University of Glasgow
Academic Standards Committee
Minute of Meeting held on Friday 18 November 2011 at 9:30 AM in Room 227, 8 The Square
Professor Graham Caie, Dr Mike Carroll, Professor Neil Evans, Professor Thomas Guthrie, Mr James Harrison, Mr Matthew Hastings, Professor Bob Hill, Professor Carole Hough, Ms Helen McAvoy (vice Mr George Tait), Dr Kevin O'Dell, Dr Allison Orr, Dr Bill Stewart, Professor David Watt (Convener).
In Attendance:Ms Helen Butcher, Ms Eleanor Waugh.
Apologies:Dr Jack Aitken, Professor Vince Bissell, Dr Barbara Burns, Professor Frank Coton, Professor Philip Cotton, Professor Alice Jenkins, Dr Vassiliki Kolocotroni, Dr Martin Macauley, Ms Anna Phelan, Dr Karen Renaud.
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a correct record subject to the correction of the degree title LLM International Property and Digital Economy listed in minute ASC/2011/14 to LLM Intellectual Property and Digital Economy. The clerk also undertook to check the online Calendar entry to ensure that the correct title was being used in the published degree regulation.
Action: Clerk
It was noted that the revised text for regulations on Incomplete Assessment and Good Cause for 2012-13 would be submitted to a future meeting of ASC during 2011-12.
The Convener reported that Dr Vassiliki Kolocotroni had replaced Ms Elizabeth Hancock as academic representative from the College of Arts on the Committee.
Members were advised that the College Annual Monitoring Summary (CAMS) for 2010-11 from Arts had been submitted to the previous day. It was agreed that ideally ASC should review the CAMS from all four Colleges at the same meeting. Members were advised that the timetable for this was to be discussed at the Quality Officers' Forum meeting next week and it was agreed that a clear timetable should be set, and that a shortening of previous timescales was desirable given that the composite annual monitoring report had previously not been submitted to ASC until the May meeting of the following session. ASC recommended that Colleges should be requested to submit their CAMS in time for the next meeting, in February 2012.
ASC considered whether CAMS could be submitted to ASC's November meeting in future sessions, but it was pointed out that this would be very difficult for PGT programmes.
[Convener's note: In subsequent discussion between the Conveners of EdPSC and ASC, it was agreed that CAMS should be submitted to the February meeting in future sessions. This timing would still enable responses to be requested in time for the June meeting. Colleges should be encouraged to raise urgent matters directly with the appropriate services, without waiting for ASC to do so.]
It was reported that the finalised chapter on External Examining had recently been published in the QAA's new Quality Code for Higher Education . The Senate Office would review this publication and advise ASC of any changes from the draft chapter which had been available for consultation last session.
Action: Senate Office
Members were advised that there had been amendment to two of the main issues of concern noted by ASC in May 2011 which related to restrictions on appointing individuals as external examiners who had i) been involved in collaborative research with a member of staff of the University or ii) been involved with approval of the programme. The second restriction relating to involvement in programme approval had been removed completely from the final version, and the first had been significantly modified to exclude only significant collaborative research, as follows:
"anyone significantly involved in recent or current substantive collaborative research activities with a member of staff closely involved in the delivery, management or assessment of the programme(s) or modules in question" .
The SRC representative, Mr Harrison, asked whether ASC would consider including student representatives on its PAG groups to assist current initiatives to develop cross curricular engagement between students and staff. While members were open to student participation in the work of the Committee, there was some doubt over whether student participation in the PAG process would enhance the engagement of students in curriculum development. It was noted that the PAG activity was primarily an auditing process reviewing the scrutiny work undertaken and College level, and also that student consultation was already built into the programme approval process with the requirement that all proposals were submitted to the most relevant student cohort for consultation. Reports of the student consultation were then provided to the College Board of Studies as part of the proposal from the School.
The Convener agreed to discuss Mr Harrison's proposal in more detail with PAG Conveners out of committee.
Action: Convener
ASC/2011/21.1.1 College of Arts
The PAG Convener, Professor Hill, reported that the Group had considered one proposal for a new programme:
MSc Translation Studies: Translation & Professional Practice
While it had not been made a condition, the Group had requested that the College reviewed the proposed title of the programme as it was considered to be rather long. A number of further amendments were required, and the proposal was therefore recommended to ASC, subject to these being made. A follow up report would be made to ASC following completion of these actions.
ASC/2011/21.1.2 College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences
The PAG Convener, Professor Guthrie, reported that the Group had considered the following new programme proposals:
MRes Infection & Immunobiology
MSc Infection & Immunobiology
A number of further amendments were required, and the proposals were therefore recommended to ASC, subject to these being made. A follow up report would be made to ASC following completion of these actions.
ASC/2011/21.1.3 College of Social Sciences
Dr Stewart spoke to the PAG report which detailed the four new programme proposals considered by the Group.
The PAG had recommended the following new programme for approval subject to the satisfactory outcome of actions identified in the report.
MEd Childhood Practice
The PAG also received three proposals for programmes which would contribute to a new 'environmental suite' of degrees which sought to establish the School of Interdisciplinary Studies as a market leader in providing innovative environmental education at postgraduate level. However the PAG was not able to recommend approval at this stage for:
MLitt Environment, Culture and Communication
MSc Environmental Education and Communication
MSc Environmental Science, Technology and Society
Issues identified in the draft programme specifications would be taken up with the College and an update provided to ASC on whether approval could be recommended.
ASC received a report from the College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences confirming its approval of the proposed Intercalated Masters degree by Research on the BVMS degree. The revised programme specification for the BVMS was also provided.
ASC approved the introduction of the Intercalated Master degree by Research on the BVMS, commencing session 2012-13.
ASC received an update on outstanding business from the fast-track PAG report submitted to the Committee in October. Professor Hill, the PAG convener confirmed that all requested actions had been taken forward by the programme proposers and therefore approval was recommended for the change to the MA Hons language programmes taught by the School of Modern Languages & Cultures. The changes had been required to accurately reflect the year abroad in the programme's credit weighting. It was noted that there was no material change to the content or delivery of the programmes.
ASC therefore approved the following major change:
MA Honours language programmes
Professor Guthrie introduced the report and highlighted the various aspects of the Sub-Committee's discussions about the operation of the Code of Assessment on the five year professional programmes (MBChB, BDS, BVMS). These discussions had taken place with Professors Anderson and Bissell present at the meeting, representing Veterinary Medicine and Dentistry respectively. ASC considered the following issues:
Credit Rating
ASC agreed that the issue of credit rating should be revisited by the relevant Schools within the College of MVLS with a view to introducing credit rating on the BVMS, BDS and MBChB degree programmes. It was suggested that the SCQF ratio of credits to learning hours (1:10) should be used, as any alternative system might be misleading. Members agreed that the credit ratings should be constructive and reflect the integrated nature of the curricula of these degrees. Furthermore, it was agreed that the higher student workload should be reflected in the degrees' credit rating, and accordingly any regulations which imposed credit limits should be reviewed in terms of their application to these programmes.
Action: Heads of Schools of Medicine, and Veterinary Medicine
ASC agreed that proposals for credit rating the BVMS, BDS and MBChB degrees from the Schools of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine should be considered by ARSC as a special case and recommended to ASC, rather than being subject to normal programme approval procedures.
ASC observed that the introduction of credit rating would resolve a number of current difficulties these programmes had in applying the elements of the Code of Assessment relating to the award of credit e.g. 'Credit Withheld', 'Credit Refused', 'Minimum Requirements for the Award of Credit' were not meaningful if courses were not credit rated.
Selective reassessment of sub components
ASC agreed that in the case of the five year professional programmes where examinations were split into parts, selective reassessment of the different exam parts by students was not satisfactory as Intended Learning Outcomes could be missed if not all elements of assessment were reassessed. The current degree regulations made clear that all reassessments had to be completed, and ASC agreed that it was reasonable to treat professional examinations as single components and not treat specific sections as sub-components.
Additional Requirements
ASC noted that on the five year professional programmes there were some components of assessment (additional requirements) that were marked as satisfactory/unsatisfactory, and were not reported to Registry. It was agreed that in terms of the Code of Assessment these should be treated as additional requirements for the award of credit.
Combining Schedules A and B in course assessments
It was noted that under the integrated structure of the five year professional degrees, different elements of assessment were marked under Schedule A and Schedule B, but due to the Code of Assessment's requirement that individual courses should be assessed under one Schedule, it was not possible to produce one overall course result where both Schedules had been used. In such cases student transcripts only showed the Schedule A assessment grade and the Schedule B performance was counted as an additional requirement for the award of credit. ARSC had proposed that further work was required to find a way of combining the Schedules on courses whilst ensuring that compensation between knowledge-based and competence-based assessment was not permitted. ASC agreed that further discussion was required with the aim of improving transparency and giving an accurate record of performance on students' transcripts. Consideration of the Gradebook functionality on MyCampus was also suggested as a possible mechanism for improving assessment information. It was agreed that ARSC would take forward further discussion in this area.
Action: Clerk of ARSC
Percentage Scores
ASC confirmed ARSC's view that it was acceptable for individual assessment results which were produced as percentage scores to be fed back to students in this format.
Grade Point Averages
It was noted that the Code of Assessment currently stated that the requirements for the award of the professional degrees are expressed as grade point averages/average aggregation scores [16.38 b)]. As this was not the case, ARSC would amend the wording of the Code accordingly.
Action: Clerk of ARSC
Degree Regulations
ASC agreed that the degree regulations for the BVMS, BDS and MBChB all required clarification on the criteria for the award of Honours and Commendation to ensure that transparent criteria were applied for these awards. Ideally, harmonisation of the criteria would be desirable.
It was noted that the MBChB regulations included an exemption from the Code's provisions on Incomplete Assessment and Good Cause in relation to final award, as 100% submission of assessments was required. Discussions at ARSC had indicated that the BDS and BVMS programme teams also wished to adopt the same exemption to reflect practice on their degrees.
The following additional items were considered from the ARSC report.
ASC approved the proposal from ARSC to amend regulations on Incomplete Assessment and Good Cause to reflect current practice and therefore allow Honours students with less than 75% but more than 30% of assessment to retake senior honours year without having to repeat junior honours - currently the regulation stated that students in this position would count as 'not having been presented for honours assessment' which could be interpreted to include Junior and Senior Honours and therefore require both Honours years to be repeated even if Junior Honours assessments were fully completed. Revised regulations would be drawn up by ARSC and reported back to ASC.
Action: Clerk of ARSC
ASC was also invited to note that ARSC had responded to further comments from the Deans of Graduate Schools (DoGS) group on the proposed new combined regulations for PGT/MRes programmes, and that the DoGS would now report to RPSC.
It was also noted that ARSC was gathering further information in relation to the operation of discretion in the award of honours classifications and the award of merit and distinction on PGT programmes, and would report to ASC in due course following consultation with Schools and Colleges.
Finally, ASC was advised that ARSC was consulting with Colleges on proposed amendments to the principles applying to assessment of visiting students and with a view to bringing proposals to ASC later in the session.
ASC received and noted a report detailing the PSR reports due for submission during 2011-12. These included full reports of reviews taking place this session, plus various follow up reports. Two ASC reviewers had been allocated to each report.
ASC/2011/23.2.1 Economics
ASC received an update on progress with the outstanding recommendation associated with the review of Economics. Recommendation 11 related to the need for a review of PGT programme structures in Economics to eliminate possible duplication of content and allow students full flexibility of choice. Members were satisfied that the Subject Area was addressing this through an ongoing process of rationalisation of its postgraduate provision across the School of Social & Political Sciences.
ASC/2011/23.2.2 History of Art
An update on responses to recommendations 13 and 15 from the review of History of Art was received and noted. Members were satisfied with progress for recommendation 13 concerning student handbooks. For recommendation 15 which sought development of PDP and Employability, it was noted that the Careers Service had been scheduled to meet the School in September to discuss services it could offer. It was agreed that some feedback on how this meeting had contributed to History of Art's progress with this recommendation should be sought.
It was also noted that the outstanding action regarding a review of auction-house websites would be pursued.
Action: Senate Office
ASC/2011/23.2.3 Urban Studies
ASC received an update on further progress with the two outstanding recommendations from the Urban Studies Review. The Committee was satisfied with progress for Recommendation 9 as it was evident that the Subject was seeking out overseas study opportunities for its students. Recommendation 1 sought development of a subject specific learning and teaching strategy, and while the response relating Undergraduate provision was accepted, it was agreed that an update on the Head of Subject's forthcoming development of a strategy for PGT should be requested for November 2012.
Action: Senate Office
ASC received an update on further actions which had been taken in relation to issues raised in the Annual Monitoring Report for 2009-10. This included a response from IT Services and also a response from AV-Services on issues relating to audio visual equipment which had initially been referred to Estates & Buildings.
Members were advised that further updates would be provided on the following items where matters were being taken forward:
- RIO's auditing of courses taken by international students for no credit (following clarification of issues raised by the College of Arts).
- EFL/Student Learning Service guidance on scientific report writing for overseas students.
- Feedback from Glasgow International College on issues raised regarding its student intakes at Glasgow.
ASC received data on degree classification results for 2010-11 showing the percentage of first class awards and the percentage of good honours degree awards (first and upper second class awards). The data had been provided by the Planning Office and was based on the data in the HESA return. As requested previously by ASC, the HESA subject codes had been grouped into larger subject areas to allow percentages to be derived from larger student cohorts. The paper therefore provided a breakdown of data by individual HESA codes and also codes combined by broad subject areas. Joint Honours degrees were grouped by degree award: BSc; MA; MA (SocSci).
ASC noted that overall, 16% of honours degrees awarded in 2010-11 were first class awards which was consistent with previous years, and therefore there was no indication of degree class inflation. However, a wide range in the percentage of firsts was noted between subject areas with some areas producing no firsts, while the highest figure was 44% firsts.
It was noted that some of the data included non honours degrees and this had therefore brought down the percentage scores in some subject areas. These would be removed and the revised figures circulated to members. The corrected data would also be sent to Deans of Learning & Teaching for consideration.
It was agreed to request similar data for PGT degrees to show the percentage of merit and distinctions awarded in each cohort. This would be requested from the Planning Office and submitted to the next meeting of ASC.
Action: Clerk
The Committee received reports from the Scottish Agricultural College (SAC) on the re/validation of two programmes.
The report of the review of the proposed BSc/BSc (Hons) Garden Design by the Horticulture Subject Group at SAC in May/June 2011 revealed that the panel had concluded that the proposal for validation should be revised according to their recommendations and brought forward for validation in February/March 2012. ASC approved the proposal that BSc/BSc (Hons) Garden Design be submitted for validation in 2012 subject to the revision of the proposed programme.
ASC approved in-principle the re-validation of the BSc/BSc (Hons) Horticulture noting that the re-validation was subject to a certain conditions and recommendations.
ASC received the validation report for the above new degree which would be delivered jointly by GSA and the School of Engineering. The proposal had been validated by GSA's Academic Council in March 2011, and ratification from the School of Engineering had been confirmed in November 2011.
ASC approved the Joint MSc in Product Design Engineering for commencement in September 2012, subject to the recommendations set by the School of Engineering:
- That the previous course codes be replaced with new ones;
- That student numbers are sufficient for the course to be viable;
- That the programme be available as a design conversion course for graduates of the BSc in Mechanical Engineering and Mechanical Design Engineering students, but not for graduates of the BSc PDE.
ASC noted the above report which provided a summary of the discussions of the Joint Academic Management Board (JAMB) at its meeting on 5 July 2011.
Members agreed to the proposal that, in line with other Joint Boards, ASC should receive an annual report from JAMB which would be submitted to its October meeting. It was confirmed that should any urgent issue arise at the December meeting of JAMB, it could be referred to ASC in February as a single item report.
Members were provided with the web link for the above new guide from the QAA which was aimed primarily at university staff at an early career stage. The guide sought to clarify the role of teaching and administrative staff in ensuring that the assessment process was effective and secure, see:
www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/UnderstandingAssessment.pdf.
There were no items of reserved business.
The next meeting of the Academic Standards Committee will be held on Friday 17 February 2012 at 9.30am in the Melville Room.
Created by: Ms Helen Butcher