LONDON’S GLOBAL UNIVERSITY
QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND ENHANCEMENT COMMITTEE
INTERNAL QUALITY REVIEW REPORT
INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY
26 April 2007
Review team:
Professor Chris Carey, Head, Department of Greek and Latin [Team leader]
Professor Chris Danpure, Department of Biology
Ms Kit Leighton-Kelly, University of Bristol (External member)
Dr Sajeda Meghji, Eastman Dental Institute
Administrative Secretary:
Mr Gary Hawes, Senior Academic Support Officer, Academic Services
Key to abbreviations used in this Report
AHRC
Art and Humanities Research Council
FTE
full-time equivalent
HEFCE
Higher Education Funding Council for England
HEIs
Higher Education Institutions
IoA
Institute of Archaeology
IQR
Internal Quality Review
NIQA
New Internal Quality Audit
QAA
Quality Assurance Agency
QME
Quality Management and Enhancement
QMEC
Quality Management and Enhancement Committee
RAE
Research Assessment Exercise
SAS
Society of Archaeology Students
SES
Self-evaluative statement
SSCC
Staff Student Consultative Committee
TC
Teaching Committee
UCAS
University and Colleges Admissions Service
1
THE IQR PROCESS
1.1
The IQR of the IoA was conducted according to the Guidelines for the Conduct of
Internal Quality Review (Academic Units and Programmes) which were developed in
2001-02 by the QMEC Working Party on Internal Quality Audit/Assessment.
1.2
In accordance with the methodology set out in the Guidelines, the IoA produced a
SES, which is attached at APPENDIX 1, along with supporting documentation.
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
1.3
The review team's visit comprised a brief tour of the IoA and its facilities, and a series
of interview sessions with the IoA’s staff and students – the schedule for these is
detailed at APPENDIX 2. The aims of the review visit were explained at the start of
each interview session: it was intended for the visit to be a constructive and
developmental exercise, the purpose of which was to identify areas of good practice
and, where necessary, recommend refinements to current QME-related practices and
areas of activity within the IoA, in the overall interests of encouraging and
disseminating good practice across UCL.
1.4
This report is set out broadly according to the headings of the Academic Committee
Guidelines for Good Practice (or ‘Gold Book’). A summary of the main findings of the
review team's visit is at section 13 of this Report.
2
PROFILE OF THE IOA
2.1
The IoA is part of the Faculty of Social and Historical Sciences at UCL, and is
physically located at 31-34 Gordon Square. The IoA’s distinction as the largest
university-based archaeological institution in Britain and a world leader in the
discipline is reflected by the range and diversity of the undergraduate and graduate
degree programmes and courses that it offers, as well as by a first-class track record
in teaching and research. The IoA received a score of 23 (out of 24) in the QAA
Subject Review that was undertaken in 2001, and a rating of ‘5(A)’ in RAE 2001.
2.2
The Department’s complement of staff currently includes 63.80 FTE academic staff
(comprising 10.5 FTE Professors, 5.5 FTE Readers, 14 FTE Senior Lecturers and
32.8 FTE Lecturers) and 37.48 administrative, clerical and technical support staff.
2.3
At undergraduate level the Department currently offers the following degree
programme options:
BA Archaeology
BSc Archaeology
BA Egyptian Archaeology
BA Archaeology, Classics and Classical Art
2.4
At postgraduate level the Department currently offers the following taught MA
programme options:
MA in African Archaeology
MA in Archaeology
MA in Archaeology of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East
MA in Archaeology of London
MA in Artefact Studies
MA in Comparative Art and Archaeology
MA in Cultural Heritage Studies
MA in Egyptian Archaeology
MA in Field Archaeology
MA in Managing Archaeological Sites
MA in Maritime Archaeology
MA in Museum Studies
MA in Principles of Conservation
MA in Public Archaeology
2
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
MA in Research Methods for Archaeology
MSc in Conservation for Archaeology and Museums
MSc in Forensic Archaeological Science
MSc in GIS and Spatial Analysis in Archaeology
MSc in the Palaeoecology of Human Societies
MSc in Skeletal and Dental Bioarchaeology
MSc in the Technology and Analysis of Archaeological Materials
In addition, the Department offers research degrees in Archaeology at MPhil and PhD
level.
2.5
As of 1 December 2005, there were 216.5 FTE undergraduate students, 204 FTE
postgraduate taught students, and 84 FTE research students enrolled at the IoA.
3
STRUCTURE AND MANAGEMENT
3.1
Although overall responsibility for the management of the IoA resides with the
Director, there is a comprehensive hierarchy of committees and sub-committees in
place to oversee the IoA’s operations and academic provision, which includes, in
addition to the usual statutory committees, a Research Committee, a Graduate
Research Students Sub-Committee, a Grants Sub-Committee, a Departmental Tutors
Sub-Committee, a Facilities Sub-Committee and a Fieldwork Sub-Committee. The
various IoA tutors, Research Group Co-ordinators, Programme Co-ordinators, and
the Academic Administrator and other administrative support staff also play important
roles in the day to day running of the IoA.
3.2
All of the IoA’s committees report directly (or, in the case of sub-committees, via the
parent committee) to the termly Staff Meetings, where the various Chairs give oral
reports highlighting the main matters arising from the Minutes of the most recent
meetings. Formal staff meetings are supplemented by informal staff meetings, which
take place throughout the year, as well as by weekly staff coffee mornings. There is
also a Policy Group, comprising the Director of the IoA, the QME Officer (see 3.4
below), the Chairs of the Teaching and Research committees, and the Research
Group Co-ordinators, which convenes regularly to consider and advise on
management and policy issues.
3.3
Although the membership of the IoA’s committees for the next session is received
and approved annually at the Staff Meeting that takes place in the Third Term, the
review team noted that there did not appear to be formal terms of reference for any of
these committees enshrined in the IoA’s supporting documentation or elsewhere on
the IoA’s web pages.
The IoA should take action to draw up and publicise formal terms of reference
for all of its committees.
3.4
As a means of helping the IoA to prepare for, and respond to, the requirements of
IQR and annual monitoring, the post of QME Officer was established in 2006, and the
current postholder, who is an established member of the IoA’s academic staff and a
former Chair of the TC, has played a pivotal and proactive role since then in helping
to coordinate and enhance the IoA’s QME structures and mechanisms, and in serving
as a general quality ‘troubleshooter’ within the IoA. In addition to routinely attending
meetings of the IoA’s key committees, the QME officer is taking an active role as a
3
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
member of the IoA’s Syllabus Review Working Group (see 8.2 below), and will also
be involved in the forthcoming review of the IoA’s Teaching and Learning Strategy.
The review team commends the IoA on its establishment of a dedicated QME
Officer post.
3.5
In terms of its academic staff profile, the IoA has managed in recent years to
anticipate a number of staff retirements through new appointments, and this should
be sufficient in the short to medium term to ensure that it will not have to restrict its
range of programme and course options. The IoA notes in its SES, however, that the
degree to which it will be able to maintain its existing strengths through new staff
appointments in the wake of further staff retirements will hinge on how well it
continues to meet Faculty and UCL regeneration targets, and it will be continuing to
monitor this situation closely.
3.6
The IoA would appear prima facie to be relatively well provisioned in the area of
support staff, with 14.8 FTE administrative and clerical staff, though it is accepted that
a lot of these staff members’ time is devoted to various aspects of student support
and administering a variety of systems and activities across the IoA, including
managing the IoA collections and IT and photographic facilities. The loss of a recent
administrative support post as a consequence of the UCL Regeneration Programme
gives particular urgency to the question of the use of the IoA’s administrative support
staff.
The IoA is encouraged to use the outcomes of its administrative/clerical review
to improve support for its core activities where possible.
4
STAFF SUPPORT
4.1
All new and probationary academic staff are assigned a senior staff member - usually
the Co-ordinator of their Research Group - as a mentor, and are also allocated a
lower teaching load during their first session. The schedule of staff reviews, whereby
all staff are appraised biennially by a trained member of staff, is now back on track
after experiencing some slippage in recent years, and should be completely up-todate by the end of 2008. In the interim between formal appraisals, academic staff
have more informal annual research-focussed interviews to monitor their research
progress and to help them to focus their future research plans. The IoA has had a
strong record of academic staff development in recent years, and all academic staff
are reminded of the IoA procedure for putting themselves forward for promotion.
4.2
In recent years the IoA has sought to implement a more proactive sabbatical leave
policy whereby staff with defined research objectives are encouraged to put
themselves forward for a sabbatical on a one in seven term or year basis, subject to
teaching needs being covered and the provision of an approved project proposal.
Members of the IoA’s staff are also encouraged to apply for AHRC Research Leave
Funding where applicable.
4.3
Peer observation of teaching takes place annually within the IoA in accordance with
UCL policy, and all academic staff are sent a reminder e-mail at the beginning of each
session outlining the IoA guidelines and procedures for this, along with a 'checklist' for
observation based on the criteria used by HEFCE observers for teaching quality
4
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
assessment. Instances of peer observation taking place are recorded by the
Academic Administrator, and reported annually to the IoA’s TC.
4.4
The IoA has a formal workload scoring model covering all teaching, administrative
and student supervisory duties, which was established in 1997 for the purpose of
assessing and managing staff workloads. The model, which is kept under annual
review, provides a basis for monitoring staff commitments to ensure that they have
sufficient time to supervise their postgraduate students, informing the allocation of
administrative responsibilities, and assessing the practicality of new teaching
proposals, and has helped to encourage comparability and transparency of academic
staff workloads across the IoA.
The review team commends the IoA on its formal system of workload scoring
to assess and manage staff workloads.
4.5
The last internal quality review involving the IoA, which was conducted in 2001 under
the NIQA methodology, advised that a more formal staff development scheme
needed to be considered. Since then the IoA has established a Staff Development
Sub-Committee to provide a forum for discussion and dissemination of staff
development issues. As well as drawing attention to opportunities for training both
within the SDTU and externally, the Sub-Committee has been proactive in organising
a series of bespoke in-house staff development seminars dealing with such topics as
interviewing applicants, supervising graduate students, use of the online Graduate
Logbook, meeting the needs of students with disabilities, and teaching with WebCT.
All staff at the IoA are expected to attend at least one day’s staff development training
per year. In commending this particular innovation, the review team was pleased to
note the Director of the IoA’s own active participation in the in-house training
seminars.
The review team commends the IoA on the establishment of a Staff
Development Sub-Committee and the organisation of in-house training
seminars for staff.
4.6
The review team was particularly impressed by the availability of core documentation,
including the various documents comprising the Staff Handbook, on the IoA’s IQR
web pages, which had been created for the purpose of the review visit.
The review team commends the IoA on the online availability of core
documentation supplied for the purpose of the review visit.
The IoA is encouraged to continue to make this online resource available to
staff after the review visit.
5
RECRUITMENT AND RECEPTION OF STUDENTS
5.1
As noted in its SES, undergraduate student recruitment remains an area of concern
for the IoA, despite the fact that the decline in undergraduate applications is very
much a subject trend nationally. Moreover, the IoA feels that undergraduate student
recruitment has the potential to become even more of an issue as a consequence of
reduced flexibility over the minimum A-level grades permissible for admission to UCL.
From 2007 the minimum standard entry offer for undergraduate student applicants
will be BBB, and the IoA is concerned that this will diminish opportunities for making
5
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
exceptional offers to students coming into the subject via some of the non-standard
routes. Similarly, the IoA notes in its SES that changes to UCL’s admissions
procedures that will prevent exceptional offers being made to students formerly
classified as ‘mature’ may also have a disproportionate effect on undergraduate
student recruitment, particularly as students in this category currently account for
around 20% of its undergraduate student intake. The IoA is still awaiting guidance on
this particular issue from the UCL Admissions Office, and it will not be able to assess
the full impact of both of these changes until after the latest round of UCAS
applications.
5.2
The IoA is actively seeking to address ways and means of improving its student
recruitment at undergraduate level, and has set up a working group to explore
possible options for this. Through the appointment of a Widening Participation and
Diversity Officer, it is also exploring greater involvement and investment in a range of
outreach activities, including, amongst other things, hosting a range of activities
during National Archaeology Week, running taster courses, school visits and classes,
holding evening sessions for mature applicants, and establishing archaeology
projects linked to relevant curricula at several schools. The IoA has also committed
funds to support the Camden@UCL Young Archaeologists Club for a further three
years. Other strategies, such as targeting collaborations at schools with relevant Alevel teaching, are presently under discussion. A recent survey of undergraduate
and postgraduate applicants has also highlighted the importance of the IoA website
as a recruitment tool, and this is presently being over-hauled to present a more
exciting profile and to include endorsements from past students. Some of the
undergraduate students interviewed by the review team felt that the IoA’s website
should give greater prominence to some of the IoA’s unique selling points, such as
the 70 days of funded fieldwork (see 7.3 below), the variability of course options, and
the fact that the IoA offers a much better level of financial support relative to other
HEIs. Also, there are plans for the web pages to give more focus to the sorts of jobs
and careers that graduates of the IoA move into, and to highlight ‘ex-stars’ where
appropriate.
5.3
The IoA is introducing a more competitive three-year undergraduate degree
programme in Classical Archaeology with effect from 2008-09, and the introduction of
combined honours degree with Anthropology with effect from 2009-10 has been
proposed. The latter degree programme option is already offered by the IoA’s
competitor departments at Oxford, Cambridge, Durham and Bristol, and will hopefully
prove a popular means of accessing high quality students. The IoA is also currently
exploring the possibility of adding a year abroad option to its BA and BSc
programmes, since this option has proven to be successful in increasing
undergraduate recruitment in other disciplines within the Faculty of Social and
Historical Sciences. The review team also noted that there might be opportunities for
the IoA to increase its undergraduate student load by making more use of the UCL
internal market, especially since science-based Archaeology courses tend to prove
popular with undergraduates enrolled in programmes within the Faculty of Life
Sciences. However, as the IoA notes in its SES, there is a tendency for students
from other departments to find the content of some of the IoA’s courses to be
somewhat inaccessible.
The IoA is encouraged to continue in its efforts to explore options for
addressing its recruitment difficulties at undergraduate level, and to engage its
current cohort of undergraduate students in this process, where appropriate.
6
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
5.4
The IoA currently offers the widest range of postgraduate taught Masters
programmes of any archaeology department in the UK, and the largest number of
options within those programmes. Given this coverage and the popularity of its
taught postgraduate programmes, the IoA feels that it should give continuing
emphasis to the recruitment of postgraduate taught students for the foreseeable
future. However, the review team noted that the IoA will need to give careful
deliberation to a marketing strategy for its postgraduate taught student recruitment to
ensure the continuing viability of its programme and course options. This is an
integral element of the revisions currently being implemented in revisions to the IoA
web-site.
5.5
Most applicants to the IoA’s postgraduate taught programmes have a background in
Archaeology or Anthropology, and around 25-30% of incoming postgraduate taught
students studied for their undergraduate degrees within the IoA. The IoA regularly
recruits above its overseas student targets, and around 39% of its current cohort of
Masters students are from overseas. In light of the popularity of its Masters degree
programmes internationally, the IoA has been successful in persuading UCL to make
more bursaries available for postgraduate taught students, and it has also asked
degree programme coordinators to come up with a strategy for identifying potential
future sponsors of postgraduate taught student bursaries. The IoA is particularly
keen to attract more overseas students from Africa for its MA in African Archaeology,
and, in light of this, the review team suggested that they might look to liaise with the
UCL Development and Corporate Communications Office, with a view to obtaining
external funding for bursaries, especially for students from Africa.
5.6
The IoA’s taught Masters programmes serve as feeders into its postgraduate
research programmes, where there is a strong retention of students, with around 50%
of PhD students having done their Masters degree at the IoA.
6
STUDENT SUPPORT
6.1
All first year undergraduate students receive a comprehensive handbook, in addition
to an additional handbook which covers what they need to know in the first two weeks
of term. There are also inclusive student handbooks available for each
undergraduate year cohort, as well as for students enrolled on the BA in Archaeology,
Classics and Classical Art, and affiliate students. Each of the IoA’s postgraduate
taught programmes also has its own student handbook, and there is a handbook for
the IoA’s postgraduate research students.
6.2
Although there are comprehensive supervisory arrangements in place for all students
who study at the IoA, undergraduate students benefit from a particularly high level of
academic and pastoral support. There are two complementary tutorial systems in
place for undergraduate students: in addition to being assigned a Personal Tutor, with
whom they meet at least termly to review their progress and receive guidance on
such matters as course choices and fieldwork opportunities, undergraduate students
also have recourse to a Year Tutor, who monitors each year group and specialises in
different areas which are of particular concern to students in that year. In their final
year, undergraduate students are also assigned a supervisor for their dissertation,
who liaises with the Year 3 Tutor over progress. For postgraduate taught students,
the Degree Programme Co-ordinators effectively fulfil the roles comparable to the
undergraduate Personal Tutors and Year Tutors. However, all MA/MSc students are
7
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
also assigned a Personal Tutor, who serves as an alternative channel of
communication to discuss academic or non-academic issues.
The review team commends the IoA on the high level of academic and pastoral
support available to undergraduate and postgraduate students.
6.3
As a supplement to the high level of tutorial support and supervision that is available
to undergraduate and postgraduate students through the IoA’s academic staff, the
Academic Administrator and other administrative staff of the IoA are on hand to offer
practical advice on degrees, courses, and all administrative matters, and to
recommend students to specific Tutors, Advisors, and officers both within the IoA and
UCL. The students interviewed by the review team as part of the visit confirmed that
the IoA’s administrative staff were extremely helpful and approachable, and often
served as the next port of call in the absence of their Personal Tutors and Programme
Co-ordinators.
The review team commends the IoA on the high level of support offered to
students generally by its team of administrative staff.
6.4
The IoA’s student-run SAS regards support of new students as a key part of its role.
In addition to producing an Alternative Prospectus, which is sent to new
undergraduate students in August each year, and organising social events at the
beginning of term and throughout the session, the SAS also runs an annual one day
conference, which gives students a chance to present subjects that interest them and
to gain valuable lecturing experience. The SAS website has also recently introduced
an Archaeology discussion forum for use by all of the IoA’s students. The elected
officers of the SAS include student representatives for each student cohort, as well as
representatives with responsibility for mature students, overseas students, and
students with disabilities, and regular meetings are held with the Director of the IoA to
discuss student views and any other issues. The students interviewed by the review
team gave testament to a strong sense of community and student involvement
engendered by the SAS. Following the IoA’s successful involvement in piloting the
UCL Transition Programme Student Mentoring Scheme, an archaeology-focused
student mentoring scheme for first-year students has also now been implemented,
although take-up of this has so far been limited owing to the comprehensive student
support systems already in place within the IoA. The review team felt that the IoA
should certainly be commended on the SAS as a complement to its own student
support mechanisms, although it noted that some involvement from the IoA’s staff
might be necessary from time to time to monitor its activities to ensure that these
were being run in compliance with UCL rules, regulations and codes of practice.
The review team commends the IoA on the support offered to its students
through the student-run Society of Archaeology Students.
6.5
During the first few weeks of their first-year studies, new undergraduate students are
required to submit a 1500-word practice essay, which is marked by their Personal
Tutor. As well as helping to build student confidence prior to the submission of work
which will count towards the marks for their degree, the practice essay also allows
Personal Tutors to identify students who would benefit from assistance with essay
writing at an early stage, along with any students who should be assessed for
dyslexia and/or related conditions.
8
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
The review team commends the IoA on the requirement for first-year
undergraduate students to submit a practice essay for diagnostic purposes
during the first few weeks of their studies.
6.6
Student support facilities within the IoA are generally excellent. As well as having
modern and well-equipped analytical and photographic laboratories, and its own
computing facility, the Archaeological GIS Laboratory, which offers specialised
facilities currently unavailable on the general UCL network, the IoA also has its own
archaeological collections, which, along with the Petrie Museum collections, are used
extensively in teaching and research. The IoA also has its own Library, which is part
of UCL Library Services, and which has an international reputation as one of the
finest archaeological collections in the world. The limitation of access to this Library
in the evenings and during weekends, particularly out of term time, however, has
been a major area of student dissatisfaction in recent years. The IoA has made
regular representations on this issue to the UCL Library Committee, and in 2006
special funding was made available centrally by UCL to fund an extension of opening
hours during the Summer Term. The IoA is hopeful that these arrangements will be
repeated for the summer of 2007.
6.7
The IoA provides training for new postgraduate research students through its
Graduate Induction Programme, which is run by the Graduate Tutor and involves
fortnightly meetings during the first year, beginning with an introduction to the basic
structures, processes and resources for graduate research at the IoA, followed by
brief student presentations of their research topics to identify common themes and
concerns and foster cooperation within the cohort, going on to introduce topics such
as constructing bibliographies, publishing articles in journals, writing CVs, preparing
for interviews, writing and presenting conference papers, interaction with the press,
and data processing and analysis. The IoA’s training scheme has been specifically
commended for its quality by the AHRC.
The review team commends the IoA on its Graduate Induction Programme for
postgraduate research students.
6.8
The Graduate Tutor has overall responsibility for all postgraduate students within the
IoA. However, owing to the high proportion of postgraduate students enrolled in
study at the IoA, the Graduate Tutor is assisted by a Deputy Graduate Tutor, who has
overall responsibility for all MA and MSc students, shares the chairing of first year
research student reviews and second year MPhil to PhD upgrade sessions, and
provides back up if the Graduate Tutor is not available. Despite the fact that all
postgraduate students are informed of the role and responsibilities of the Graduate
Tutor during their induction week sessions, some of the postgraduate research
students interviewed by the review team did not seem to be aware of who they might
approach in the event that any disputes or problems arose between them and their
supervisor(s).
The IoA should take action to ensure that all postgraduate students are fully
aware of the roles of the Graduate Tutor and the Deputy Graduate Tutor and of
the option of approaching these individuals in the event that any problems
arise between them and their supervisor(s).
6.9
Although postgraduate research students meet regularly with their supervisors, and
have been informed that the use of the Graduate School Research Student Log Book
to record these meetings is mandatory, the Log Book remains extremely unpopular
among the IoA’s staff and students. Among the criticisms levelled at the Log Book
9
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
are that it is cumbersome, counter-intuitive, confusing to interface with, userunfriendly, and a general waste of time which involves too much subsidiary
documentation. However, the review team noted that the Log Book would be
invaluable in the event that any disputes arose between supervisors and research
students which subsequently lead to grievance cases. Although the IoA has been
involved in the lengthy process of consultation with the Graduate School over the use
of the Log Book since the latter’s inception some seven or so years ago, the review
team felt that, given the general level of antipathy towards the use of the Log Book
within the IoA, the IoA should be encouraged to garner suggestions from staff and
students on how aspects of the Log Book might be usefully improved, with a view to
submitting these to the Graduate School.
The IoA should take action to ensure that staff and postgraduate research
students are aware of the mandatory requirement to use the Graduate School
Research Student Log as a means of documenting academic progression and
skills development training.
The IoA is further encouraged to gather constructive comments and
suggestions from its staff and postgraduate research students on how to
improve aspects of the Graduate School Research Student Log, with a view to
feeding these back to the Graduate School.
6.10
While research students meet with their principal supervisors before the start of their
studies to finalise their research proposals, their secondary supervisors are not
appointed until the first meeting of the Graduate Research Student Sub-Committee,
which takes place a few weeks after the start of term. Although some research
students who were interviewed by the review team drew attention to this delay
between appointment of their principal and secondary supervisors, the IoA feels that
there is little point in appointing secondary supervisors until after students have
actually arrived at the IoA and had an opportunity to discuss and define their
proposed research, including the broad range of supervision required, in detail with
their supervisors. Moreover, it feels that secondary supervisors are best appointed by
the Graduate Research Student Sub-Committee since this Sub-Committee is better
placed to take account of staff workload. However, the review team felt nevertheless
that, given the importance of the availability of the secondary supervisor as a
resource early on in a student’s research career, the IoA would do well to review its
procedure for appointing secondary supervisors.
The Institute is encouraged to review its procedure for appointing secondary
supervisors to postgraduate research students, with a view to ensuring that
this process is undertaken much earlier in the course of postgraduate research
students’ studies.
6.11
The IoA feels that its five Research Groups provide an important focus for
encouraging internal research collaboration and communication among and between
academic staff and postgraduate research students. All postgraduate research
students choose to be members of one of the Research Groups upon arrival at the
IoA, and, in 2006, the role of students within these Groups was further developed
through the appointment of Student Co-ordinators for each of the Groups, who were
charged with assisting the Research Group Co-ordinator in organising seminars,
workshops, and conferences. While the review team felt that the activities of the
Research Groups represented an intelligent and exemplary way of sharing expertise
and of giving students access to current research and debate, it noted that some
postgraduate research students who were interviewed as part of the review visit felt
10
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
that the Groups themselves were too broadly defined and RAE dominated. Some
students also felt that, although there was some activity between the different
Research Groups, it was largely left up to individual students to organise this, and
that there would be better ways of seeking to promote interaction between research
students.
The IoA is encouraged to rearticulate the value of its Research Groups to its
postgraduate research students, particularly in light of the perception among
some students that these groups are primarily RAE-driven and of more
relevance to the IoA’s staff.
6.12
PIA (Papers from the Institute of Archaeology) is an annually published academic
journal which was launched in 1989 by some of the IoA’s research students to serve
as a means of encouraging students to publish their research, thereby reflecting the
breadth of postgraduate research at the IoA of Archaeology. Since then, it has
developed into an international, self-financing, non-profit refereed publication which is
stocked in almost fifty university libraries worldwide. All papers submitted to PIA are
refereed by established professionals, and they are only published once the editorial
board and the referees are convinced of their suitability. Although in recent years it
has been increasingly difficult to get research students to publish their work in PIA, it
still offers a unique opportunity for PhD students to publish their first paper
The review team commends the IoA on its student-produced journal Papers
from the Institute of Archaeology.
6.13
Although there are some opportunities within the IoA for postgraduate research
students to gain teaching experience, the IoA sees these as limited by the amount of
internal and AHRC training funding that is available, as well as by the need for it to
balance the quality of its teaching with the possibilities for teaching it can reasonably
provide for such a high proportion of postgraduate students. Nevertheless, students
continue to raise this as an issue at SSCC meetings, and, although some academic
staff have arranged for their own PhD students to teach one or two classes in their
areas of expertise, the IoA is aware of the need to try to arrange opportunities for this
on a more systematic basis. The IoA feels, however, that, unless students wish to
teach without payment, there is no obvious solution to this issue.
The IoA is encouraged to continue to explore possibilities for increasing and
systematising teaching opportunities for its postgraduate research students.
7
THE TEACHING FUNCTION AND PROCESS
7.1
All teaching activity within the IoA is co-ordinated and monitored by the TC, whose
minutes are circulated by e-mail to all members of staff and student representatives,
and posted on the IoA intranet. Matters considered by the TC are, whenever
appropriate, discussed and, if necessary, approved at meetings of the Director's
Policy Group and IoA Staff Meetings.
7.2
Teaching at the IoA is designed to be varied and challenging, and takes place
through lectures and seminars supplemented by tutorials, discussion sessions,
demonstrations, material handling sessions, laboratory work, projects, and field-trips.
Directed self-study is considered an essential part of the learning process, and
students are helped in the development of study skills through tutorial sessions which
11
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
complement the first-year undergraduate core courses. Practical sessions, whether
demonstrations, material handling sessions or laboratory work, are considered
essential and are an integral component of many courses, and most make extensive
use of the IoA's excellent teaching collections, whose use in teaching is facilitated by
a Keeper of the IoA Collections and a Collections Manager.
7.3
Fieldwork training is crucial for students in order for them to learn the specific field
skills involved in archaeological practice, along with skills such as teamwork,
leadership and initiative. Undergraduate students work both independently and in
groups in structured fieldwork in their first year, in the Experimental Archaeology
course, on the Field Training Course, and during field practicals. This continues
through the subsequent years of their degree in a variety of independent contexts
while undertaking a total of 70 days of fieldwork on approved projects, often those run
by Institute staff. The undergraduate students who were interviewed by the review
team confirmed that the generous provision of 70 days of fieldwork was one of the
aspects of the undergraduate syllabus that attracted them most to studying at the IoA.
The review team commends the IoA on the extent of its provision of fieldwork
training opportunities for undergraduate students.
7.4
Most Master's programmes are structured around three taught elements and a report
or dissertation. Masters courses with a more vocational orientation involve student
placements or internships. All Masters programmes involve an intensive seminar
element, where students are expected critically to discuss and debate issues based
on directed reading. Many individual courses within the MA programmes draw
extensively on the IoA's collections for practical teaching, and courses within the MSc
programmes have integral practical and laboratory components. A number of
courses within the MA programmes make extensive use of field trips. Close contact
with the profession is further facilitated by the graduate work-study placements which
are an integral component of the MA degrees in Museum Studies, Managing
Archaeological Sites, Cultural Heritage Studies, Artefact Studies, and the
Archaeology of London.
7.5
In an attempt to rationalise its teaching and free up more academic staff time and
teaching resources, a significant degree of bienniality in second and third year course
options will be implemented across the IoA’s undergraduate degree programmes over
the next two sessions with effect from 2007-08. The IoA is hopeful that focusing
student demand for course options in this way will also allow some of its more
specialist courses which rarely make the student enrolment threshold to be taught,
thereby broadening subject coverage and student satisfaction.
7.6
All of the students interviewed by the review team had nothing but praise for the
exceptionally high quality of teaching within the IoA.
8
PROGRAMME DESIGN, OPERATION AND REVIEW
8.1
The IoA’s TC reviews the overall provision of taught programmes and approves
specific course proposals, as well as modifications to programmes and courses and
all significant changes to teaching provision. It also maintains a formal overview of
programme and course documentation and quality monitoring of teaching and
learning. The IoA’s postgraduate research degree programmes are overseen by the
Graduate Research Student Sub-Committee, which reports to both the TC and the
12
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
Research Committee. With the continued expansion in the number of programmes
offered by the Institute, and because all Programme Co-ordinators are members of
the TC, a standing sub-committee of the TC has been established with effect from
2007 to facilitate the detailed consideration of new programme and course proposals,
and to assess the contribution of current programmes and courses in the context of
the IoA’s overall provision.
8.2
Following the IoA Staff Away Day in June 2006, a Syllabus Review Working Group,
comprising a small group of staff members with detailed knowledge of degree and
syllabus structures, year structures, assessment methods and audit issues, was
established to review all teaching provision, focusing primarily on undergraduate
degrees. In addition to considering the case for introducing bienniality of certain
undergraduate course options (see 7.5 above), the Working Group has also, as a
necessary consequence of this, proposed the introduction with effect from 2007-08 of
new assessment criteria clearly defining the different expectations for students taking
undergraduate course options in each year of study. Other issues currently under
consideration by the Working Group include a review of assessment options,
including possibilities for introducing a larger proportion of courses with unseen
examinations, and the introduction of new specialist undergraduate and postgraduate
degree programmes.
The review team commends the IoA on the establishment of a Syllabus Review
Working Group and on the progress made to date by this group, particularly in
terms of implementing bienniality in option course teaching at undergraduate
level, and introducing new assessment criteria.
8.3
The IoA will be continuing to keep under review its provision of taught Masters degree
programme options with a view to assessing the continued viability of some of these
in the wake of low student uptake in recent years, e.g. MA in African Archaeology, MA
in Maritime Archaeology, and extending coverage in other, new, high profile areas
which have been strengthened as a consequence of recent staff appointments, e.g.
Palaeoanthropology and Palaeolithic Archaeology, Roman Archaeology. The
introduction of annual monitoring institutionally will be useful in this context as it will
help to identify year on year trends that will assist in informing decisions on
programme viability.
The IoA is encouraged to continue to keep under review its taught
postgraduate degree offerings, with a view to ensuring viability of these
programmes within UCL guidelines and/or adjusting its offerings as
appropriate.
9
STUDENT INPUT AND FEEDBACK
9.1
Student feedback on any aspects of the IoA’s provision can be made via the student
representatives at the termly meetings of the TC and SSCC, through programme and
course evaluation questionnaires, and through direct discussions with individual
degree programme and course co-ordinators, Personal Tutors, the Year Tutors and
other IoA Tutors, Graduate Tutor and Deputy Graduate Tutor, the Academic
Administrator, and the Director of the IoA.
9.2
Course evaluation questionnaires are handed out to students prior to the last session
of the course, and students complete these anonymously. These are then collated
13
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
and summarised by the Course Co-ordinators and discussed with the students. The
summarised responses are then considered by the Programme Co-ordinator, the
SSCC and the TC. In addition, all questionnaires are reviewed by the Chair of the TC
and the Director of the IoA, who consider the course co-ordinator's comments and
recommendations, and identify points for discussion or action.
9.3
The SSCC meets termly, and students are invited to notify their degree programme
representative if they wish to raise any matters. In addition, an open meeting of the
Committee is held each year, usually in the Spring Term, for all students to attend.
Minutes of the meetings of the SSCC are circulated by email to all staff and students,
and posted on the IoA intranet. The SSCC is jointly chaired by a member of staff and
one of the student representatives, who usually hold a joint pre-meeting to go through
any issues prior to the main committee meeting. This consolidated approach works
very well, and concerns or issues raised by students are fully minuted and actioned
very quickly. The IoA was approached in 2006 with the request for the Minutes of
one of its previous SSCC meetings to be circulated to other UCL departments as a
model of good practice.
The review team commends the IoA on its thorough and exemplary
arrangements for ensuring student feedback.
10
ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE
10.1
The IoA has single Boards of Examiners meetings for its BA/BSc programmes and its
MA/MSc programmes, which bring together the Examination Boards for each of the
current undergraduate and postgraduate degree programmes. There is also an
Extenuating Circumstances Sub-Committee, which meets prior to the Boards of
Examiners meetings to assess mitigating circumstances. In this way the IoA feels
that the privacy and the equity of treatment of candidates can be assured.
10.2
Prior to the main Boards of Examiners meetings, preliminary meetings are held with
the external examiners for each of the degree programmes to discuss student cases
in more detail and to iron out any disagreements. Any contentious cases are then
brought to the attention of the relevant Boards of Examiners meeting. The IoA feels
that bringing all of the Examination Boards together under one meeting is the best
way of managing the process and also helps to provide an overview of all degrees
awarded. External examiners consistently attest to the appropriateness of the degree
classifications awarded to students, and they also comment regularly on the high
standard of students’ assessed work and of the dissertations submitted by third-year
undergraduate students.
10.3
The IoA has experienced some difficulty in finding external examiners because of the
range and number of its programme provision and the non-reciprocal agreement
which precludes external examining between courses or departments in two
institutions. Although the IoA is considering the possibility of approaching academics
in mainland Europe to serve as external examiners, there is some concern about the
likely cost implications of this.
10.4
In responding to the recommendations of the last internal review that took place in
2001 under the former NIQA methodology, the IoA established an Assessment
Working Group which explored and developed a range of assessment methods for
specific elements of its undergraduate and taught postgraduate programmes. As a
14
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
consequence, the IoA has now introduced various forms of assessment for its
undergraduate courses, including unseen examinations, continuously assessed
essays and exercises, in-class tests, field notebooks, laboratory notebooks, portfolios,
reports on readings and site visits, Wikipedia entries, press releases, posters, websites, and presentations and displays.
10.5
The last internal review which took place in 2001 commended the statement on
plagiarism and poor practice included in all of the IoA’s programme handbooks. This
statement has since been expanded, and an explicit briefing has been incorporated
into each of the student induction programmes. In addition, the IoA has been
involved in piloting the ‘Turn-It-In’ software, and the IoA’s Standing Sub-Committee of
the TC has recently agreed that, with effect from the start of the 2007-08 session, all
students should be required to submit their work via this application prior to handing it
in for marking.
10.6
The IoA acknowledges in its SES that PhD completion rates, while improving over the
long-term and benefiting from the tightening-up of admission and first and secondyear review procedures, remain a serious concern. Whereas research students who
are in receipt of Research Council grant funding and their supervisors have
recognised the importance of completing their PhD within four years, the IoA’s selffunded students and their supervisors are far less inclined to regard timely completion
as an issue, and this has given rise to a degree of completion complacency. From
2007-08, however, the IoA will be implementing third- and fourth-year interviews
involving each research student, their supervisors and the Co-ordinator of their
Research Group, and the Graduate Tutor, for the purpose of monitoring student
progress and encouraging completion within three to four years.
The IoA should take action to improve its PhD completion rates and to address
the issue of ‘completion complacency’ among self-funded PhD students and
their supervisors.
11
KEY SKILLS TRAINING AND CAREERS ADVICE TO STUDENTS
11.1
Careers advice is offered to all undergraduate students by way of scheduled
meetings with each year cohort, presented in collaboration with the UCL Careers
Service. Taught postgraduate programmes with a vocational orientation have
career-specific sessions incorporated into their core courses, and the programme coordinators are well-positioned to offer relevant careers advice. Students also have
the option of discussing matters pertaining to careers and employment with their
Personal Tutor, their supervisor, the IoA Careers Liaison Tutor and the UCL Careers
Service.
11.2
Undergraduate students receive generic skills training by way of a series of weekly
sessions throughout the first year of their undergraduate studies, and key skills are
also introduced in core teaching throughout the undergraduate programmes.
Although the undergraduate students interviewed by the review team were aware of
the broad range of key and transferable skills that they had developed during their
time at the IoA, they also felt that these needed to be publicised more prominently in
the student literature and in the IoA’s promotional material. The review team shared
this opinion, particularly given the broad range of generic and transferable skills that
students are exposed to during their time at the IoA which help to enhance their
employability.
15
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
The review team commends the IoA on the level of awareness among
undergraduate students of the key skills that they have developed through their
studies.
The IoA is encouraged, however, to i) make more explicit in its student
literature and promotional material the particular types of key and transferable
skills that are available to students through their courses of study in
Archaeology, and ii) discuss with the UCL Careers Service and others the role
of transferable skills in marketing both the IoA’s degree programmes and its
graduates.
12
CONCLUSIONS
12.1
The IoA deserves its international reputation as a leader in the field and as one of the
most eminent hubs of archaeological activity in the world today. In particular, the
review team felt that the IoA should be commended on its uniqueness as an
academic enterprise, characterised by, among other things, its distinctive ethos, the
breadth and diversity of its expertise and programme and course options, the
exceptionally high quality of its staff and teaching, and the impressive array of
facilities and learning resources available to students.
12.3
The IoA is evidently conscientious about ensuring compliance with UCL’s quality
assurance mechanisms, and its QME arrangements and practices are generally
robust, well-documented, and, in a number of instances, exemplary. Despite its
numerous strengths, however, there are some areas that the IoA will need to address
if it is to maintain its all-round level of excellence. In particular it is aware of the need
to improve its undergraduate student recruitment and its PhD completion rate. It is
also well aware of the need to continue to keep under review its provision of
postgraduate taught programmes and courses with a view to ensuring the viability of
these.
12.4
The review team is particularly grateful to the IoA for its frank and positive
engagement with the IQR process through the Self-Evaluative Statement and through
the staff and student interview sessions with the review team.
13
SUMMARY FINDINGS
Good practice
13.1
The review team commends the IoA on:
•
its establishment of a dedicated QME Officer post [see 3.4 above]
•
its formal system of workload scoring to assess and manage staff workloads [see
4.4 above];
•
the establishment of a Staff Development Sub-Committee and the organisation of
in-house training seminars for staff [see 4.5 above];
16
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
•
the online availability of core documentation supplied for the purpose of the review
visit [see 4.6 above];
•
the high level of academic and pastoral support available to undergraduate and
postgraduate students [see 6.2 above];
•
the high level of support offered to students generally by its team of
administrative staff [see 6.3 above];
the support offered to its students through the student-run Society of Archaeology
Students [see 6.4 above];
•
•
the requirement for first-year undergraduate students to submit a practice essay
for diagnostic purposes during the first few weeks of their studies [see 6.5 above];
•
its Graduate Induction Programme for postgraduate research students [see 6.7
above];
•
its student-produced journal Papers from the Institute of Archaeology [see 6.12
above];
•
the extent of its provision of fieldwork training opportunities for undergraduate
students [see 7.3 above];
•
the establishment of a Syllabus Review Working Group and on the progress made
to date by this group, particularly in terms of implementing bienniality in option
course teaching at undergraduate level, and introducing new assessment criteria
[see 8.2 above];
•
its thorough and exemplary arrangements for ensuring student feedback [see 9.3
above];
•
the level of awareness among undergraduate students of the key skills that they
have developed through their studies [see 11.2 above];
Recommendations of the review team
Necessary action
13.2
The IoA should take action to draw up and publicise formal terms of reference for all
of its committees [see 3.3 above].
13.3
The IoA should take action to ensure that staff and postgraduate research students
are aware of the mandatory requirement to use the Graduate School Research
Student Log as a means of documenting academic progression and skills
development training [see 6.9 above].
13.4
The IoA should take action to ensure that all postgraduate students are fully aware of
the roles of the Graduate Tutor and the Deputy Graduate Tutor and of the option of
approaching these individuals in the event that any problems arise between them and
their supervisor(s) [see 6.8 above].
13.5
The IoA should take action to improve its PhD completion rates and to address the
issue of ‘completion complacency’ among self-funded PhD students and their
supervisors [see 10.6 above].
17
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
Advisable action
13.6
The IoA is encouraged to gather constructive comments and suggestions from its
staff and postgraduate research students on how to improve aspects of the Graduate
School Research Student Log, with a view to feeding these back to the Graduate
School [see 6.9 above].
13.7
The IoA is encouraged to continue in its efforts to explore options for addressing its
recruitment difficulties at undergraduate level, and to engage its current cohort of
undergraduate students in this process, where appropriate [see 5.3 above].
13.8
The IoA is encouraged to continue to keep under review its taught postgraduate
degree offerings, with a view to ensuring viability of these programmes within UCL
guidelines and/or adjusting its offerings as appropriate [see 8.3 above].
13.9
The Institute is encouraged to review its procedure for appointing secondary
supervisors to postgraduate research students, with a view to ensuring that this
process is undertaken much earlier in the course of postgraduate research students’
studies [see 6.10 above].
13.10 The IoA is encouraged to continue to explore possibilities for increasing and
systematising teaching opportunities for its postgraduate research students [see 6.13
above].
13.11 The IoA is encouraged to i) make more explicit in its student literature and
promotional material the particular types of key and transferable skills that are
available to students through their courses of study in Archaeology, and ii) discuss
with the UCL Careers Service and others the role of transferable skills in marketing
both the IoA’s degree programmes and its graduates [see 11.2 above].
Desirable action
13.12 The IoA is encouraged to use the outcomes of its administrative/clerical review to
improve support for its core activities where possible [see 3.6 above].
13.13 The IoA is encouraged to rearticulate the value of its Research Groups to its
postgraduate research students, particularly in light of the perception among some
students that these groups are primarily RAE-driven and of more relevance to the
IoA’s staff [see 6.11 above].
13.14 The IoA is encouraged to continue to make this online resource available to staff after
the review visit [see 4.6 above].
18
Internal Quality Review Report
Institute of Archaeology – 26 April 2007
Gary Hawes
Senior Academic Support Officer
Academic Services
July 2007
19