Learning and Teaching Committee

Curriculum Sub-Committee

Subject: Use of 15-credit modules in undergraduate programmes

Origin: Unconfirmed Minutes of Learning and Teaching Committee on 3 June 2004 and Senate on 23 June 2004

Learning and Teaching Committee: 3 June 2004

.1 Report from Programme Development & Quality Team

The Committee considered a report from the PDQ Team on discussions at its meeting on 24 May 2004 on the use of 15-credit modules in undergraduate programmes. The PDQ Team had received a report of discussions at Curriculum Sub-Committee on proposals from Electronic and Electrical Engineering (EL) for the introduction of a new BEng programme in Systems Engineering which involved the use of 15-credit modules. It had also received a communication from the HOD concerning a new undergraduate programme structure including 15-credit modules, which the department wished to introduce across existing programmes, and the HOD had suggested that the department be permitted to run the 15-credit modules in 2004/05 as a pilot study to assess their impact.

LTC was invited in the light of the PDQ Team’s report and feedback from the AD(T)s on subsequent consultations in their faculties to make recommendations to Senate.

The Committee noted the arguments advanced by EL in support of its case for using 15-credit modules, as set out in the agenda paper and elaborated verbally by Dr Gregory. The Committee also noted the point made by the PDQ Team that to allow EL to proceed would undermine one of the main principles of the modular structure, that it should facilitate inter-departmental and inter-faculty co-operation, even if in practice only a very small number of students would be affected.

It was reported that the Engineering Directorate fully supported EL in seeking approval for the use of 15-credit modules. The majority of Science Faculty Teaching Co-ordinators were reported to be neutral on the matter, so long as the use of 15-credit modules did not impact on their joint programmes; and a minority were opposed to the proposal. A majority in SSH were opposed to it: there was concern not only about creating a precedent for moving away from the current University-wide structure based on the 10-credit module and about the potential effects on the ability of departments to offer joint programmes, but also about the constraints it would place on students’ ability to select optional modules from outside their own department.

It was noted that the proponents of the case for 15-credit modules were not proposing to exclude the use of 10- or 20-credit modules, and departments offering joint programmes already had to negotiate over details of programme structure.

It was noted that the EL proposals also took the volume of credits from year-long modules over the agreed ceiling of 80 per year: the Committee was assured that at least 20% of the assessment of each module was nevertheless undertaken in Semester 1.

There followed a full and frank discussion.

The Committee was reminded that under the previous agenda item the Committee to Review the Structure of the Academic Year had advocated a departmental review of programmes across the University, which in part would focus on the balance of modules of different credit values. EL had already undertaken a review of its programme structure, very much along the lines now envisaged, before coming forward with its proposals. Although these proposals went outside the current modular framework, there was a strong possibility that before the end of 2004/05, other departments, having reviewed their own programmes, would also be looking for additional flexibility in the modular framework. Issues such as the introduction of 15-credit modules and the relaxation of the 80-credit ceiling on year-long modules would then have to be resolved, but decisions could be taken at that point with the benefit of considered views from all departments. It was therefore suggested that at this juncture EL should be allowed to implement its proposals, strictly without prejudice to any future decisions on the matters in question, while awaiting the outcome of the departmental programme review exercise.

It was also suggested that departments should be specifically asked as part of the process of reviewing their programmes to consider whether they would favour the introduction of 15-credit modules.

It was RESOLVED to RECOMMEND that the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering be permitted to introduce its proposed new programme structure, using 15-credit modules in Part B of its existing undergraduate programmes and in the new BEng programme in Systems Engineering, while awaiting the outcome of the departmental programme review exercise recommended by the Committee to Review the Structure of the Academic Year. This should not be regarded as a precedent for the use of 15-credit modules in other undergraduate programmes and if, following the programme review exercise, the University decided not to relax the current rules against the use of 15-credit modules, the department would be required to revert to a 10-credit-based modular structure.

.2 BEng/BEng(DIS)/BEng(DPD) Systems Engineering – New Programme Proposals

It was RESOLVED to RECOMMEND the proposals to Senate, having noted that the Curriculum Sub-Committee had recommended approval in principle and having recommended in the course of the foregoing discussion that the use of 15-credit modules in 2004/05 be permitted in this instance.

Senate: 23 June 2004

Use of 15-credit modules in undergraduate programmes

Senate considered recommendations from Learning and Teaching Committee that the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering be permitted to introduce its proposed new programme structure, using 15-credit modules in Part B of its existing undergraduate programmes and in the new BEng Systems Engineering programme, while awaiting the outcome of the departmental review exercise recommended by the Committee to Review the Structure of the Academic Year. The concern was voiced that should the introduction of 15-credit modules later be permitted across the University this could lead to loss of flexibility and further complicated regulation structures. Though there might be short-term benefits for some departments, problems could proliferate for others. There would be particular effects on joint degrees, when special arrangements might need to be made. It was commented, however, that the proposal from the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering had been well considered and should be welcomed as a pilot: there would be nothing to be lost from this and it could prove to be the way forward for other departments. It was RESOLVED to approve the recommendations of Learning and Teaching Committee. It was requested that a report on the pilot study be received by Senate as a substantive item at its meeting in June 2005.

Author – Robert Bowyer/ Jennie Elliott

Date – October 2004