Learning and Teaching Committee

Subject: Periodic Programme Review – School of Sport and Exercise Sciences

1. Title of report: Periodic Programme Review

2. Date of report: November 2004

3. JACS codes: C600, G500, L300, L310, X200

4. Department: School of Sport and Exercise Sciences

5. Objectives of review:

All departments undertake a ‘periodic programme review’ of this kind once every five years. The review is conducted by an independent review panel and covers a department’s complete portfolio of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. A self-evaluative commentary forms the focus of discussion between the department and the review panel, whose report and recommendations are intended to assure the University of the quality of the department’s programmes and the standards being achieved by its students. The review panel will also report on the effectiveness of the department’s arrangements for managing quality and standards in relation to learning and teaching.

6. Conduct of review:

The Panel comprised the Dean of the Faculty (Chair), the Faculty’s Associate Dean (Teaching), two senior academic staff from other departments, the Head of Academic Practice and Quality in Professional Development, and an External Assessor from another University, with the Programme Development & Quality Team Manager as Secretary.

The Panel met the Acting Head of School, the Director of Learning and Teaching, the Directors of Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programmes and the majority of Programme Leaders. It also met a mixed group of current undergraduate and postgraduate students.

A draft report was circulated to all Panel members and their comments incorporated into the final version.

7. Evidence base:

Documentation provided to the Panel in advance of the review met the University’s requirements, was helpful and comprehensive. It included

· Departmental self-evaluative commentary

· Annual programme review forms for reviews conducted from 2001 onwards (including data on recruitment, progression, degree results, first destinations, summary of actions taken in response to feedback)

· External Examiners’ reports from 1999/00 onwards (up to 2003/04 for UG programmes, 2002/03 for PG)

· Departmental responses to External Examiners’ reports (UG programmes, excluding 2004)

· Staff/Student Committee Minutes from 1999/00 onwards

· Reports from a recent graduate, a Masters graduate, and the Head of a PGCE partnership school

· Programme specifications

8. External peer contributors to process

The University’s academic quality procedures require that the review panel includes an External Assessor who is not a serving External Examiner for the department. The External Assessor was a senior academic in the same discipline area from another university, and a QAA-trained subject reviewer, who had not been an External Examiner at Loughborough. The External Assessor reviewed the documentation provided, took a full part in discussions between the review panel and the department and contributed to the report.

9. Overview of the main characteristics of the programmes covered by the review

The review covered five undergraduate (including two joint honours) and nine postgraduate programmes. The School is involved in five further joint honours programmes where administrative responsibility rests with the partner department: these were not included here.

A compulsory core of modules is offered to undergraduate students in their first year to equip them with a broad knowledge and understanding of their subjects; in the second and third years, an increase in the number of optional modules facilitates construction of pathways through programmes that best meet students’ specialist interests, strengths and career objectives. All single honours students can pursue a research project in their final year. Some modules are designed specifically to enable students to engage with issues of professional practice. A restructuring of programmes for 2004/05 has resulted in an increased use of 20-credit modules (rather than 10-credit modules). All undergraduate students are full-time.

Most of the postgraduate programmes are discipline specific and championed by the various research groups within the School, enabling students to gain an in-depth understanding of their chosen field. The Sports Science programme allows more scope for students to cross subject boundaries through modular options. All programmes require the presentation of a research dissertation for the award of the MSc degree. The number of programmes has increased dramatically over the past five years. The majority of students are full-time though part-time routes are available with several different modes of study offered on the Physical Education programme.

The School is characterised by the breadth as well as depth of subject knowledge reflected in its programmes. The strong relationship between research and teaching across all subject areas is a notable strength.

10. Conclusions on innovation and good practice

Examples of innovation and good practice observed by the Panel included the following:

(1) The Panel was impressed by the many examples of ways in which access to leading edge research informs and enriches student learning and teaching at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

(2) The Panel commends the evident commitment of the staff to providing high quality teaching and welcomes the involvement of senior academic staff in undergraduate teaching from Part A onwards.

(3) Although the Personal Tutoring system is by and large ‘demand-led’, personal tutors are required to set aside three hours per week for meetings with their tutees.

(4) The students informed the Panel that they valued the introductory sessions given at the start of modules, indicating what would be covered, and confirmed the usefulness of module handbooks and the practical information they contained

(5) There has been a steady increase in use of ‘Learn’, the University’s VLE, in support of learning and teaching and students appreciate the facility even its more passive mode as a repository for lecture notes and as a signpost to relevant web-sites. The School believes the development of the ‘Research Gateway’ will be successful as an on-line resource to support student projects.

(6) Sports-based practical activities continue to feature in many modules and are provided by part-time staff, many of whom are employed in the Sports Development Centre. Postgraduate research students contribute to seminars in their own fields of research expertise.

(7) The Panel welcomes the establishment of an External Advisory Committee, comprising individuals from organisations such as the English Institute of Sport, the Sports Councils and governing bodies, with knowledge and expertise to act as a sounding board for the School; and also the use of guest lecturers.

(8) The School maintains a dialogue with the central University Widening Participation team and has undertaken a number of activities aimed at attracting applications from students who might otherwise have been deterred by the School’s image as an ‘elite’ centre, as well as raising aspirations amongst lower age groups.

(9) Students are carefully selected for admission to the postgraduate programmes to ensure that all students, whether having undertaken previous undergraduate study at Loughborough or elsewhere, are appropriately prepared.

11. Conclusions on quality and standards

(1) The School has undertaken a thorough review of programme objectives with reference to the relevant Subject Benchmark and the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications. Programme specifications have been compiled using University guidelines and are published on the University’s web pages. Module specifications have been updated and a mapping exercise has been undertaken to verify where transferable skills are developed and assessed within the curriculum.

(2) All statistical data and feedback attest to the excellent quality of learning opportunities and the standards achieved by the students. The report of the QAA Subject Review 2001 (awarded 23/24 points) and the report on the Discipline Audit Trail in Sports Science included in the QAA Institutional Audit 2004 provide external verification.

(3) External Examiners’ reports are positive. They confirm that students are achieving the intended learning outcomes and that programme specifications are being delivered.

(4) Employability rates are good. A significant proportion of graduates go on to further study.

(5) Quality management procedures within the School ensure that careful consideration is given to the range of feedback and evaluative comments that relate to the School’s programmes; that these are synthesised with the reflections of the teaching staff through programme committees, and fed into the School’s Learning and Teaching Committee. The recommendations from this process have been instrumental in guiding programme development at undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

(6) Good communications are evident between staff and students. The Department has appropriate mechanisms in place for eliciting and responding to student module feedback, though it may not always be the case that students hear how the School has responded. Some students felt it likely that a number of their peers did not take advantage of the Personal Tutor system.

(7) The School has responded positively to issues identified by the External Examiners, though in some instances it has taken some time for changes to be implemented.

(8) The School has a developmental system of peer observation which is beneficial in sharing good practice.

(9) The students remarked upon the enthusiasm and energy of the staff.

(10) Outstanding facilities are available on campus for teaching curriculum-based sport activities.

12. Conclusions on whether the programmes remain current and valid in the light of developing knowledge in the discipline, practice in its application, and developments in teaching and learning

(1) Many of the staff have developed methodologies and techniques used nationally and internationally, and have authored material which appears on the reading lists of other institutions. Many share the findings of their research with their students before publication. The students are exposed to a wide variety of perspectives in the School.

(2) Students believe the programmes are helping them towards their career objectives. In this context, the Panel welcomes the introduction of a four-year version of the programme in Sports and Leisure Management which includes a placement year leading to the Diploma in Industrial Studies (DIS).

(3) The increased use of 20-credit modules from 2004/05 is designed to add depth to students’ learning experience as well as reducing the burden of assessment. This is seen as a prerequisite for critical reflection which the School seeks to engender in its students. Students’ modular options will not be reduced.

(4) The School aims to expose students to a broad range of assessment methods across the programmes and the use of different assessment instruments is being explored.

(5) A wide range of practical sports-based activities is included within the curriculum.

13. Forward-looking recommendations for actions to remedy any identified shortcomings, and for further enhancement of quality and standards

(1) The Panel would encourage the School to take stock after a period of significant and rapid expansion, in order to refine and strengthen what is already high quality provision.

(2) The School is advised to consider whether its postgraduate taught provision might be excessively compartmentalised and whether more should be done to promote collective ownership within the School.

(3) It is also advised to reflect on the implications of expanding international student numbers and develop strategic targets in this respect.

(4) Dissertation supervision is acknowledged as a key factor in staff workloads and a limiting factor on PGT expansion. The School may wish to consider alternative degree structures, including the adoption of core modules where appropriate.

The School is also encouraged

(5) To pursue the adoption of Co-Tutor as a record keeping tool within the Personal Tutoring system.

(6) To follow through its plans to help students reflect on their own academic progress, possibly by means of a derivative of the skills assessment and recording tool ‘RAPID’, and link this to the Personal Tutoring system.

(7) To continue to improve consistency in feedback to students.

(8) To increase further its use of online learning especially in terms of interactive resources; it is encouraged to adopt strategic targets to give direction to these developments.

(9) To pursue its plans for a more comprehensive approach to the management of part-time staff and their professional development, through a shared appointment with the Sports Development Centre.

(10) To consider how the peer observation model could be adapted to cater for a scenario in which there is more extensive use of online learning and delivery cannot be ‘observed’ in the usual way.

14. Further observations and recommendations (This section is not for TQI summary.)

(1) The School’s proposal to phase out its participation in joint honours programmes should be opened up for discussion within the University.

(2) The Panel recommends Learning and Teaching Committee to instigate a review of the co-ordination of joint/combined honours programmes across the institution. The views of students whom the panel met during the review confirmed the disparity of experience between departments, as commented upon in the QAA Audit Report.

(3) In 2004, a number of the External Examiners for the undergraduate programmes stated that the policy and procedures for determining degree classifications, particularly in borderline cases, were not sufficiently clear. The Panel believes the School proposed to adopt a ‘majority of papers’ rule, instead of relying on the overall programme mark, and this was supported by the Externals; however, the School was advised that this would be contrary to University policy. Learning and Teaching Committee is asked to clarify whether any further consideration is being given to the current rules for degree classification.

(4) The School is encouraged to contribute to the development of the University’s online learning strategy (through the AD(T) in the first instance), given staff experience of other VLEs and access to relevant projects in the PGCE area from which lessons might be learned.

(5) The Panel recommends that the School and the Sports Development Centre (SDC) together review their relationship to ensure that it is proactively managed to maximum mutual benefit.

(6) The Panel was informed that the School is actively seeking the replacement of the sports science laboratories which currently occupy converted space. The Panel is given to understand that the University is committed to a new building for the Biosciences which would help address this need. The Panel urges the University to act on this and the proposed redevelopment of the East Site in the near future to ensure that all of the School’s accommodation is of the same high standard.

(7) The Panel recommends that consideration be given in the context of the Estates Strategy to the provision of additional office accommodation on campus for use by international visitors.

TK/RAB 071204

RESPONSE TO THE PERIODIC PROGRAMME REVIEW PANEL REPORT FOR THE SCHOOL OF SPORT AND EXERCISE SCIENCES

Background

The Periodic Programme Review (PPR) for the School of Sport and Exercise Sciences was conducted on 17^th November 2004. It covered five undergraduate (including two joint honours ) and nine postgraduate programmes. This document constitutes the School’s formal response to the Review Panel’s report.

SSES Comment on the Panel’s Conclusions

The School welcomes the Panel’s particularly positive overall conclusions about both its undergraduate and postgraduate provision. The acknowledgement of the breadth and depth of the subject matter to be found in the School’s programmes was appreciated as was the highlighting of the strong relationship between research and teaching in all subject areas. This significance of “leading edge” research informing teaching was a key context factor recognised as underpinning one of the many areas of innovation and good practice identified by the Panel.

Specific Panel Recommendations and Observations and SSES Responses

The Panel’s report includes in Section 13 some recommendations for action and in Section 14 some further observations and recommendations. Each of the points raised is repeated below with the School’s responses.

Section 13:

13(1) The Panel would encourage the School to take stock after a period of significant and rapid expansion, in order to refine and strengthen what is already high quality provision.

Response: The School’s Learning and Teaching Committee is undertaking a review of its provision of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes and this will include the establishment of quality benchmarks for future developments.

13(2) The School is advised to consider whether its postgraduate taught provision might be excessively compartmentalised and whether more should be done to promote collective ownership within the School.

Response: The School has appointed a Director of Postgraduate Programmes who will oversee the maintenance and further development of its MSc programmes. This role will help ensure postgraduate provision reflects the corporate teaching strength of the School and that all new programmes are only introduced as part of a School wide strategy.

13(3) It is also advised to reflect on the implications of expanding international student numbers and develop strategic targets in this respect

Response: The rapid expansion in the number of international students has provided the School with helpful learning experience about what can and should be expected from these students as well as the extent and nature of the additional demands on academic and administrative staff that arise. The School’s International Advisory Group will review the overall involvement in international recruitment and provision. One immediate action arising from recent experience is that the School will tighten its entry requirements with regard to English language proficiency.

13(4) Dissertation supervision is acknowledged as a key factor in staff workloads and a limiting factor on PGT expansion. The School may wish to consider alternative degree structures, including the adoption of core modules where appropriate.

Response: The school’s Postgraduate Committee is exploring additional and innovative ways of reducing the project supervisory load on staff whilst still providing a quality supported research project experience. For example, some projects are too ambitious for a single postgraduate but could be successfully completed by a team or two or three postgraduates. Adopting this approach to dissertation supervision would not only reduce the supervisory load but would also provide postgraduates with additional opportunities to develop their team working skills and take more ambitious projects. Small group laboratory-based projects are limited by the availability of adequate laboratory space. However, alternative dissertation projects that do not make large demands on limited laboratory space are being considered and these include ‘field based research studies’, ‘literature-based studies’ and extending the use of ‘research-team’ projects that are undertaken by groups of two or three postgraduate students.

As implied above, consideration of the introduction of core modules, e.g. Advanced Research Skills, into the School’s taught postgraduate provision is one task for the School’s Director of Postgraduate Programmes and the SSES Postgraduate Committee

The School is also encouraged

13(5) To pursue the adoption of Co-Tutor as a record keeping tool within the Personal Tutoring system.

Response: The School has researched and laid the foundations for the introduction of Co-Tutor as part of its Personal Tutoring system no later than the beginning of the next academic year (2005-2006)

13(6) To follow through its plans to help students reflect on their own academic progress, possibly by means of a derivative of the skills assessment and recording tool ‘RAPID’, and link this to the Personal Tutoring system.

Response: The School intends introducing RAPID, or a derivative, for the beginning of academic year (2006-2007). The School’s research into the acceptance and effective use of such a personal academic progress monitoring system has underlined a need for it to be linked with a student’s involvement in an introductory information technology module. It would also be valuable for it to be linked to the operation of the School’s Personal tutoring system.

13(7) To continue to improve consistency in feedback to students.

Response: The School is in the process of ‘bench-marking’ what it expects as the minimal acceptable level of feedback to students, For example, a standardised summative and formative feedback coversheet for coursework has been developed and implemented.

13(8) To increase further its use of online learning especially in terms of interactive resources; it is encouraged to adopt strategic targets to give direction to these developments.

Response: The School’s Learning and Teaching Committee is actively exploring the adoption of strategic targets for the use of the University’s ‘LEARN’ and related systems. A member of school staff had been delegated to take the lead in Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) related developments

13(9) To pursue its plans for a more comprehensive approach to the management of part-time staff and their professional development, through a shared appointment with the Sports Development Centre.

Response: The School and SDC have now made the joint appointment and the new member of staff concerned is examining a number of areas of the School’s work that involve a significant number of part-time staff.

13(10) To consider how the peer observation model could be adapted to cater for a scenario in which there is more extensive use of online learning and delivery cannot be ‘observed’ in the usual way.

Response: The School plans to introduce ‘bench marks’ for online learning material and its delivery as well as quality assurance. The School will work closely with the SSH Faculty and the University’s e-learning support services to ensure the adoption of ‘best practice’ in this area. Advice will be sought about processes by which the current use of the peer observation model can be adapted to the include the review of more online learning and delivery practice.

Section 14:

14(1) The School’s proposal to phase out its participation in joint honours programmes should be opened up for discussion within the University.

Response: The School would welcome the early implementation of such a University –wide review of the role and future of joint honours programmes and will not be pursuing any phasing out of its programmes at present.

14(2) The Panel recommends Learning and Teaching Committee to instigate a review of the co-ordination of joint/combined honours programmes across the institution. The views of students whom the panel met during the review confirmed the disparity of experience between departments, as commented upon in the QAA Audit Report.

Response: See above: the School supports the Panel’s recommendation to the University’s Learning and Teaching Committee

14(3) In 2004, a number of the External Examiners for the undergraduate programmes stated that the policy and procedures for determining degree classifications, particularly in borderline cases, were not sufficiently clear. The Panel believes the School proposed to adopt a ‘majority of papers’ rule, instead of relying on the overall programme mark, and this was supported by the Externals; however, the School was advised that this would be contrary to University policy. Learning and Teaching Committee is asked to clarify whether any further consideration is being given to the current rules for degree classification.

Response: The School has received clarification about the establishment of degree classification boundaries. It welcomes a Faculty-wide review of opinion on this issue and has contributed its views on the operationalisation of a ‘majority of papers’ element.

14(4) The School is encouraged to contribute to the development of the University’s online learning strategy (through the AD(T) in the first instance), given staff experience of other VLEs and access to relevant projects in the PGCE area from which lessons might be learned.

Response: See earlier references to the involvement of the School’s Learning and Teaching Committee and the role of the member of staff leading on VLE developments. The latter’s work will be supported by a working group that will report to the school’s Learning and Teaching Committee, liaise closely with SSH Faculty developments through the AD(T)) and take advantage of the experience of the university’s Initial Teacher Training staff and the specific expertise of the university’s Learning and Teaching Development section

14(5) The Panel recommends that the School and the Sports Development Centre (SDC) together review their relationship to ensure that it is proactively managed to maximum mutual benefit.

Response: SSES/ SDC discussions are ongoing with regard to the context and work of the two bodies and, in particular, to the specific areas of mutual interest and contact.

14(6) The Panel was informed that the School is actively seeking the replacement of the sports science laboratories which currently occupy converted space. The Panel is given to understand that the University is committed to a new building for the Biosciences which would help address this need. The Panel urges the University to act on this and the proposed redevelopment of the East Site in the near future to ensure that all of the School’s accommodation is of the same high standard.

Response: The School welcomes the support of the Panel for the development of a new building to house our world class researchers in the biological sciences and to the development of the East Park site more widely.

14(7) The Panel recommends that consideration be given in the context of the Estates Strategy to the provision of additional office accommodation on campus for use by international visitors.

Response: The School welcomes the support of the Panel for the development of an Estates Strategy that takes into consideration the need for additional office accommodation not only for existing staff but also for international visitors.

Professor Clyde Williams. SSES Head of School

Dr Alan Bairner. Chair SSES Learning and Teaching Committee

25 January 2005