|
|
The Committee considered the report of the panel.
It was noted that the College had submitted documentation to
the University within the past few days to address the issues raised by the
panel in paragraph 30 of its report as conditions of approval. There had not yet been sufficient time to
consider and ‘sign off’ the documentation within the University.
Attention was drawn to the recommendations in paragraph 33
for action within the University. The
Committee expressed concern at the delay in securing SSES involvement in the
validation arrangements for the College Foundation Degrees in Sports Science,
in line with the ‘minimum expectations’ agreed by Senate at its March meeting,
and urged that appropriate discussions take place as soon as possible.
It was noted that the Working Group on Validation would be
considering the ongoing arrangements for the management of quality and
standards of validated programmes in further detail, including the financial
arrangements involved.
The Committee observed that the level of validation activity
in which the University was involved meant that economies of scale associated
with a bigger operation were not available.
It was RESOLVED to RECOMMEND to Senate that the proposed programme leading to a Foundation Degree (FdSc) in Exercise and Health be validated for an initial period of three years from 2004/05, subject to the conditions set out in the report being met and to SSES confirming its willingness to provide support for the validation of the programme on an ongoing basis.
Author: R A Bowyer
Date:
June 2004
Copyright
© Loughborough University. All rights reserved
|
|
Report of a Validation Panel on proposals from Loughborough
College for a Foundation Degree in Exercise and Health
Background
1.
Loughborough University over the
past three years has approved the validation of Foundation Degrees at
Loughborough College in the following subject areas (start dates in brackets):
and a
one-year top-up programme leading to an Honours degree:
·
Applied Sports Science (2003).
2.
With the University’s
encouragement, the FDs in Leisure, Tourism and Hospitality Management will be
taken to another awarding institution after the 2004 entry. The institution concerned is already
validating an Honours progression route for HND students of the College in this
field of studies.
3.
In the early part of the current
academic year, the University was approached about the validation of further of
Foundation Degrees that would share some elements of the existing FDs in Sports
Science but incorporate a range of new modules to expand the number of FD
pathways available. The University
agreed in principle to consider one additional pathway. The College opted to put forward an FD in
Exercise and Health.
4.
The College offers several other
Foundation Degrees in collaboration with other awarding institutions.
5.
The College has made a successful
bid to HEFCE this academic year for Additional Student Numbers for Foundation
Degree provision from 2004/05. Exercise
and Health was one of three areas of study included in the bid.
6.
In accordance with the
University’s standard validation procedures, a validation panel was established
to consider the College proposals, with the following membership:
Professor
Morag Bell, PVC(T) – Chair
Peter
Maunder, AD(T) SSH
Jan Tennant, Head of Academic Practice and Quality in the Professional
Development Unit
Robert Bowyer, Programme Development & Quality Team Manager
Trish Gorely was nominated by the HOD of SSES to
provide subject specialist advice to the panel.
7.
The panel received documentation which in the light of existing links
focused on programme specific rather than institutional issues.
8.
The panel visited the College on
13 May 2004 and held discussions about the proposals with members of the
College staff. Those involved in the
meetings were
Eric
Macintyre, Senior Manager, Higher Education
Helen
van Aardt, Section Leader
and members of the programme team
Steve Saffhill
Jonathan
Smith
Vicki
Barber
Shelly
Hillier
9.
The panel’s recommendations and observations on the proposals were
conveyed to Eric Macintyre, Helen van Aardt and Steve Saffhill at the end of
the visit.
Introduction to the proposals
10.
In introducing the proposals, Eric Macintyre emphasised the following
points:
·
The College had made a major strategic commitment to Foundation
Degrees, backed up be resources
·
All Loughborough University-validated FDs had recruited well
·
Progression opportunities were in place, with top-up degrees
·
External quality evaluations had been positive, including the
University’s own review of the top-up degree
·
The College had been awarded ASNs by HEFCE for FD provision, and the
places originally awarded for the Sports Science FD were to be directly funded
from 2004/05 rather than being indirectly funded through LU
·
Exercise and health was the biggest growth sector of the sport,
exercise and fitness industry, creating a demand for qualified staff that the
FD was designed to meet
·
Skillsactive UK, the new Sector Skills Council (succeeding SPRITO), had
identified a need for FDs in this area
·
The FD would aim to equip learners with the knowledge and skills needed
to work at managerial level in the exercise and fitness sector, in both public
and private organisations
·
Part-time and full-time study options would be available: employees
working in the sector were likely to be attracted by the part-time option. This was more in line with the FD market as
initially envisaged. It would be likely
to require the use of distance learning and other flexible learning modes.
·
The specific subject area was not in competition with anything the
University offered at the undergraduate level.
Summary of discussions
11.
It was established that the College wished to launch the programme in
time for a September 2004 start.
12.
The College believed it was well equipped, in terms of available staff
expertise and experience, to provide a Foundation Degree in Exercise and
Health. The panel was informed of a range of external consultations in which
staff had engaged during the development of the programme, for example with the
regional Primary Care Trust, the Sector Skills Council and private health
clubs, and how these had helped shape the design of the curriculum. It was anticipated that students would seek
to undertake secondary qualifications alongside the FD, such as the ILM
Management Diploma, and the curriculum had been designed to facilitate these.
13.
A revised programme specification and programme regulations were
tabled, correcting an imbalance in the modular weighting between Parts A and B
in the original proposal document.
14.
It was suggested to the College that the documentation as presented did
not make it easy to see a coherence between the modules, recognise themes around
which the curriculum was organised, or get a sense of progression from Part A
to Part B. The College felt this was
indeed a matter of presentation. The
modules could be seen to fall into three broad groupings: work-related
learning, business and management, and themes within exercise and health. The students would gain a broad foundation
of knowledge and understanding in Part A and Part B would focus on its
application in vocational contexts.
15.
Attention was drawn to the ‘assessment matrix’ being introduced by the
University Curriculum Sub-Committee.
The College programme team was invited to undertake a similar exercise,
as an aid to reflection on the coverage and variety of assessments, and on
practical issues such as possible congestion of assessments at particular times
of the year.
16.
It was queried how the modules which were in common with the full-time
FDs in Sports Science/Sports Science with Sports Management would be delivered
to students pursuing the programme in part-time mode. It was explained that the students from all the degrees would not
necessarily be taught together, though the learning outcomes and methods of
assessment for the modules would be the same.
17.
Another query was whether ‘block teaching’ arrangements would work for
part-time students. The College was
confident from its own experience, with programmes in the Business Management
and Leadership field for example, that it usually suited students who were
balancing study and work commitments and it was thought the model would transfer.
18.
The panel heard that some develop funding had been made available by
HEFCE with the ASNs, which would be used to develop materials in distance
learning format, with part-time students particularly in mind.
19.
The panel explored the statements in the proposal document concerning
AP(E)L. It was felt that some students
joining this programme might well have experiential learning that could be
accredited and the ethos of Foundation Degrees was that AP(E)L should be
facilitated. The panel noted the importance
of a robust process to ensure that students had fulfilled the learning outcomes
of any modules from which they were to be exempted on grounds of prior
learning, whether certificated or experiential.
20.
The role of employers was discussed.
The College was seeking to establish an Employer Learning Network,
through the good offices of the recently appointed Employer Liaison
Officer. There would be for each
programme a body of employers who could be consulted on curriculum development
issues, industrial placements and for QA processes such as programme
review. One of the ways in which local
employers had contributed to the design of the current programme was through
the integration within one of the modules of the competences required of a
public health specialist, developed by the local Primary Care Trust.
21.
The role of the Employer Liaison Officer would include visiting
employers offering work placements, briefing them on their responsibilities
towards the students, viewing their facilities, undertaking risk assessments,
setting up interviews for students, and visiting students once on placement.
The mentoring role implied by the latter might involve other staff. This was still evolving.
22.
It was not anticipated that employers would have a direct involvement
in the assessment of students, beyond submitting progress reports or ‘witness
statements’ to attest to students’ work-related activities and competences.
23.
The overall content of the curriculum was considered appropriately
balanced for a Foundation Degree in Exercise and Health. It was noted that a mapping of the modules
against relevant QAA Benchmark Statements had been carried out.
24.
Some minor modifications to details in module specifications were
suggested, including a correction of the coding in one case. It was noted that the project was expected
to be around 7500 words (and this should be stated in the module
specification). The oral presentation
would be made to the various supervisors as a group and marked by them.
25.
Some concern was expressed about the content of the modules in common
with the FDs in Sports Science and Sports Science with Management. The College staff were advised to ensure
that the modules met the needs of students of Exercise and Health as well as
those focusing on sports performance, by careful management of the topics they
covered, so that students could relate the modules to the rest of whichever
programme they were following and the modules did not detract from the
coherence of their programme.
26.
The Panel asked how staff had been selected to contribute to the
programme and was informed that both academic qualifications and vocational
experience had been taken into account.
Wherever possible staff had been chosen who were qualified to higher
degree level, with vocational experience as well, though vocational experience
had been the main criterion in some more applied areas. There would be some contributions from staff
in other parts of the College (eg Business/Management). Professional development opportunities were
available in the College and staff were encouraged to avail themselves of
training and updating as required.
27.
It was noted that the position of course leader would be taken by a new
member of staff appointed within the past few days. The individual concerned had a strong academic background and
good vocational experience.
28.
The Panel observed that the provision of an Honours progression route
for students completing the FD had still to be discussed. It was the hope of the College that a
variant of the Applied Sports Science top-up could be negotiated that would be
tailored to meet the needs of FD students who had followed the Exercise and
Health pathway.
Recommendations
29.
It is recommended that the proposed programme leading to a Foundation
Degree (FdSc) in Exercise and Health be validated for an initial period of
three years from 2004/05, subject to the following conditions (para 30) and
recommendations (para 31).
30.
The conditions should be met to the satisfaction of the PVC(T) as Chair
of the Panel and of the Learning and Teaching Committee before students are
enrolled on the programme*. These are:
(1)
The programme to be re-presented in such a way that the coherence of
the modules and the sense of progression from Part A to Part B can be seen more
clearly. It requires sections of the
programme specification to be modified.
It should be done primarily for the benefit of students and carried over
into the Student/Programme Handbook.
(2)
An assessment matrix to be produced, and the programme team to consider
whether a broader range of assessment methods could be deployed; also to ensure
broad comparability between the assessment requirements of different modules in
terms of student effort.
(3)
Further consideration to be given to the needs of Exercise and Health
FD students in respect to the modules shared with Sports Science/Sports Science
with Sports Management and to ensure that the Exercise and Health dimension is
more explicit both in the module specifications and in their delivery.
(4)
The details of other module specifications to be tidied up.
(5)
The programme regulations to be amended to accord with University
requirements in respect of reassessment.
(6)
The College to provide an assurance that staff involved in the delivery
of the programme who have vocational experience but do not meet normal
expectations in respect of academic qualifications will participate in
appropriate professional development activities. The College in particular to ensure that they are given appropriate
guidance and support in relation to the student assessment process.
(7) The statements in the proposal document concerning student progression to be deleted and not appear in any other documentation relating to the programme. Arrangements have still to be negotiated and it is important that students are not misled.
* The report of the Panel
will be presented to the Learning and Teaching Committee on 3 June 2004. The College is therefore requested as far as
possible to submit the necessary documentation to meet the above conditions
before this date.
31.
The Panel has also made the following recommendations to the College,
which should be acted upon as the validation process goes forward.
(1)
The College should ensure that its AP(E)L procedures are fully
documented and communicated to the University.
The University will expect individual AP(E)L cases to be submitted to
the AD(T) for ratification.
(2) The College should ensure that any new or revised modules
involving full or partial distance learning are submitted to the University for
approval through the normal channels.
(3)
Any changes in the staffing of the programme should be notified to the
University in advance of implementation, accompanied by CVs for any new staff.
(4)
The College should clarify the role and responsibilities of the
Employer Liaison Officer in relation to the work-based elements of the
programme and the arrangements for student mentoring in particular. It is proposed that progress in this regard
be monitored by the AD(T) at the time
of the 2005 Annual Programme Review.
32.
In addition, the College has been requested to bring forward proposals
for the progression of students from the Foundation Degree to an Honours
Degree, before the end of April 2005, with a view to this issue being resolved
by the end of 2004/05.
33.
The following recommendations are for action within the University:
(1)
It is recommended that responsibility for academic oversight of the
programme including programme review be assigned once validation has been
confirmed to the Board of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities.
(2) It is also recommended, in line with the guidance recently
approved by Senate on departmental involvement in collaborative activity, that
the School of Sport and Exercise Sciences be requested to provide support to
the College programme team to help assure the quality of the programme and the
standard of the award. The Panel is
aware that negotiations have still to be entered into with SSES regarding
support for the existing FDs in Sports Science and Sports Science with Sports
Management, and recommends that all three programmes be discussed at the same
time.