University of Glasgow
Academic Standards Committee
Minute of Meeting held on Friday 4 October 2013 at 10:00 AM in the Melville Room
Professor John Briggs, Mr Oli Coombs, Professor Christine Edwards, Professor Thomas Guthrie (Convener), Mr Matthew Hastings, Ms Helen McAvoy (vice Mr George Tait), Dr Martin Macauley, Dr Anna Morgan-Thomas, Dr Penny Morris, Dr Anna O'Neill, Dr Allison Orr, Dr Karen Renaud, Dr Helen Stoddart.
In Attendance:Ms Helen Butcher, Dr David Forrest (for item ASC/2013/4), Mr Gavin Lee (for item ASC/2013/5).
Apologies:Dr Jack Aitken, Mr Michael Arthur, Dr Kenny Brophy, Professor Frank Coton, Professor Neil Evans, Professor Bob Hill, Professor Alice Jenkins, Dr Kevin O'Dell, Ms Anne Phelan, Dr Joanne Ramsey.
The minutes of the previous meeting were approved as a correct record subject to the following correction: page 6 delete MSc Real Estate from list of programmes which had not been approved. The Clerk also agreed to check that proposals for PgCert Real Estate and Pg Cert Spatial Planning had been correctly included under this section or whether they should have been recorded as being recommended "subject to satisfactory outcome of actions identified in the PAG report".
Clerk's Note:
The PAG which considered the PgCerts Real Estate and Spatial Planning had not initially recommended approval and therefore minute ASC/2012/65.1.3 had been correct in listing these proposals as not approved as that had been the case at that point in time.
It was noted that various actions had been taken to finalise recommendations in the reports of the reviews of Celtic and Gaelic, and the School of Engineering which had been considered at the previous meeting. These reports had therefore been approved under summer powers.
ASC also noted that guidelines for PSR panel members and administrators had been revised for 2013-14 in line with recommendations from ASC, and that draft reports would be considered by an independent reviewer prior to submission to ASC and distribution to the School or Subject.
ASC received a report on progress with a number of recommendations arising from the review of Life Sciences which had been held in October 2011. Members welcomed the good progress that had been made on the development of the workload model (recommendation 2) and information packs for incoming PGT students (recommendation 9). For recommendations 3 and 11 it was noted that work on the review of ILOs and Programme Specifications across the School was yet to gather pace and had been hindered by resource constraints. While ASC understood the situation, it was agreed that the School should be requested to provide a short explanation of the planned process for taking forward these recommendations.
Action: Senate Office
It was noted that ARSC would will take forward, at its forthcoming meetings, actions to review i) the internal translation of year abroad grades and ii) practice/guidance for marking Honours assessments for ordinary degree awards. The matter of standard penalties for late submission of coursework for part-time students would also be reviewed.
ASC was advised that action would be taken to access HESA statistics to obtain comparative subject data on degree classifications across the UK and these would be reported back to ASC in due course.
Dr Forrest spoke to the proposal to introduce a taught Masters degree in Land & Hydrographic Survey which would include a six month work placement in place of the MSc project. ASC heard that the degree was based on an existing programme in Geospatial and Mapping Sciences where the majority of graduates gained employment in industry. The new structure allowed industrial experience to be embedded in the degree and would build on the strong links the School already had with industry in running shorter industrial placements on the honours degree. The new practical element in the Masters award would therefore allow students to focus on employment after graduation, and would also allow application for accreditation by the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) which required a practical component to the programme.
There was discussion on various aspects of the proposal including the assessment of the work placement, the process for students applying for placements with agreed industrial partners, contingencies for students who could not complete the placement or had incomplete assessment of the placement, RICS accreditation requirements in terms of work experience. In conclusion, ASC agreed in-principle to the proposed structure of the MSc Land & Hydrographic Survey with the requirement that the following issues were addressed when the full proposal was submitted to the Programme Approval Group:
- detailed information on the assessment of the work placement, demonstrating how the reflective report and the extended essay provided an equivalence in level, volume and structure to the traditional 60 credit masters dissertation;
- training for industrial partners on the placement report to ensure appropriate support to students and input to the assessment;
- clarification on the framework of agreements with industrial partners including flexibility for revised arrangements if placements are disrupted due to unforeseen circumstances;
- information to students on the RICS accreditation process and graduation timings which would be non-standard.
Mr Lee from the Senate Office introduced the paper containing a full draft of the University's Reflective Analysis (RA) and the three accompanying Case Studies which were currently under preparation as the key documents to be submitted to the QAA in advance of the Enhancement-led Institutional Review of the University which would be taking place in February and March 2014.
Members were invited to review these documents and provide commentary to the Senate Office. ASC was advised that the RA had been drawn up in the Senate Office following wide consultation with staff and students across the University and the current draft had also been reviewed by a set of experienced student and external reviewers. Following this process the document would undergo significant editing to reduce the narrative (removing excessive operational detail) and to achieve a consistent tone and clarity of key messages.
Comment was invited from ASC with particular focus on section 4 - Academic Standards. Members identified a number of editorial points. Comment was also made on various paragraphs/sections as follows:
4.3 - the development of the Quality Enhancement Officers role within the challenges of the University re-structuring, with the current refinement of the annual monitoring documentation which had resulted in better engagement in the annual monitoring process.
Noting enhancements to the programme approval process agreed by ASC as referred in 4.4.3 it was agreed that an update on the development of guidance to aid construction of ILOs for undergraduate and postgraduate provision would be useful.
Action: Clerk of ASC
4.5.9 and 4.15.5 would benefit from provision of evidence to support the points being made, for example in 4.5.9 an articulation of the areas identified to bring greater benefit to the annual monitoring process.
4.15.6 could also refer to the online system for PGR student administration in Computing Science.
Following approval in-principle of a revised programme for teacher education - the five year MEduc with Teaching Qualification, the School of Education had sought an amendment to the proposed exit award at year 4. ASC was advised that there had been some reaction from some sections of the teaching profession which considered the Masters Diploma award to be regressive in that a Diploma qualification echoed the previous qualification structure prior to the era before teaching had become a graduate profession. It was therefore proposed that students who qualified for the Diploma at the end of year 4 should be given the option of taking an MA (hons) degree award instead. This would however be on the basis that having accepted the four year degree award they would not be eligible to progress to the fifth year to qualify for the Master of Education degree.
ASC agreed to this proposal and therefore recommended to EdPSC that students who successfully complete Year 4 of the programme select to accept one of the two awards:
Masters Diploma in Education with Teaching Qualification
Or
MA Honours in Education with Teaching Qualification
ASC also highlighted the necessity of ensuring that absolute clarity was given to students about the consequences of accepting the MA award.
Following consideration of the annual report on External Examiners reports for 2011-12 at its last meeting, ASC received an overview of the responses Schools had made to External Examiner comments on matters relating to marking inconsistencies.
In reviewing School responses, ASC considered these to be appropriate and constructive. In two cases (MLitt European Studies, Cultures, Societies and Languages, and BSc Neuroscience) there was concern that the grading process being used was not consistent with the Code of Assessment and it was therefore agreed that this would be flagged to these areas with guidance on the need to ensure that course grading was on the basis of primary grades and secondary bands. Good practice in internal moderation was noted in the response from the BAcc Financial Accounting, though it was agreed that the comment on the exam board debate on where to draw the boundaries for first class, 2:1 and 2:2 classifications required clarification to ensure that correct use was being made of the zones of discretion and the University guidance on discretion.
Action: Clerk of ASC
The Committee received a summary of responses received to date on actions arising from CAMS which required the attention of the University, rather than College-level response.
In noting the report, ASC was aware that many of the accommodation issues highlighted would be fed into the work of the University's Teaching Infrastructure Group which was developing a strategy for investment in teaching space and that as it was necessary to prioritise refurbishment and campus development, much of the required work would take place on a gradual basis and after the commencement of the University's major campus development plans in 2015. The Clerk of Senate and Vice Principal confirmed that the University Management Group was acutely aware of the considerable pressures currently being placed on accommodation to support teaching and learning, and consideration was currently being given to the development of a short-term (10 year lifespan) building to provide temporary relief. It was also noted that with the increased student numbers this year, there was increased pressure on examination accommodation which would make the timetabling process more challenging.
The feedback on re-equipping central teaching space facilities was noted, and it was suggested that the maintenance and refurbishment plan, while responding to identified requirements, should also include detail of prioritising upgrading activity.
In terms of the impact of MyCampus where many CAMS had raised concerns and referred to the need for additional administrative resource at local level to relieve workloads; there was concern that the response, which reported on the appointment of a Process Improvement Manager, did not fully address the issue which had identified the need for more staffing resources at local level.
ASC received a summary of issues arising from the first examination diet where the University's Guidelines on Discretion had been implemented. ASC agreed that further clarification was required for some aspects of the guidance in order to achieve further consistency in the application of discretion across the University. It was also acknowledged that a balance had to be struck in providing guidance that was clear without being totally prescriptive given that Examination Boards were operating discretion when considering cases where performance fell within the agreed zones of discretion.
It was agreed that ARSC should be asked to review the following issues, and that in doing so could also refer to practice in other universities, in order to propose revisions to enhance the current Guidelines.
Preponderance
To consider introducing a single definition of preponderance for the University deciding whether preponderance should mean 'at least 50%' or 'more than 50% of grades'.
Grade Profile
To consider adding guidance on how grade profile can be taken into account when candidates in the zone of discretion have a preponderance of grades in the upper band. It would be useful if methodologies for taking account of grade profile could be proposed.
Year Weightings
To consider whether the year weightings of grades should be taken into account in considering the preponderance of grades. While the guidance was currently silent on this issue, arguments had been put forward both for and against taking these into account. In considering its recommendations on this matter, ARSC should take account of the detailed comments submitted from the School of Engineering.
Role of the External Examiner
To consider providing further guidance on how the External Examiner can provide input to the application of discretion.
Action: ARSC
ASC agreed that in the case of PGT programmes, the dissertation should not be included in considering preponderance as the GPA determining whether the candidate fell within the zone of discretion did not include the dissertation grade, and the awards of merit and distinction were based on the absolute requirement that the dissertation mark must be in the higher band. This would be clarified in the guidelines.
Action: Senate Office
ASC/2013/10.1.1 2012-13: Summary of Recommendations
ASC noted the summary of recommendations which had been prepared following a review of the PSR reports for 2012-13. A number of themes were identified and 21 recommendations were identified as having potential for wider application across the University. In noting the recommendations relating to support for GTAs it was noted that while these had led to some helpful actions, much of this was reliant on adequate resources from the relevant College.
ASC noted that a number of recommendations related to assessment and it was agreed to reinforce the point that assessment and feedback should remain a key initiative for the University particularly in terms of developing students' use and understanding of feedback. Mr Coombs also reported that the SRC could contribute to this process for example through the student representative system.
ASC/2013/10.1.2 2012-13: Summary of Good Practice / Key Strengths
ASC noted the areas of good practice which had been identified in the PSR reports for 2012-13. While ASC considered it positive to see the wide array of good practice reported, it was suggested that a smaller group of key actions should be identified for wider dissemination to Heads of School.
Action: Convener and Clerk of ASC
ASC/2013/10.2.1 Open Studies
It was noted that the report of the review of Open Studies was yet to be fully finalised and would therefore be submitted to ASC in November.
ASC received a report on recent activity which had been undertaken to explore the development of MyCampus to allow all student Good Cause claims to be processed on this system.
ASC agreed that there could be a number of benefits to the proposed system particularly as it would present an opportunity to explain to students the difference between absence reporting and Good Cause claims and also explain the consequences of making Good Cause claims which normally involved allowing a further opportunity to take an assessment which had been compromised by adverse circumstances.
The proposed development would involve the following:
- Development of a landing page from which students select to input Absence or Good Cause claims - with an explanation of the two processes.
- All Good Cause claims to be notified in My Campus (even if in particularly sensitive cases, the details of the adverse circumstances were not loaded onto the system).
- Assessment Officers and course administrators to be notified of all Good Cause claims for their courses in order for claims to be considered through due process and submitted to Examination Boards.
- Details of Good Cause claims to be restricted to Assessment Officers and course administrators.
- All Good Cause claims to remain on the system as a permanent record.
ASC agreed that it would be important to include the option for students to notify Good Cause claims on MyCampus while providing the detail of sensitive circumstances to a nominated member of staff separately. It was also agreed that while Assessment Officers and course administrators would have full access to the detail of Good Cause claims on the system, Advisers of Studies should have restricted access which would allow them to see which students had made Good Cause claims for which courses, without access to the detail of the claim itself. It would also be important to provide students with clear information on who would have access to the data submitted in their Good Cause claim.
Dr Renaud reported that the School of Computing Science had set up its own IT system for processing student requests for coursework extensions and Good Cause claims. It was recommended that representatives from SLSD should review this system when looking at the development for MyCampus, although it was noted that the central system would not cover the short three-day extensions to coursework submissions as permitted in the regulations for penalties for late submission of coursework as these operated outwith the Good Cause regulations.
Noting the benefits to transferring all Good Cause claims to MyCampus as outlined below, ASC agreed that this development should be taken forward. It was however stipulated that the development process must involve a pilot in selected Schools as it was essential that procedures for the Good Cause regulations operated effectively and robustly.
Action: Senate Office and SLSD
While the above would require development work for SLSD and significant work by Schools in the initial input of Assessment Officer names into each course record, the following benefits were identified.
- Increased understanding by students of how and why Good Cause claims need to be submitted, the timescales for this, and a reduction in confusion between Absence reports and Good cause claims;
- Streamlining of procedures ensuring information on Good Cause claims is directed to the correct staff and opportunities to remind students of procedure e.g. automatic reminders of outstanding documents which they are required to submit.
- The move away from paper processing would reduce the risk of lost claims or wider circulation of claims than is necessary;
- Retention of a permanent record of Good Cause claims accessible by appropriate staff.
ASC agreed to recommend to EdPSC the proposed remit and composition for 2013-14 as detailed in Appendix 1.
ASC agreed to recommend to EdPSC the proposed membership for 2013-14 as detailed in Appendix 2.
The PAGs for session 2013-14 were approved as follows:
PAG 1 - College of Arts
Dr K O'Dell (Convener)
Dr A Morgan-Thomas
Dr A O'Neill
SRC Representative
PAG 2 - College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences
Professor R Hill (Convener)
Dr K Brophy
Dr K Renaud
Ms J Ramsey
SRC Representative
PAG 3 - College of Science & Engineering
Professor N Evans (Convener)
Dr H Stoddart
Dr A Orr
SRC Representative
PAG 4 - College of Social Sciences
Professor C Edwards (Convener)
Dr P Morris
Dr M Vezza
SRC Representative
The PAGs would meet to consider proposals from College Boards of Studies in semester 1 and semester 2.
ASC received and approved the Statement of Intent for the development of a new degree - MFA Global Product Strategies at The Glasgow School of Art. In noting the collaborative nature of the proposed programme, ASC agreed that further detail should be submitted to the validation panel to ensure an effective process was in place which also preserved academic standards. In particular information should be provided on the nature of the assessments undertaken at partner institutions, and the amount of teaching and assessment contributing to the final award that students would be permitted to at other institutions.
Action: Senate Office
ASC noted the report of the above meeting held in June 2013 and approved the Joint Board's proposed remit and membership for 2013-14. ASC also approved the new members of staff reported to be recognised as teachers of the University.
The report of the above meeting of the Joint Board held in July 2013 was noted and the revised remit and membership for 2013-14 was approved.
ASC noted the report on GSA policy amendments covering External Examiner, and Examination Board policies and the Code of Assessment.
ASC noted the programme proposals that had been approved under summer powers (Proposals are for new programmes unless marked with * which denotes a major change to a current programme):
College of Medical, Veterinary & Life Sciences
MRes Biomedical Sciences (Cancer Studies)
MRes Biomedical Sciences (Cardiovascular Studies)
MSc (MedSci) Advanced Practice in Health Care with specialisms*
MSc Stratified Medicine and Pharmacological Innovation
College of Science & Engineering
BEng (Hons) Electronics & Electrical Engineering (UESTC)
BEng/MEng degree programmes in Engineering
BEng/MEng Aeronautical Engineering*
BEng/MEng Aerospace Systems*
BEng/MEng Biomedical Engineering*
BEng/MEng Civil Engineering*
BEng/MEng Civil Engineering with Architecture*
BEng/MEng Electronic and Software Engineering*
BEng/MEng Electronics and Electrical Engineering*
BEng/MEng Electronics with Music*
BEng/MEng Mechanical Design Engineering*
BEng/MEng Mechanical Engineering*
BEng/MEng Mechanical Engineering with Aeronautics*
BEng/MEng Mechatronics*
BEng/MEng Product Design Engineering*
MSc Physics: Nuclear Technology
College of Social Sciences
MEd Professional Learning & Enquiry
MRes Public Policy Research
MRes Urban Research
MSc Chinese Studies*
MSc Chinese Studies (Research Methods)
MSc Finance & Management
MSc Investment Fund Management
MSc Psychological Studies*
PgCert Leading Professional Learning
PgCert Real Estate
PgCert Spatial Planning
PgCert Teaching and Learning of Modern Languages in the Primary School
It was also noted that the title of the MLitt Art History: Mackintosh, Glasgow & International Art Nouveau) had been revised to:
MLitt Art History: International Art Nouveau
The Convener reported that the issue of the level of the diplomas in Estonian, Hungarian and Latvian Languages had now been resolved and that following discussion with the Graduate School in the College of Social Sciences it had been confirmed that these were all Graduate Diplomas and could therefore be approved on this basis.
Finally, ASC received for information the report of the Subject Review of Politics which had been approved under summer powers.
ASC received and noted the above report detailing course proposal activity on PIP which demonstrated a small decline in the number of new courses proposed and those withdrawn, compared to 2011-12, and level number of course changes between the two sessions.
There was no further business.
There were no items of reserved business.
The next meeting of the Academic Standards Committee will be held on Friday 15 November 2013 at 9.30am in the Melville Room.
Created by: Ms Helen Butcher