with Jaguar Land Rover (JLR)

 

Origin:            Richard Stobart and Jane Horner, AAE

 

Aeronautical & Automotive Engineering has been approached by Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) to participate in a consortium of universities delivering taught postgraduate courses to JLR staff. The other universities are Warwick, Coventry and Cranfield, with the Warwick Manufacturing Group (WMG) playing the lead role. A representative of WMG, Alastair Keddie, has also had a telephone discussion with the DVC regarding this activity.

 

JLR have identified subject areas in which there is a skills shortage and then have also identified potentially suitable modules from the four universities’ module catalogues. Modules from Loughborough make up the majority of their module “wish list”, with the majority of modules coming from AAE. JLR also have a strong interest in modules in Systems Engineering and EEE have been kept informed of the discussions.

 

Briefly, JLR wants its engineers to study material over a number of years as various skills requirements are identified. This material would be delivered by whichever university JLR considers is most expert for the requirement. JLR would also like to be able to influence the content of the taught modules to best fit their needs. As an incentive for their staff to study, they want recognised academic awards to be obtained at different stages. Rather than the usual Loughborough model of registering for an MSc, JLR want to follow the model of first Post Grad Certificate, which can then be topped up to Post Grad diploma and finally topped up to MSc. JLR understand that there will be assessment requirements and appear to fully committed to the concept of rigorous assessment tailored to the correct level. It has been agreed that while WMG will do the administration for the project and will liaise with the four universities, the qualification will be awarded by the university that contributes most credits and/or the individual project module to the award

 

At a meeting at JLR held on 8th October 2009, it became clear that cost will be a major factor in where JLR decide to source modules. They requested a pricing policy against a number of scenarios including, for example, a fully open version of the course and year by year variation in student numbers. The Finance Office has been contacted to help with the costing. One unresolved question concerns how the University recovers costs associated with collaborative provision when the number of LU modules taken by any one student may be very variable.  JLR is concerned for cost reasons that modules are not specially customised to their requirements.  A good fit to requirements will be enough with JLR topping up as needed.

 

AAE is requesting approval from Operations Committee to continue with the discussions with JLR. The agreed next steps with JLR include a review of our pricing policy and a discussion between LU staff and JLR engineers on module content.

 

This document drafted for Operations Committee is also being submitted to LTC with an additional page raising issues regarding teaching provision and quality assurance.

 

19th October 2009

Issues to Raise with LTC

 

·         JLR see the programme consisting of modules that fill various skills requirements rather than a collection of modules that will deliver the stated learning outcomes of the programme. This will not present problems if the modules are drawn from a narrow field

·         JLR “pick and mix” view of module catalogues has taken no account of module level. At the meeting at JLR it was explained to them that any PG qualification must be delivered at level 7, with possibly 30 credits at level 6. JLR have LU material which is level 4 and 5 on their wish list

·         What LU consider to be level 7 may not align with the other universities

·         JLR view this as training rather than education. However JLR will be open to the arguments that the University delivers education not training. This needs to be discussed in a future meeting with JLR

·         There will be a need to supply maths support to the students. JLR have already raised this as a question. How is the cost covered? JLR have introduced the notion of non-credit bearing elements in the course.

·         JLR want to have a strong say in the module contents. This again may result in the suggestion of module content at the wrong level. Also the issue of paying for significant module development.  JLR equally have stated that they want to control costs by choosing a good fit to their requirements.

·         The proposed MSc will require alignment of the programme regulations at all four universities and agreed QA procedures

·         Also require alignment of assessment “expectations”

·         The individual investigative project should ideally be the same module weight at all partner universities

·         The model put forward by JLR is of the MSc being a top-up on the award of a PG diploma which itself tops up a PG cert. This could put the University in the position of “topping” up a PG dip (and cert) in which it had contributed zero credit.

·         In a collaboration of this form the process of awarding marks most be above board and transparent. Pressure could be put to align marking across the four Universities

·         WMG will be “running” the programme for JLR. This means LU needs to be clear about what fee actually comes to LU

·         Recovery of collaborative costs. Does this mean a minimum number of LU modules per student ?

Richard Stobart and Jane Horner

Copyright © Loughborough University.  All rights reserved.