ASC had requested an update on Recommendation 1 from the Academic Review of GIC regarding mentoring of students and transition to studying at the University. An interim progress statement was provided but the Joint Board had agreed that a more comprehensive review should be undertaken and that a fuller report would therefore be provided to ASC in November 2018.

Action: Academic Collaborations Office

ASC had requested an update from Estates & Buildings regarding the refurbishment of teaching space and timetabling. The Director had provided a statement highlighting the refurbishment of a number of rooms to support active learning and the annual survey of centrally-managed teaching rooms which was used to develop a maintenance plan. The focus was turning to a five-year plan for the refurbishment of teaching spaces across the existing estate.

It was noted that the original request from ASC arising from Annual Monitoring was to receive information on timetabling issues and on how staff were involved in refurbishment activity. The response provided did not adequately address those points. It was also agreed that a timeline for the refurbishment workstream should be requested.

Action: Senate Office

The Convener reported that the Director of the Senate Office had written to Deans of Learning & Teaching and Deans of Graduate Studies requesting views on the possible impacts of increased take-up of additional time in class tests and short exams. A further report would come to ASC in due course. 

The Assistant Director of the Senate Office reported that the allocation of cognate members to School programme approval committees and former PAG members to College committees was being taken forward. 

The Convener reported that the Director of Human Resources had indicated that, in response to the issue raised in Recommendation 8, there was a means of HR identifying to LEADS new members of staff who were eligible to register on the Postgraduate Certificate of Academic Practice.  

The Convener reported that a further statement was awaited from the Director of Human Resources regarding the apparent contradiction between two published statements concerning the requirements for the promotion of academic staff. 

Recommendation 13 related to the protocol being established to allow students to transfer between Colleges where they had initially enrolled on the 'wrong' degree programme. The Convener reported that feedback from Social Sciences indicated that this had run more smoothly in the current session but feedback was awaited from Science & Engineering which would provide information after an Advisers meeting in December, and the matter would then be discussed with Arts.  

The Head of Academic and Student Administration for the College of Arts had provided a statement regarding the degree to which course approval documentation had been adequately completed. ASC noted that while a number of difficulties had been encountered the College was providing valuable support and oversight of the process. 

ASC noted the outline of a project being led by Dr Nathalie Sheridan from the Learning Enhancement & Academic Development Service which would be looking at the role, training and support of Graduate Teaching Assistants. 

Dr Doherty introduced the report for the College of Social Sciences noting that there had been a lot of activity in relation to course and curriculum review and the development of assessment, though this was set in the context of an on-going struggle to comply with the various administrative requirements of the University. Concerns had been raised in particular in relation to the use of Urkund, noting the considerable workload for staff associated with preparing plagiarism cases for the Senate Office. Course evaluation was a key component of monitoring but the effectiveness was undermined by low response rates in EvaSys. Teaching accommodation continued to be a cause for concern. The allocation of rooms with inadequate facilities and locations which necessitated excessive travel times between rooms was perceived to have a direct negative impact on the student experience. 

Dr Dick introduced the report for the College of Arts highlighting positive developments such as examples of innovative teaching and increasing diversity of assessment. A digest of best practice was now available on the College Learning & Teaching Moodle. Again, timetabling and teaching accommodation were highlighted as causing problems, as were low EvaSys return rates, excessive staff workloads, student mental health and the interface between Moodle and Urkund. Two issues specific to Arts were the administrative and logistical problems associated with the cross-subject programme in Medical Humanities, and staffing levels in Music. There was a concern regarding the increasing number of exams being timetabled outwith normal working hours, which caused additional administrative issues. Dr Morgan-Thomas noted that one issue highlighted in Arts concerning the handling of end-of-contract letters for GTAs was also causing problems in the College of Social Sciences, and this was the second occasion on which it had been raised. 

Professor Evans introduced the report for the College of MVLS. Many positives had been identified in relation to developments in teaching and assessment. Work to improve feedback appeared to have had a positive impact. In relation to the issues previously identified as needing attention, most had now been resolved or had a clear plan in place. There were a number of areas of good practice which would be discussed with LEADS for possible dissemination. Many of the issues identified as requiring highlighting to the university mirrored those from the other colleges. In relation to staffing there were serious concerns relating to succession planning and the integration between research institutes and the schools. The use of short-term employment contracts was unhelpful in this regard. There was a concern that the University was falling behind its competitors in relation to electronic facilitation of assessment and feedback. A particular concern regarding the mismatch between room allocation and the number of students admitted was highlighted. It was also noted that students lost access to their portfolio work on graduation. This was important for students on professional programmes but was increasingly important for those on non-professional programmes too. 

Dr Casey introduced the report for the College of Science & Engineering, noting that the School Quality Officers had engaged well with the process and that this appeared to reflect a good engagement with quality throughout the session. There was, however, a continuing perception of a failure at a higher level in the University to close the loop on matters raised in previous years. Not only were many common issues currently being raised across the Colleges but there was a lot of repetition from previous years. Teaching accommodation was again a serious concern, including the failure to align increased student numbers with booked room capacity, and specific issues with facilities such as the lack of conventional desks in teaching spaces. The administrative burden associated with University requirements was noted, for example, the continuing rise in Good Cause claims. Staff frustration was noted at competing pressures which meant that they felt unable to complete required tasks to a satisfactory standard.

The Director of SLSD responded to comments that had been included in the monitoring reports regarding problems caused by MyCampus, noting that many of these were general in nature. Ms Broad invited members of staff to contact her direct with specific details of the problems in order that they could be investigated. Dr Casey advised that she had designed a 'triage list' for school Quality Officers which could be used to log problems as they arose. It was recognised that, rather than logging problems, hard-pushed staff would often find a work-around solution. Dr Casey agreed to forward the list to the other Quality Officers for information.

Action: Dr Casey

In relation to the comments concerning Good Cause, Ms Butcher noted the importance of distinguishing between, on the one hand, requirements of the policy and, on the other, the process in place for applying the policy. As Academic Regulations Sub-Committee was currently reviewing the regulations, members were invited to address any specific issues to Professor Alexander (Convener) or Mrs Cole (Clerk). A new two-page summary of Good Cause was now available on the Senate Office website and this aimed to address some common misconceptions such as the belief that an accepted Good Cause claim could lead to students' grades being inflated.

Dr Lowden (Senate Office) had produced an overview of the main themes arising in the Undergraduate College Annual Monitoring Summaries. ASC's view was that the summary paper should be reproduced in full for EdPSC, particularly in view of the number of repeat issues being raised.

ASC endorsed the list of main themes requiring University-level attention, for forwarding to the relevant areas for action, as follows:

• Suitability and quality of teaching spaces.
• Student mental health. While it was encouraging that some action had been taken, it was clear that more support was needed as demand continued to grow.
• Staffing.
• EvaSys. Members noted that there were a number of questions to be addressed around the low return rates and whether alternative methods might be used to elicit the required feedback.
• MyCampus.
• Moodle.
• Urkund. It was noted that the Turnitin/Urkund Working Group had had its first meeting, and that it was important that the questions relating to on-line marking were kept distinct from questions relating to functionality as a plagiarism checker.

It was agreed that the issue of access to portfolio work for recent graduates should be added to the list and that this should be addressed to the VLE Development Board with a request for an anticipated timescale for achieving a resolution.

Concerns were expressed by members about the effectiveness of the annual monitoring exercise particularly as there did not appear to be a clear route for providing feedback to the Colleges on the issues raised and the long timescales involved. It was suggested that the Quality Officers' Forum could provide greater support to the Quality Officers with the aim of enhancing the effectiveness of the process. It was noted that Senate Office was reviewing the annual monitoring process, and ASC agreed that a progress report on this review should be requested for its January 2018 meeting.

Action: Senate Office

ASC received and noted the report detailing the schedule of PSR reports due to be submitted to the Committee during the current session with allocated ASC reviewers for each report. All but two of the full reports were currently scheduled to be received at the May 2018 meeting. New members were invited to note the role of the reviewer as detailed in the paper. 

ASC/2017/20.2.1 Dental School

ASC received a report providing an update on actions relating to various recommendations arising from the review of the Dental School held in March 2016. The Committee was satisfied with progress made in relation to Recommendations 5 and 7. The updated response provided for Recommendation 4, concerning the way that the University's systems could best support the distinctive features of the School's curriculum, indicated that while the issue was not resolved a plan had been developed with SLSD and work was on-going, so ASC agreed that no further update was required. 

ASC/2017/20.2.2 English Language & Linguistics

ASC received an update report from the Chair of the University VLE Development Board to Recommendation 5 concerning the limitations within Moodle of providing feedback to students on their assessed work. These matters were to be addressed through the new Digital Learning Strategy, though no timescale was provided. ASC requested that a further update be provided with an anticipated timescale.

Noting that the Digital Learning Strategy was due to be approved at the December 2017 meeting of EdPSC, ASC wished to highlight to EdPSC the importance of anticipated timescales being incorporated for the various actions.

Action: Senate Office

ASC/2017/20.2.3 Interdisciplinary Studies

ASC received a report providing an update from the review of Interdisciplinary Studies held in March 2016. The Committee was satisfied with the response to Recommendation 9 which concerned strengthening the working relationship of the School with LEADS.  

ASC considered the documentation relating to the proposed new programme, MLitt Art Writing at GSA, which had received in-principle approval at the November 2016 meeting of ASC. This was found to be thorough and satisfactory. ASC agreed to validate the programme commencing in September 2018, for a period of six years, subject to the completion of a satisfactory Service Teaching Agreement between the two institutions. 

ASC received the programme approval report concerning the proposed replacement for the former M.Ed in Education in the Creative Disciplines, which had received in-principle approval at the November 2016 meeting of ASC. ASC agreed to validate the programmes listed below commencing in September 2018, for a period of six years.

• Master of Education in Learning, Teaching and Supervisory Practice in the Creative Disciplines
• Postgraduate Certificate in Higher Education Learning and Teaching in the Creative Disciplines
• Postgraduate Certificate in Supervisory Practices in the Creative Disciplines; and
• Postgraduate Diploma in Learning, Teaching and Supervisory Practices in the Creative Discipline

However, ASC noted that GSA had previously been asked to provide clarification regarding the Dissertation preparation course in view of the fact that 20 credits was also awarded for a Research Methods course. The response provided was that the course specification described the course aims and ILOs and outlined the purpose of the course in relation to the MEd and its location within the programme. This did not clarify the situation for ASC so it was agreed that a more informative response should be requested.

Action: Academic Collaborations Office 

ASC received a major programme amendment proposal for the BA (Hons) Fine Art, with the changes aimed primarily at aligning with the GSA First Year Experience curriculum reform. ASC agreed to give in-principle approval to the proposal, with the full approval documentation due to be considered by GSA's Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programme Approval meeting in February 2018. 

ASC approved a proposal from The Glasgow School of Art to reform its first year curriculum to offer two SCQF level 7, 20 credit units of interdisciplinary learning, one in semester 1 and one in semester 2, commencing in session 2019-20. 

ASC noted the update report in response to the Recommendations and one outstanding Condition made at the Review held on 15 and 16 February 2017. Actions in relation to Recommendations D, E, G and H were still outstanding and ASC agreed that an update should be requested for the May 2018 meeting.

Action: Academic Collaborations Office

ASC noted the final update report on the progress made in response to the School of Design's Periodic Review (2015-16). 

ASC noted the final progress report in response to recommendations arising from the GSA Singapore/Singapore Institute of Technology Collaborative Review Action Plan (2016-17). 

ASC noted the report on actions taken in response to three Recommendations made at the GSA Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programme Approval meeting in September 2016.