SENATE

[Minutes]

Minutes of the 310th (Ordinary) Meeting of Senate held on Wednesday 27 November 1996

                           Professor D J Wallace        
                                                                                 
          Dr M Acar                         Mr P G Lewis                         
          Mr J A Arfield (ab)               Professor R McCaffer                 
          Dr C Backhouse                    Professor J J McGuirk                
          Dr J V Black                      Dr M P McIver                        
          Dr W R Bowman                     Ms K Myers                           
          Dr P L Byrne (ab)                 Professor J N Miller                 
          Professor S Cox                   Professor I C Morison                
          Dr R K Dart                       Dr P N Murgatroyd                    
          Professor J V Dawkins             Professor K C Parsons (ab)           
          Dr D W Edwards                    Dr A Price (ab)                      
          Professor M Evans                 Dr A C Pugh                          
          Professor J P Feather             Professor I Reid                     
          Ms G A Fish                       Professor P H Roberts                
          Dr M Gilbert (ab)                 Professor J A Saunders               
          Professor P Golding               Professor H Schröder                 
          Dr H Gross                        Professor M Shaw                     
          Professor N A Halliwell           Professor M Streat                   
          Professor V I Hanby               Dr G M Swallowe                      
          Professor A G Hargreaves          Professor T G Weyman-Jones           
          Professor D J Hourston            Dr P Wild                            
          Mr M Jackson                      Professor F Wilkinson                
          Mr T P Jones                      Professor C Williams                 
          Ms A Kanwar                       Dr B Woodward                        
          Mrs W Llewellyn (ab)              Professor K R A Ziebeck (ab)         
                                                                                 
          In attendance:       Mr R A Bowyer                        
                               Dr D E Fletcher                      
                               Mr N A McHard                        
                               Dr B P Vale                          
                               Mr J S Wilcox                        
                                                                    
          By invitation:       Dr J Costello                        
                               Professor B Marples                  
                               Dr R Wilcockson                      

96/67 Business of the Agenda

96/68 Minutes

96/69 Matters Arising from the Minutes

96/70 Matters for Report by the Vice-Chancellor

i)

Discussions with LCAD regarding a merger were ongoing. The original schedule for reaching a final decision had, however, been amended. It was now envisaged that a definitive decision would be made by the LCAD governors and University Council in May 1997.

ii)

A feasibility study regarding the establishment of a University College in Peterborough was being undertaken. A key feature of any proposal would be the willingness of the local Council to contribute to the project financially, following the example of Lincolnshire Council and the University of Lincoln. A meeting with the Chief Executive of the HEFCE was arranged for the near future to discuss the project.

iii)

The University had made its response to the Dearing Enquiry on Higher Education. The response would be circulated on the Web with the Minutes. Responses on the funding of teaching and research had been made to the Funding Council. A proposal had been made to move the funding of teaching to fewer broader bands. The University's view however, was that the model proposed too few bands. It was not expected that there would be any change to the funding model for the academic session 1997/98.

iv)

The Chancellor's budget statement had announced an additional £280M for the funding of the HE/FE sector. This figure included £20M for a special equipment fund. When this figure was set against the cuts in capital revenue from last year it represented a cash increase of 0.5% and efficiency gains of 2 - 2.5% were still to be made. Overall, however, the outcome was slightly more positive than had been feared.

v)

With respect to the pay settlement it was acknowledged that the University's financial position was such that it could afford an increase in excess of 1.5%. It was hoped that UCEA might make a revised pay offer in early December following the cash injection to the system outlined in the Chancellor's budget statement. At present the University would follow the UCEA guidelines in deducting ¹/260^th from the pay of those members of staff who took industrial action. The deduction would not be made until January 1997 and if in the meantime the majority of other Universities did not adopt this policy, the University would review its own position.

96/71 Matters for Report by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Teaching) and the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Research)

96/72 Programme Proposals

6.1

To recommend to Council the following:

i)

for introduction in the 1998/99 session:

• BSc Physics with Computing
• BSc Physics with Environmental Science

ii)

For introduction in the 1996/97 session.

• BSc Retail Automotive Management.

Senate noted that this programme was an innovative self funding programme with a large element of work based learning.

6.2

To recommend to Council validation of the following programmes at Loughborough College of Art and Design:

(SEN96-P43)

• BA History of Art and Design with Studio Practice from September 1997.
• BA Graphic Communication from September 1997.

96/73 Semesterisation Review Group

.1 Degree Classification Scheme

i)

Further to Minute 96/64 of Senate's 309th meeting members considered proposals with respect to a new degree classification scheme.

The proposals provided for the progression criteria where students had not met the necessary credit thresholds. Students would be permitted the opportunity to meet these thresholds at reassessment but their marks would be capped at 40%. It was confirmed that candidates could be classified out of rank order on the basis of medical evidence or following a viva. There was some discussion as to whether a student should be permitted to be re-examined in all their failed modules, but it was felt that this would potentially overburden the student and cause difficulties with the numbers of re-examinations. It was noted that the proposal committed all University departments to offer September reassessments whilst such a general practice was retained. However, it was noted that there were areas, such as project work, where September re-sit examinations would not be appropriate. In these cases Programme Boards could set alternative assessment measures.

The principle of awarding only 40% on a successful re-sit examination was questioned and it was suggested that an average of the initial and re-examined result could be given. In some cases this could fall below 40% and it was not felt that this would be appropriate.

It was RESOLVED to approve the proposals as set out in the agenda paper.

ii)

It was RESOLVED to approve the proposals for transitional arrangements as set out in the agenda paper.

.2 Structure of the Academic Year

i)

The Vice-Chancellor reported to Senate that following the meeting of the General Assembly on 20 November, the proposal to introduce a 14 week semester prior to Christmas as outlined on the agenda paper had been withdrawn. A revised proposal had been circulated electronically and a hard copy of this paper had been tabled. Members were asked to note that the corrected version of the paper stated that the five week teaching and learning period would end on 22 May 1998 and the 4 week assessment period would commence on 25 May 1998. Members agreed to discuss item 7.2 prior to 7.1 on the basis that any decisions made could have a bearing on matters raised in the foregoing proposal.

ii)

Members were advised that under agenda item 7.2 ii) General Assembly had made a formal motion to Senate which would be put following the debate. The motion had been previously circulated electronically to all members.

iii)

The principles behind the revised proposal were outlined to Senate. The need to address the difficulties perceived with the existing structure and the concern expressed by the General Assembly had been accepted, while at the same time retaining the principles of modularity, credit accumulation and assessment immediately following teaching and learning. It was hoped that the current proposal would provide a solution to difficulties associated with September re-examinations, final year vivas, failed modules and other issues.

iv)

In the course of a lengthy discussion of the proposal members raised a number of points. It was suggested that students would be disadvantaged by being examined immediately after Christmas because of reduced access to the Library for revision purposes. It was further suggested that Final Year students should be examined at a later stage and that a difficulty arose if Year 1 students were given only a light formal examination load in Semester 1. Concern was also expressed over the abolition of re-sit examinations and permitting progression if a module was failed and the outcome of a reassessment not known.

It was felt, however, that students could elect to return or to stay on campus during part of the Christmas vacation to revise; that the reduction to a 2 week assessment period would address the problem of the Year 1 Semester 1 examinations. If finalists were examined at a different time then the advantage of the final year viva arrangements would be lost. With respect to students' progression, programme regulations could prescribe any prerequisites for progression, but by implication a student may therefore have to wait 12 months before re-assessment. It was noted that the re-examination fee of £15 was a very low figure, particularly when multiple assessments were taken. It was felt this could be reviewed.

v)

The Vice-Chancellor accepted that the functioning of any scheme was limited by the annual calendar and in particular by the way Easter fell. Nevertheless it was a key principle of the scheme that assessment must follow teaching and learning as a closely as was practicable. A number of members questioned this principle. The University, however, must be forward looking in its approach to the needs of students especially given the substantial expansion of the sector and the broadening of access in recent years.

vi)

The General Assembly had proposed a model of two 12 week periods of teaching and learning following by 6 weeks of assessment. The advantages of this system would be to allow for the students' learning to develop fully over the year before examination; to reduce staff workload and permit more time for research. It was accepted that this model, like others, did not fit well within the annual structure, but certain members felt that it would enhance teaching and research. It was argued that the current prominence of examinations was impacting on teaching and learning and on the quality of coursework, particularly on final year projects. The current pressure on staff to return coursework by the end of Semester 1 and conduct examinations immediately after Christmas meant that it was difficult to conduct research over this period.

vii)

There was considerable discussion about the pressure on staff from examinations. It was felt that there were a number of ways in which this might be reduced. Attention should be paid to ensuring that examination length was appropriate to the credits associated with a module; there were alternative means of providing feedback to students, eg via problem sheets. The advantages were noted of including an end of semester assessment in long projects. It was accepted, however, that there may be a limited degree of flexibility regarding modules taught over two semesters provided that undue pressure was not imposed on students.

viii)

Representatives of the Students' Union advised Senate that the student body supported a structure which offered assessment as close to teaching and learning as was practicable. Although examinations after Christmas were not ideal, they were felt to be acceptable. It was felt that a return to end of year assessment would jeopardise the credit accumulation scheme. It was further argued that a 6 week assessment period in the summer would be disruptive to other elements of the student experience. Students valued gaining feedback on performance prior to Semester 2 and were not concerned about losing September re-sits. It was felt that under the 12, 12, 6 model, the burden on staff of marking coursework and examinations would shift to later in the year rather than easing it.

ix)

After considerable discussion many members of Senate expressed the view that although the views of General Assembly could not be easily disregarded given that they reflected a wide body of the academic staff, nor could those of the students and other staff who favoured retention of the existing arrangements for a further period or who supported the proposed model. The need for a cautious, non-confrontational approach was recognised. There had been little time to consider the revised proposals recently circulated. It was agreed to move the motion of the General Assembly, and that the status quo would remain in the event of the motion not being adopted to give time to develop modifications along the lines of the tabled paper.

x)

The motion from the General Assembly was put namely that `Senate should initiate the implementation of a system of Semesterisation encompassing two twelve week semesters (Semester One before Christmas and Semester Two between Christmas and Easter) and a six week examination period after Easter.'

The motion was defeated by 12 votes in favour; 21 against and 4 abstentions.

xi)

It was agreed that Teaching and Learning Committee would examine means of developing and improving the current system with features of the revised proposal with a view to re-presenting it in due course to Senate for implementation in the academic session 1998/99.

The need to communicate this decision to all members of staff possibly by convening General Assembly was agreed.

96/74 Librarian's Annual Report 1995/96

(SEN96-P47)

On the recommendation of the Information Services Committee the Annual Report for 1995/96 was received.

96/75 UK/EU Undergraduate Intakes 1997/98

It was RESOLVED on the recommendation of Resources and Planning Committee to approve UK/EU Undergraduate intakes for 1997/98.

96/76 Honorary Degrees

It was RESOLVED pursuant to Statute XVII and with the advice of the Honorary Degrees Committee to make a recommendation to Council regarding persons to be invited to receive Honorary Degrees at Degree Congregations in 1997. Members were reminded that these recommendations were confidential at this stage.

96/77 Teaching and Learning Committee

.1

To recommend to Council that the BSc in Electronic Engineering and Physics be discontinued after the 1997 entry.

.2

To recommend to Council amendments to programme titles as follows:

• BSc Mathematics and Computation to Mathematics and Computing from 1997 intake.
• BEng/MEng Environmental Systems Engineering to revert to Building Services Engineering with immediate effect.

(SEN96-P50)

.3

To approve the arrangements for periodic programme reviews.

96/78 Ordinances and Regulations Committee

i)

Ordinance VI: Appointment of Academic Staff

(SEN96-P51)

To recommend to Council amendments to simplify the operation of the Appointments Committee and to regularise the position of Senior Lecturers and Senior Research Fellows.

ii)

Regulations for Higher Degrees by Research

(SEN96-P52)

To approve amendments to clarify the minimum registration requirements for Academic and Equivalent Staff and Graduates of the University wishing to register for a higher degree of the University.

iii)

Regulation VII: Rules for the Conduct of Written Examinations

(SEN96-P53)

To approve amendments to the arrangements for examinations.

iv)

Ordinances XV and XXVIII: Study Leave and Leave of Absence

(SEN96-P54)

To recommend to Council amendments to Ordinances following Senate's decision at its meeting of June 1996.

v)

Regulation X

(SEN96-P55)

To note action taken by the Vice-Chancellor on behalf of Senate in approving an amendment to Regulation X concerning Membership of Faculty Boards.

96/79 Loughborough University Disability Statement

It was RESOLVED on the advice of the Student Services Committee to approve and recommend to Council the adoption of a University Disability Statement to be submitted to the Higher Education Funding Council for England in January 1997.

96/80 Information Services Committee

(SEN96-P57)

It was RESOLVED on the recommendation of Information Services Committee to recommend to Council the establishment of an Information Policy Implementation Sub-Committee with effect from 1 January 1997 and consequent amendments to the terms of reference of Information Services Committee.

96/81 Reports from Committees

1. (SEN96-P58) Ethical Advisory Committee 1995/96
2. (SEN96-P59) Information Services Committee 25 October 1996
3. (SEN96-P60) Resources and Planning Committee of 8 November 1996
4. (SEN96-P61) Teaching and Learning Committee of 7 November 1996
5. (SEN96-P62) Research Committee of 31 October 1996
6. (SEN96-P63) Student Services Committee of 13 November 1996
7. *Ordinances and Regulations Committee of 13 November 1996

*all major items considered by the Committee appeared as substantive items on the Senate agenda and no separate report was made.

96/82 Membership of Senate 1996/97

(SEN96-P64)

Membership of Senate for 1996/97 was noted.

96/83 Date of Next Meeting

Wednesday 5 March 1997 am.

Author - Nick McHard

November 1996

Copyright (c) Loughborough University. All rights reserved.