MBBS (A100)
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORT
2011/12
Copyright University College London Medical School
University College London
1
Annual Monitoring Report 2010-11
Contents
Head of Degree Programme Report
MBBS Statistics Admissions and Final Qualifying Examination
4
7
Year 1
9
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Foundations of Health and Medical Practice
Infection and Defence
Circulation and Breathing
Fluids, Nutrition and Metabolism
10
11
14
16
17
18
Year 2
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Movement and Musculoskeletal Biology
Neuroscience and Behaviour
Endocrine Systems and Regulation
Reproduction, Development and Genetics
Cancer Biology
Mechanisms of Drug Action
Society and the Individual - Epidemiology
SSC
Years 1 and 2 Vertical Modules
19
20
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Year 3
31
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
ICCM
General Medicine (inc MiC)
General Medical Specialties
Surgery (inc Anaesthetics)
Care of Older Person (inc Rheumatology / Orthopaedics)
Taught Course & Use of Medicines
Clinical Epidemiology
32
32
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Year 4
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Child and Family Health with Dermatology (Paediatrics, General Practice,
Dermatology)
Clinical Neurosciences (Neurology, Psychiatry)
Women’s Health and Infectious Diseases (Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Infectious
Diseases)
Public Health
Professional Development Spine (Phase 2)
2
41
42
44
45
46
48
49
Year 5
50
Programme Statistics
Head of Programme Report
Electives
General Practice
Year 5 Vertical Modules
51
51
53
55
57
Vertical Spines, MBPhD, IBSc and Student Presidents
58
SSC
Cancer Patient Project
MBPhD
Pathological Sciences
Intercalated BSc (IBSc)
RUMS Junior Student President (2011-12) Report
RUMS Senior Student President (2011-12) Report
Senior Vice President for Education (2011-12) Report
Medical and Postgraduate Student Officer (2011-12) Report
Junior Vice President for Education (2012-13), Years 1&2 Report
Senior Vice President for Education (2012-13), Years 3-6 Report
59
61
62
63
65
69
70
71
72
73
74
3
FACULTY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES: Head of Department/Chair of Departmental Teaching Committee Proforma
Head of Department/Chair of
Departmental Teaching
Committee
Number Enrolled in department
Prof. Jane Dacre
1993
A. i) commentary on student recruitment and student performance overall; ii) difficulties experienced and
action(s) taken to resolve these. You are asked particularly to discuss issues of student progression.
Recruitment has been on target this year, however, there has been some confusion between the Medical School and the
department of Health about the inclusion of re-sitting students in the overall numbers. This made us slightly over target for
our entry year (Year 1)
B. Commentary on report of Chair of Boards of Examiners and action taken or planned
MBBS Examinations have all gone well, with satisfactory reports from external examiners. With the implementation of the
new MBBS curriculum, we are adding an OSCE style of assessment into years 1 and 2. This will be formative for year 1
and year 2 in 2012/13.
The MBBS Academic Lead for IBSc’s has compiled an overview of the reports from external examiners for IBSc
programmes in all Faculties to ensure that the programmes meet MBBS requirements. External examiners were highly
complimentary of the standard of student work and the breadth and depth of content and use of different types of
assessment in some programmes. Some concerns were expressed relating to the marking process and to lack of
consistency in project dissertations. Plans are in place through the IBSc Steering Committee to address all of these
issues for the 2012/13 session.
C. Commentary on resourcing issues and action taken or planned
We have continuing problems with finding enough suitable teaching space. We have no lecture theatre big enough for the
whole cohort, except the Peter Samuel Hall at the Royal Free Trust. There is inadequate AV support for this, and we have
had a significant AV failure in front of the whole cohort of Y4 students. This is being addressed.
We have had trouble recruiting enough Personal tutors for the course. We have allocated tutors for either years 1-3 or 36. FLS were at capacity, so could not provide tutors for years 1-3. These have been recruited from other sources, but we
will struggle to provide the required number of PT contact sessions going forward.
A decision has been made this year to close the Archway campus. Although estates have been extremely helpful, out
overall MBBS teaching space footprint will be less, which may prove problematic. We are negotiating with the NHS.
D. Examples of good practice or prizes or accolades awarded to students or staff. You are asked particularly to
mention if any members of staff in the Department have received a Provost’s Teaching Award
We are top in London in the NSS again this year with 94% overall satisfaction. We are above the sector mean, and above
th
th
the UCL mean. We are the 4 best Medical school in the guardian national ranking, and 6 best in the world in the Times
Higher.
Dr Will Coppola won a Provost Teaching award. Dr Jayne Kavanagh also won a Provosts teaching award for ethics
nd
teaching. We won 2 place in the University of London Gold Medal, and one of our students won a comedy award at the
Edinburgh Festival.
E. Major changes envisaged and main forward-looking recommendations for action
We launched the new MBBS this October. Our whole curriculum has changed so we meet the needs of tomorrows
doctors. We have increased use of IT, earlier and more sustained clinical contact, and greater integration, whilst
maintaining the high quality scientific content.
G. Confirmation that the Departmental Teaching Committee has received an annual summary of the operation of
peer observation in the department (i.e. a statement confirming that peer observation of all relevant staff has
taken place in the preceding 12 months according to UCL policy) - please confirm that the annual summary has
been forwarded by the Departmental Teaching Committee to the Faculty Teaching Committee.
Peer Observation on Teaching in the Divisions and Institutes which contribute to the MBBS is recorded and submitted by
the individual departments
4
H. Confirmation that all Programme Specifications have been reviewed
We have a new programme specification document for the new MBBS
I. Confirmation that the requirements of UCL’s Personal Tutoring scheme have been fulfilled.
See above. We are working towards full compliance, but do not have capacity to commit to the full number of 1:1
sessions in all cases at the moment. This is under review.
5
STUDENT EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRES DEPARTMENTAL SUMMARY
(For submission to the first meetings of the Departmental Teaching Committee, Staff Student Consultative Committee and
the Faculty Teaching Committee)
Head of Department/Chair of
Departmental Teaching
Committee
A. Confirmation that all course and programme questionnaires received by the department (or academic unit)
Confirmed
B. Any matters which indicate key strengths or areas of good practice arising from the analyses of the
questionnaires and action taken or planned to disseminate this within the department or academic unit
Overall, the MB BS program receives very positive evaluation by students with the vast majority of modules rated as 4
(very good) or 5 (excellent) on SEQs. The introduction of Lecturecast in Years 1 and 2 appears to be very well
received. Teaching in the clinical years was on the whole evaluated positively and Paediatrics, Psychiatry, final year
attachment in Medicine achieved over 80% satisfaction.
C. Any matters of concern arising from the analyses of the questionnaires and any action taken or planned
The surgical attachment at The Royal Free received poor feedback. Significant effort was made on by the staff, both
clinical and administrative to improve this, however this was insufficient to remedy the student experience. It resulted in
the shifting of some students from that campus and placing them at one of our DGH sites (Luton and Dunstable). The
medical school is currently working with the trust in order to remedy the problem. In general, student evaluation
questionnaires reveal a variety in the standard of surgical teaching and efforts to standardise this are in hand but it is
hoped with the introduction of the new curriculum 2012, this issue will be minimised. Whilst teaching across the
different sites used in the MBBS curriculum remains varied on the whole there is high quality teaching and our outlyres are identifiable and remediation is supported centrally.
D. Practical matters arising from the analyses of the questionnaires (including response rates) and any action
taken or planned
Low response rates are becoming an issue. This was prevalent in Year 2 and some other modules later on.
In CN changed the delivery of the invitations so that the student evaluations were posted three days before the end of
the rotation. This was in response to a request by C&I Foundation Trust. Some improvement was seen.
E. Any other matters of note arising from the analyses of the questionnaires
Dissemination of evaluation data through the MMG process can be variable. Student reps are trained in order to
facilitate the discussion of SEQ data at these meetings.
G. Confirmation, if possible, of the dates of the meetings of (i) Departmental Teaching Committee (or
equivalent) and (ii) Staff Student Consultative Committee and (iii) Faculty Teaching Committee for which this
summary was or will be submitted
st
MBBS Teaching Committee 31 October 2012
Date:
6
Admissions Data for AMR for 2011 UCAS Cycle
Applications and Offers





Total number of applications in 2011 was 2273.
Number of offers made in the 2011 cycle was 484 (454 for 2011 entry plus 30 for deferred entry in 2012), plus 39
students deferred from the 2010 cycle.
346 accepted our offer as their first choice. (Of these 327 accepted their 2011 offer and 19 accepted a deferred
place for 2012 and, again, there are also the 39 deferring from the previous cycle to be taken into account for
2011 entry).
The final year one intake was 333 for the academic year 2011/12 (comprising 29 Overseas fee-payers, 2 Islands
fee-payers and 302 Home fee-payers).
The gender split for the intake that year was 49% female and 51% male.
Entry Qualifications for 2011 Entrants
GCE A-levels (including all A-levels and excluding all AS-levels) – 275 students
With three A-levels
A*A*A*
14
A*A*A
18
A*AA
29
AAA
24
A*AB
1
AAB
8
With four A-levels
A*A*A*A*
10
A*A*A*A
22
A*A*A*B
6
A*A*A*C
1
A*A*AA
15
A*A*AB
3
A*A*AC
1
A*AAA
29
A*AAB
10
A*AAC
1
AAAA
20
AAAB
12
AAAC
2
AAAD
2
AABB
1
AABC
1
With five A-levels
A*A*A*A*A*
2
A*A*A*A*A
4
A*A*AAA
5
A*A*AAB
1
A*AAAA
6
A*AAAB
4
A*AAAC
1
A*ABBC
1
AAAAA
1
AAAAB
3
AAAAC
1
7
AAABB
1
AAABC
1
AABBD
1
With more than five A-levels
A*A*A*A*AA
2
A*A*A*A*B
1
AAAAAC
1
A*A*A*AA
4
A*A*A*AB
2
A*AAAAB
2
AAABBD
1
International Baccalaureate – 26 students
Range of points scores 36 – 44 points, with mean total 41 points.
Graduates – 26 students
BSc/BA 2.1
13
st
BSc/BA 1
10
Masters
Law degree (mature) 1
2
Other Qualifications – 6 students
Scottish Advanced Highers
Cambridge Pre-U Cert/A-level mix
3
3
Year 5 Assessment Statistics 2011-12
Title & Code of Module/ Course
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
MBBS
MBBS1005
Year 5
Dr Anita Berlin
367
Average Mark Gained
73.9 (written papers)
77.9 (OSCE)
Percentage Distribution
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Not
Complete
Absent
Fail
Pass
8
Merit
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
10
37
9.5
35
95.4
350
3.54
13
0
0
1
4
MBBS Year 1 & 2
Science and Medicine
MONITORING REPORT
2011/12
UCL Medical School
University College London
9
Year 1
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
Title & Code of Degree
Programme
Programme Organiser
Number Enrolled on programme
MBBS Year 1
Prof. Michael P Gilbey
337
Average Mark Gained
NA
Programme Statistics
333 students entered the examinations in May 2012 of whom 277 passed (72 with Merit), 56 failed. 4 withdrew.
57 students entered the resit examinations in July 2012, of whom 36 passed and 21 failed. 3 withdrew.
Marks
Merit
Pass first attempt
Pass resit
Fail
Absent or withdrawn
Number of Students
%
Number
22
72
83
277
63
36
6
21
0.9
3
Percentage Distribution
90
80
70
60
50
Percentage
Distribution
40
30
20
10
0
Merit
10
Pass first Pass resit
attempt
Fail
Absent or
WD
Year 1
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
Considering all modules the pace, content and appropriateness of teaching methods appeared to be good to excellent, as
judged from student feedback (gleaned from questionnaires, module management group and teaching sub-committee
student reps, and Student Staff Consultative Committee meetings). Generally students performed well with a high level of
engagement as judged by the numbers completing, for example, on-line quizzes, attendance at practicals, workshops and
tutorials. A variety of teaching methods were utilized; e.g., lectures, workshops, practicals, tutorials, small group work,
clinical skills small group sessions, early patient contact and those employing virtual learning environment (VLE).
However, it is clear that students would benefit from more small group work. Eighty-three percent of students passed the
summative assessment held in May and thirty-six of fifty-seven students sitting the exam in July were awarded passes by
sub-board of examiners. Based on these data six percent of students will not progress to Year 2 of the MBBS
programme. However, at the time of writing appeals are being processed. The percent of students that have failed to
progress is considered acceptable and the external examiners considered that UCL Medical School assessment
standards are consistent with those of other UK medical schools (see Report of the Chair of the Board of Examiners
on the MBBS Examination Process 2011-12).
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
This year saw the issue of personal responders to all Year 1 students. However, there were a number of issues with the
technology. In addition the new microphone system did not function at an optimal which affected live delivery and
Lecturecast quality. Personal responders have been fitted in the Cruciform 1 Lecture theatre. However, limited funding for
the training of teaching staff may reduce the impact of these technologies on the student experience.
Teaching space (capacity ~ 100) has been lost: to be refurbished and used as a student hub. This teaching space was
used for workshops and related activities. Although most workshops will now be held in two dry labs (simultaneous
usage) there are obvious efficiency losses from the use of two rooms rather than one; e.g., reduced efficiency of tutor
support. The loss of teaching space may act as a constraint on curriculum development. Furthermore, the use of dry labs
for workshops impacts potentially on the practical content of the curriculum. Maintaining and improving the availability of
teaching space appropriate for medium size group activities is particularly important as we aim to move from lecturebased activities to more active learning platforms. The concerns of the Year 1 and Year 2 sub-committee have been
minuted and brought to the attention of the Faculty of Life Sciences Senior Management Team.
There are a number of IT issues that need to be addressed. This is evidenced through student feedback: IT issues were a
large concern for students as they feel there are too few computers in the main clusters, they are often booked out and
the computers and printers are slow and often break down. Furthermore, Increasing numbers of students do not use the
library facilities in College due to the lack of space, we need more on-line and digital capabilities that students can use in
College, not just remotely. All these matters have been minuted and reported to the senior management team. As a
consequence more student hubs are being commissioned.
The congestion caused when large cohorts of students move into and out of the Cruciform Lecture Theatre 1 between
sessions leads to a loss of lecturing time. This problem and concerns over associated safety issues has been raised and
minuted at the Year 1 and 2 teaching sub-committee.
11
Year 1
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students asked for more feedback. Students are provided with immediate feedback in small group sessions led by tutors.
However, they often do not recognize it as feedback. Quiz feedback is provided in the form of answers and explanations
and answers are provided for workshop problems and self-paced learning questions. We are constantly aiming to improve
feedback and also raise student awareness of what constitutes feedback.
Reports on student evaluation questionnaires can be found at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/medicalschool/quality/seq. From this
feedback much of the teaching was identified as excellent. Students found some material more challenging; e.g., that
which involved understanding complex concepts rather than the learning of facts.
Students expressed a desire for more small-group teaching, particularly tutorials in biochemistry and physiology.
However, an ever-dwindling supply of experienced staff from the Division of Biosciences with a background, for example,
in systems physiology or knowledge of metabolic pathways means that it is not possible to provide additional small group
sessions. Indeed, the situation has reached the point where some existing physiology tutorials and workshops will only
continue if the required staff can be recruited. The staffing issue has been raised with the senior management team. Staff
from other Divisions may have to be recruited to deliver systems-based teaching if the Division of Biosciences is unable to
deliver the required teaching.
The students reported that the quality of the Anatomy lab/Demonstrators was variable. This is difficult to correct, given the
large number of demonstrators and the lack of means to formally assess their qualities.
Students
andbyappreciated
the verticaland
module,
the early patient contact, clinical skills sessions, the
D. Issuesenjoyed
Identified
External Examiners
actionparticularly
taken or planned
See: Report of the Chair of the Board of Examiners on the MBBS Examination Process 2011-12
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The academic year sees the introduction of a new curriculum. The new curriculum is documented fully on the Medical
School website. In Year 1, as in Year 2, the plan is to enhance contextual learning; e.g., the relevance of science, facts
and principles, to the understanding of Core Conditions will be emphasised. Summative assessments will consist of two
Single Best Answer papers and one combined data interpretation paper and anatomy practical. An OSCE formative
assessment with be delivered in February. See Medical School website for details.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please
confirm that the PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their
updated PSs by email each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to
the Academic Support website.
The Programme Specification has been updated by the Head of Medical Student Administration.
12
Year 1
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:


The name of the PSRB concerned; General Medical Council
The date (month/year) of the latest PSRB accreditation of the programme;
Annual Return (last December 2011, next due December 2012)
Triennial visits (due November 2012)

The main outcomes of this latest accreditation;
“Compliant” with nearly 150 GMC requirement areas. "Working towards compliancy" in less than 10 areas. No areas of
non-compliance. A number of areas of good practice identified
A number of areas of good practice identified.

The expected date (month/year) of the next PSRB accreditation of the programme.
Annual Return (last December 2011, next due December 2012)
Triennial visits (due November 2012)
13
Year 1
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 1 Module Organiser Reports
Title & Code of Module
Foundation of Health and Medical Practice
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Dr Pamela A. Houston
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems

A major revision of content and teaching style occurred in this session including a module name change. There is
new emphasis on learning styles to improve transition from school to university and an increased awareness of
the range of disciplines studied throughout the whole MBBS programme.
 New activities have been introduced, all supported by Moodle;
o Quiz on Cell Differentiation CAL: 486 attempts; year average: 86%
o Quiz on Cell Permeability practical: 479 attempts; year average: 90%
o Three maths quizzes: 754, 1085 & 837 attempts; year averages: 90%, 80%, and 80% respectively.
o Anatomy quiz: 556 attempts; year average: 92%
o Précis on homeostasis: attempted by all but 45 students
o Pharmacology poster submission all groups submitted.
 The above two non-quiz activities required a high level of staff time to mark and will be reappraised for next
session – action Dr Houston. The level of engagement was extremely high in the new tasks introduced this
session; the Précis and the Poster group work exercise. Comments from staff that marked these activities were
glowing, with some truly exceptional work submitted. Feedback was delayed on the Précis and this will be
delivered differently from next session to speed up feedback.
 Formative Assessment: 629 attempts; 85% year average. Unlike previous years, feedback on the assessment
was available throughout the module. This was well received by students.
 MMG feedback from staff and students was positive although was seen as a little disjointed as we try to introduce
the complexities of the range of vertical course elements to provide a solid ground work for the course.
 The pace and content were reduced from the previous version of the module (FHD) to promote learning and more
enquiring study practice rather than rote learning.
 There was a high level of student attendance at lectures but also an increased level of background noise
compared with previous years. Requests were made to feedback to the next SSCC meeting. The student
representatives were advised to make a representation as a group to those responsible – action: Mr Hong and
Mr Ali.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned

This year saw the issue of personal responders to all Year 1 students; as the initial module, there were a number
of issues with the technology not working encountered by staff. In addition the new microphone system was also
rather variable in operation which affected delivery and recording performance initially. Both of these issues
improved over time.
14
Year 1
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned


The students appreciated the reduced pace and content to allow then to settle into university.
The new elements in terms of Précis work on-line and the poster were well received. Student module rep Mr.
Hong received complaints concerning the pharmacology project: students indicated a lack of coverage of
pharmacological concepts and were not fully prepared for the project submission. In reply, it was emphasized that
the session was context-focused and a taster of pharmacology, not designed to teach mechanisms. The detail
submitted was above the level expected. As a new module component, it had not been possible to post an
example poster this year, which will be provided in the next year.
 Students last year asked for more feedback on their in-course tests and this was provided this year.
 There were a few electronic marking errors in the mathematical quizzes and these have now been corrected for
the next session.
 Dr Gill advised that Personal Tutors had not reported any student complaints regarding the level of work
required. This was perceived to be too high in previous sessions. Dr Houston confirmed that the module had
been revised; the number of facts given has been reduced to introduce more discussion and higher level analysis
by the students. This provides the same breadth of topic but less depth delivered in lectures, with greater SPL
directed time. Student module rep Mr Ali reported that the workload had generally been manageable but
students had found the embryology sessions on the first day difficult.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
15
Year 1
Title & Code of Module
1 Infection and Defence
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Pete Delves
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
For the vast majority of students their work is of good quality, and in many cases excellent. A variety of teaching methods
are employed and students appreciate the diversity of approaches to learning [as reported by feedback questionnaire,
student-staff consultative committee, Module Management Group student representation and individual personal
feedback from students]. However, the number of students that have to resit the summative assessment exams remains
a concern. It is worrying that a module as well received as this one continues to generate some fairly poor answers in the
exams. Action taken is mainly a considerable effort placed on explaining the material simply, and the use of Lecturecast.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The 2011-2012 questionnaire from the Medical School QAU was rather generic in nature and therefore it was not possible
to identify if there were any problems of a relatively minor nature. As there were no significant negative comments it is fair
to assume that all teaching was of at least an adequate standard. Indeed much of the teaching was identified by students
as being of excellent quality. More targeted lecturer-specific feedback will be available for the next academic year. Overall
the module continues to generate a pleasingly positive response from students. Student reps on the module management
group held following the module were also very praising of the organization and content of this module. The only real
issues identified were that some of the Spl/CALs could be improved and changes have already been made to at least 2 of
the Spl/CALs for 2012-2013 in the light of student feedback. Students stated they would like a laboratory practical
session, and this will also be introduced for 2012-2013. Students were not readily able to identify where the Pathology
teaching. This will be addressed in a new introductory lecture for the module.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
16
Year 1
Title & Code of Module
Circulation and Breathing
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Michael P Gilbey
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained N/A
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Student learning appears to have been led at an appropriate pace. In the main, the specified syllabus was delivered but a
lack of engagement and experience of some teaching staff remains an issue. We are in the process of dealing with these
challenges. We do not have access to a large enough cohort of teachers who have a deep understanding of physiology.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The histology laboratory teaching space (capacity ~ 100) has been lost. Although most workshops will now be held in two
dry labs (simultaneous usage) efficiency losses arise from the use of two rooms rather than one; e.g., reduced efficiency
of tutor support. Maintaining and improving the availability of teaching space appropriate for medium size group activities
is particularly important as we aim to move from lecture-based activities to more active learning platforms. The loss of the
histology space has reduced availability of such space and thereby may act as a constraint on curriculum development.
Representations have been made to the Senior Management Team.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The invitee response rate was 63%. The module was rated 4 (5 = excellent) by 58% of responders, 5 by 18%. 23% of
responders strongly agreed that topics were presented in a logical sequence and 26% strongly agreed that facts and
details were taught in the context of larger principles and concepts. There was as relatively equal distribution concerning
these aspects over the rating range 3-5.
We continue to seek to improve all aspects of the module through continuous curriculum review and development.
Student feedback feeds into the review process (course content and assessments).
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
As part of ongoing curriculum development, the Circulation and Breathing Module areas have been identified where
contextual learning can be enhanced and non lectures-based activities can be developed. Ways of improving the
engagement of teaching staff is being examined. Regarding physiology and pathophysiology, the LabTutor Suite has
been purchased which provides: 1) hardware and software to run physiology practicals; 2) a platform that enables
students to compare the data obtained from practical sessions with patient data. Students will have online access to their
lab data and questions that probe their understanding.
17
Year 1
Title & Code of Module
Fluids, Nutrition & Metabolism
Year
MBBS Year 1
Module Organiser
Dr Ted Debnam
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
No major problems were recorded.
An organisational issue was the difficulty is achieving a full quota of tutors to deliver tutorials on systems physiology and
for the renal PBL sessions in weeks 6/7. As a consequence, some students were not able to have the same tutor for all
five tutorials. This problem also resulted in re-timetabling of some sessions.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
No problems to report.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback from students has been received via the module questionnaire. 46% (=161 responses) of the student group
completed in the questionnaire. 90% of those responding judged the module to be worth a score of >3 (on a 1-5 range).
Overall, the written responses indicated that the content of the module and its delivery were well-received, particularly the
areas of clinical application.
Students expressed a desire for more small-group teaching, particularly tutorials in biochemistry and physiology.
However, an ever-dwindling supply of experienced staff with a background in systems physiology or knowledge of
metabolic pathways means that it is not possible to provide additional small group sessions. Indeed, the situation has
reached the point where some existing physiology tutorials and renal PBL’s may have to be discontinued in the coming
year.
Major changes to the module were new lecturers for biochemistry and renal teaching and the introduction of Use of
Medicines (Pharmacology) teaching. Responses to the delivery of these subjects were very positive. A few students
commented on the pace of delivery of biochemistry lectures and this has been brought to the attention of the lecturer
concerned. For the 2012-13 course, there will be a reduction in the number of biochemistry lectures; the metabolism online will be replaced with an updated programme.
As with previous years, students would like the module to finish at Easter to allow more time for revision. However, it
would not be educationally beneficial to compress 7 weeks of an existing busy module into one of 5 weeks. Resolution of
this issue will require a reorganization of the Year 1 module structure.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
18
Year 2
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 2 Programme Organiser Report
Title & Code of Module/ Course
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
MBBS
Year 2
Prof. Michael P Gilbey
325
Average Mark Gained
N/A
Programme Statistics
321 students entered the examinations in May 2012, 304 of whom passed (67 with Merit and 32 with Distinction – these
32 attained both a Merit and a Distinction) and 17 failed. 3 withdrew.
15 students entered the resit examinations in July, of whom 8 passed and 7 failed. 5 withdrew.
After the May and resit examinations 312 will progress to Year 4 or an intercalated BSc in 2012/13.
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass first attempt
Pass resit
Fail
Absent or withdrawn
Number of Students
%
Number
12
32
26
67
95
304
53
8
2
7
1
5
Percentage Distribution
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percentage
Distribution
19
Year 2
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
Considering all modules the pace, content and appropriateness of teaching methods appeared to be good to excellent, as
judged from student feedback (gleaned from questionnaires, module management group and teaching sub-committee
student reps, and Student Staff Consultative Committee meetings). Generally students performed well with a high level of
engagement as judged by the numbers completing, for example, on-line quizzes, attendance at practicals, workshops and
tutorials. A variety of teaching methods were utilized; e.g., lectures, workshops, practicals, tutorials, small group work,
clinical skills small group sessions, early patient contact and those employing virtual learning environment (VLE).
However, it is clear that students would benefit from more small group work.
Ninety-five percent of students passed the summative assessment held in May and eight of fifteen students sitting the
exam in July were awarded passes by sub-board of examiners. Based on these data two percent of students will not
progress to Year 3 of the MBBS programme. However, at the time of writing appeals are being processed. The percent of
students that have failed to progress is considered acceptable and the external examiners considered that UCL Medical
School assessment standards are consistent with those of other UK medical schools (see Report of the Chair of the
Board of Examiners on the MBBS Examination Process 2011-12).
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Personal responders were not available to Year 2 students. There were a number of issues with technology; e.g., the new
microphone system did not function at an optimal which affected live delivery and Lecturecast quality. Personal
responders have been fitted in the Cruciform 1 Lecture theatre. However, limited funding for the training of teaching staff
may reduce the impact of these technologies on the student experience.
Teaching space (capacity ~ 100) has been lost: to be refurbished and used as a student hub. This teaching space was
used for workshops and related activities. Although most workshops will now be held in two dry labs (simultaneous
usage) there are obvious efficiency losses from the use of two rooms rather than one; e.g., reduced efficiency of tutor
support. The loss of teaching space may act as a constraint on curriculum development. Furthermore, the use of dry labs
for workshops impacts potentially on the practical content of the curriculum. Maintaining and improving the availability of
teaching space appropriate for medium size group activities is particularly important as we aim to move from lecturebased activities to more active learning platforms. The concerns of the Year 1 and Year 2 sub-committee have been
minuted and brought to the attention of the Faculty of Life Sciences Senior Management Team.
There are a number of IT issues that need to be addressed. This is evidenced through student feedback: IT issues were a
large concern for students as they feel there are too few computers in the main clusters, they are often booked out and
the computers and printers are slow and often break down. Furthermore, Increasing numbers of students do not use the
library facilities in College due to the lack of space; we need more on-line and digital capabilities that students can use in
College, not just remotely. All these matters have been minuted and reported to the senior management team. As a
consequence more student hubs are being commissioned.
The congestion caused when large cohorts of students move into and out of the Cruciform lecture theatre 1 between
sessions leads to a loss of lecturing time. This problem and concerns over associated safety issues has been raised and
minuted at the Year 1 and 2 teaching sub-committee.
20
Year 2
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students asked for more feedback. Students are provided with immediate feedback in small group sessions led by tutors.
However, they often do not recognize it as feedback. Quiz feedback is provided in the form of answers and explanations
and answers are provided for workshop problems and self-paced learning questions. We are constantly aiming to improve
feedback and also raise student awareness of what constitutes feedback.
Reports on student evaluation questionnaires can be found at: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/medicalschool/quality/seq. From this
feedback much of the teaching was identified as excellent. Students found some material more challenging; e.g., that
which involved understanding complex concepts rather than the learning of facts.
Students expressed a desire for more small-group teaching. However, a year on year reduction in the supply of
experienced staff from the Division of Biosciences with a background, for example, in systems physiology means that it is
not possible to provide additional small group sessions. The staffing issue has been raised with the senior management
team. More staff from other Divisions may have to be recruited to deliver systems-based teaching if the Division of
Biosciences does not recruit staff that are able and willing to deliver the required teaching.
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
See: Report of the Chair of the Board of Examiners on the MBBS Examination Process 2011-12
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The academic year sees the introduction of a new curriculum. The new curriculum is documented fully on the Medical
School website. In Year 2, as in Year 1, the plan is to enhance contextual learning; e.g., the relevance of science, facts
and principles, to the understanding of Core Conditions will be emphasised. Summative assessments will consist of two
Single Best Answer papers and one combined data interpretation paper and anatomy practical. An OSCE formative
assessment with be delivered in February. See Medical School website for details.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please
confirm that the PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their
updated PSs by email each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to
the Academic Support website.
The Programme Specification has been updated by the Head of Medical Student Administration.
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
See Faculty of Medical Sciences Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
21
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Movement and Musculoskeletal Biology
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
PN Anderson
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The students achieved a good standard and their comments on the module were overwhelmingly favorable.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The congestion caused when large cohorts of students need to move into and out of the Cruciform lecture theatre 1
between sessions leads to a loss of lecturing time. This problem and concerns over associated safety issues has been
raised and minuted at the Year 1 and 2 teaching sub-committee.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The students reported that the quality of the Anatomy lab/Demonstrators was variable. This is difficult to correct, given the
large number of demonstrators and the lack of means to formally judge their qualities.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
22
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Neuroscience and Behaviour
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Prof. Christopher Yeo
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The quality of work was judged to be good by the teaching staff and the examination results bore this out. The balance of
lectures and laboratory classes was well received.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None identified
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The module was very well received by the students – the overall feedback was good and the student representatives at
the MMG reported very high levels of satisfaction with the module.
One point was raised that the module test was mainly neuroanatomical. This is a particular feature of the module
designed specifically, at the request of previous students, for a neuroanatomy test after the Christmas break. It was
agreed that this is a useful test and should continue, but we will make even clearer that this is a test of mainly functional
neuroanatomical concepts. The inter-module week test that follows two weeks later remains, of course, a broad-based
test of the whole course.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Another highly successful year for the module. Student feedback was very good indeed and the standard remains high.
The course was much enjoyed by the students and this has resulted in the highest ever number of applications for the
intercalated BSc in Neuroscience for the third year.
23
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Endocrine Systems and Regulation
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Dr Pamela A. Houston
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems



The feedback was extremely positive, although the return rate was very low - only 38% compared to 46% last
year.
No major problems encountered, consistently good feedback as in previous years. Students performed very well
in examination of this topic in the February formative, May examinations and re-sits (where required). The Moodle
site received great reviews for its structure and content enhancing the students’ learning experience.
The in-course assessment was not compulsory as it was so close to the formative exams, yet there were 962
attempts and the average score was 86%.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned


This year the personal responders issued to all students were not available to second year students, thus
advances made the year before were not able to be utilized this year. It is hoped to install the handsets in
Cruciform Lecture Theatre 1 for 2012-13 session.
The new Lecturecast went well and was used by many students.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned





From questionnaires 99% (38% return) rated the module 3 or more with 47% rating it excellent.
Not enough copies of core books (Essential Endocrinology and Diabetes)
Slow computers and printers, and not enough of them.
Prefer to do the CAL’s at home to increase revision time for the year formatives that fall at the end of the module.
Important comments:
o Mechanisms of Drug Action (MDA) has been one of the harder modules with a lot of information.
Perhaps, it would be better for it to be split over both Year 1 and Year 2. I also didn't like the way that
90% of the MDA lectures were on Thursdays.
o Some of it is good - however can someone please sort out the enormous duplication of content across
different vertical and horizontal modules? Tony Dickenson's lecture on the 9th Feb, as an example, was
composed exclusively of content we have genuinely had about 6 or 7 times in PDS, epidemiology, and
various lectures in horizontal modules. We truly do not need to spend 20 minutes on double blinding and
intention to treat analysis at this point in the course.
o I feel that Psychology has been badly taught so far. Some of the lectures seemed to have very little
content other than the lecturer's own research projects and it was difficult to really ascertain what we
were supposed to be learning.
o Some good lectures were delivered, but it sometimes feels that the epidemiological teaching is badly
coordinated. To give an example, we seem to receive multiple lectures on very similar, or the same,
topics. I'm sure that once learnt that basics will stand us in good stead for the rest of our careers. But, in
an area as dynamic as public health research, I find this rehashing of the basics at best frustrating.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
24
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Reproduction, Development and Genetics
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Dr Leslie Dale
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Only 86 of 327 students (26%) responded to the module questionnaire. The feedback was generally good but mixed as
in previous years. The majority of students’ expectations were met by the course. Case studies were well received and
helped contextualise the scientific knowledge. The fertility workshop and ethical debates were well attended and usually
positively reviewed by students, although there were a small number of negative comments about the ethical debate.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The Moodle site received good reviews for its structure and content aiding the student’s learning experience.
IT issues were a large concern for students as they feel there are too few computers in the main clusters, they are often
booked out and the computers and printers are slow and often break down. Increasing numbers of students do not use
the library facilities in College due to the lack of space, we need more on-line and digital capabilities that students can use
in College, not just remotely.
New lecturer on midwifery, Carol Saunders, gave two very good lectures that were well received by the students.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Some issues were raised by students but negative comments were usually matched by positive comments. For example,
some students liked the order in which lectures were presented while others found it confusing.
At Module Management Group Meetings, student representative pointed out that formative tests included material that
was not covered in lectures. The summative tests accurately reflected course content.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
.
25
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Cancer Biology
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organisers
Shane Minogue, Prof. Charles Swanton
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Cancer Biology is intensively taught in one week. The 2012 module was held during 23-27th April and consisted of 21
lectures, 2 CAL and 1 case study session. There were no major problems this year. However, we did feel that the module
was in need of some revision.
The 2013 module has been substantially reorganized to include new lectures on the cell biology of cancer, surgical
oncology and tumour heterogeneity. We have therefore updated the course to include more scientifically and clinically
relevant lecture content.
A lecture was cancelled due to an emergency on Tottenham Court Road that prevented the lecturer getting to the venue
in time. SM immediately took action to remove the relevant questions from the exam papers and reassure students.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Complaints of lack of space were received from students in relation to the CAL sessions. We will drop one CAL session
next year and SM will assess the suitability of the computer space for the remaining sessions and also address the issue
of assistance for students during these.
No problems with resources affected the teaching on the module.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback (26% response) was generally positive praising the interesting and expert-led teaching. In common with
previous years, students found the week before the exams rather intensive. This is due to timetabling constraints and is
unavoidable. The impact on student attendance needs to be gauged, especially later in the week.
A small number of students were irritated by the overlap between lecture content, particularly in the introductions. SM will
liaise with lecturers to minimize this repetition in future years.
We will also drop the lectures in proteomics and microscopy, putting some more clinically relevant subjects in their place.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
26
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Mechanism of Drug Action (Pharmacology)
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Prof. A. G. Ramage
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Feedback
An average overall positive rating of 68% was reported for this module.
Comments received were generally positive. Sessions were deemed interesting, engaging, and comprehensive but
relevant. Students reported that there was often good coordination between the sessions and the rest of the module
teaching; however, there was some overlap with other vertical module teaching sessions.
It was hard to identify any consistent problems with course other than the lectures should be more spread out as noted
previously and the MMG would like to see this but have been informed that it would require serious timetable changes.
However, in the collated feedback it is suggests that module “consider the introduction of Moodle activities and CALs/SPL
to consolidate learning” This had already begun with “ask the tutor” on Moodle page and there are three PBLs as part of
the practical course. Furthermore collaboration had begun with clinical pharmacology (Use of medicines Part II) to
introduce a Therapeutics Practical/PBL (see MMG minutes 2012) due to the re-organization of clinical pharmacology
teaching in Years 4, 5, & 6.
Quality of student work
Students do not submit any work on pharmacology to be marked as part of their overall assessment; it is hard to
comment on the quality of student work. Overall, the exam data did not indicate that the students are finding MDA
(pharmacology) any more difficult than other modules.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None, although the loss of the Histology laboratory has caused some serious re-organisation of space for the module
practical sessions. The impact of this can only be really determined at end of 2013.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
No consistent issues, see A
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
None
27
Year 2
Title & Code of Module
Society and the Individual
Year
MBBS Year 2
Module Organiser
Prof. Paul Higgs
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
This is the last year that the S&I vertical module ran. From October 2012 the module will be replaced in part by a module
‘Social Determinants of Health’ which will contain elements of the sociology and epidemiology previously taught as part of
S&I. The Psychology teaching will transfer to a module on mental health. All discussions of S&I have transferred to the
SDoH working group.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
This year saw a transfer of the sociology assessment from MEQs to SBAs which necessitated considerable preparation
from the teaching staff to familiarize students with this different form of assessment.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
No issues were identified by external examiners, other than regret that the MEQ format was disappearing.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
28
Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Student Selected Components (SSCs)
Year
MBBS Year 1 & 2
Module Organiser
Dr Greg Campbell
Number Enrolled on Module
Approx 700
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The majority of Y1/2 SSCs received good to excellent feedback from the students. Due to the large range of topics and
tutors for SSCs there is naturally a variation in the nature and pace of work involved. Students however, generally cope
well with this and their performance and achievement are good.
One first year student failed a taught SSC but passed the referred assessment at the maximum D bare pass.
One second year student submitted a library project essay late and was awarded a maximum D bare pass.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There was a wide choice of SSCs available this year due to 40 new tutors agreeing to offer them. Most new tutors were
from the Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and associated hospitals with a few from other faculties. Year 1, block 1 is the
most difficult SSC to attract tutors. Many students gained their first or second choice but some had to be allocated their
third choice. It has proven extremely difficult to persuade staff in the Division of Biosciences to offer SSCs. This is
something that should be taken up by the Year 1/2 Organiser, Biosciences Teaching Lead and Director, and Dean of
FLS. There is still a shortage of teaching rooms for SSCs, exacerbated by the college closing many.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
A number of comments and suggestions in the questionnaires were useful and were fed back to tutors. Tutors were keen
to see these and to act on them. One on-going problem is that of tutor feedback to students that usually doesn’t happen
before the rapid deadline of the questionnaire they are required to complete for QA purposes. I am negotiating with QA to
change this.
Students wanted more clinically oriented SSCs, which they now have. Some students would like more humanities SSCs
but some offered were not chosen.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
29
Year 1 and 2
Title & Code of Module
Vertical Module
Year
MBBS Year 1 & 2
Module Organiser
Dr Deborah Gill
Number Enrolled on Module
Compulsory
Average Mark Gained
N/A
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
In academic year 2011-12 the former PDS became ‘the Vertical Module’ (VM) to provide a smooth transition to the new
vertical modules structure that will form part of the MBBS new curriculum. The VMs will be significantly more substantial
part of the overall course than PDS and so the naming of many activities changed. This caused more confusion for staff
than students who coped well with the transition year. It did mean that some things that fell under the new VM umbrella
were not fed back appropriately. Similarly a number of activities were fed back to the VM team that were not VM activities.
Despite this slight confusion VM sessions were generally well received. Students particularly appreciate the small group
work nature of VM activities and the ongoing relationship with their VM tutors.
The revamped portfolio was appreciated by most students. Some remain unhappy with the marking as either satisfactory
or unsatisfactory feeling satisfactory did not reflect the work put in. However, as postgraduate portfolios (that doctors keep
for the whole of their career and on which this portfolio is modelled) uses this marking format and so it remains for
2012/13. Tutors and students are working well with the virtual learning environment (VLE) for all coursework submissions.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None. Room issues at the Whittington site have largely been resolved. Disabled access for some rooms in the Cruciform
building for patient visitors is poor and needs careful allocation of patients to small groups.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students seemed to genuinely enjoy and appreciate the VM in Years 1 and 2, particularly the early patient contact,
clinical skills sessions, the use of peer tutors, the integrated day and the excellent skills of their VM tutors. We did make
some small changes to content and organization of VM in Years 1 and 2 in response to formal and informal (provide by
the VM tutors) student feedback. We also introduced a major additional patient based activity: the Cardiometabolic
Patient Pathway. This was well received by students. Some did comment that the assessment was disproportionate and
timed too close to end of year exams and so this has been modified for 2012/13.
All other placements were also revised into a patient pathway in community and integrated care. This allowed more
flexibility of objectives for placements and resulted in good student feedback.
Students
for morebyintegration
horizontal
and taken
verticalorteaching
D.
Issuesask
identified
External between
Examiners
and action
plannedand state that there is repetition between other
N/A See Chair of Year Committee’s Report
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
30
Year 1 and 2
MBBS Years 3 and 4
MONITORING REPORT
2011/12
UCL Medical School
University College London
31
Year 3
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 3 Programme Organiser Report
Programme Statistics
Title & Code of Module/ Course
MBBS: MBBS1005
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
MBBS Year 3
Prof. Jean McEwan
351
Average Mark Gained
151.8
Percentage Distribution
100
80
60
40
20
Not Complete
Absent
Fail
Pass
Merit
0
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
0
n/a
19.9
70
94
330
3.13
11
0
0
2.84
10
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
This is the last year of running the current programme. Some issues in respect of teaching in surgical specialities at the
UCH site have improved but there was a deterioration in student feedback from the Royal Free. Despite discussions and
reassurances, the teacher engagement was poor and so arrangements were made to send a small group to Luton and
Dunstable Hospital where a much more satisfactory programme was delivered. At the Whittington Hospital there was
some deficiency in the quality of respiratory teaching and good local leadership from the current lead for respiratory
teaching for the year (Dr Porter) and the site Sub Dean (Dr Fertleman) helped resolve this and improve the situation.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The lack of a student common room at UCLH remains a problem as does locker provision but we continue to press for
these and use of a teaching space for rheumatology. The space was reconfigured for clinical service and this meant staff
and students had to be flexible and accommodating and move locations for several months. A UCL programme of
development has identified funding to contribute to refurbishment of a room in the Rockefeller and this will be available for
next term and a social learning space will be developed and refurbished at the Royal Free also.
Moodle is still under-utilised during Year 3, but with Moodle 2 coming on line next year there will be more opportunity to
develop staff and encourage supply of appropriate content.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
We met regularly with students in staff student liaison committees and reviewed the problems (those above) and
responded appropriately to concerns. The student feedback responses was reviewed (in great detail) and free comments
also considered.
32
Year 3
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None identified, other than the value of a built in pause in the timings of the end of year OSCE exam, which we included
to good effect.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please
confirm that the PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their
updated PSs by email each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to
the Academic Support website.
None, second year of Cancer patient pathway.
Pilot of minor changes to the Introductory Course in Clinical Methods was introduced and used to inform the programme
for the new curriculum.
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
See Faculty of Medical Sciences Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
33
Year 3
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 3 Module Organiser Reports
Title & Code of Module
Introductory Course in Clinical Methods
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Prof. Jean McEwan
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Feedback from the ICCM continues to reflect very favourably on the PALs teaching and Clinical Skills sessions. Major
changes this year included a structured approach to clinical examination skills learning that included in series, watching a
video and demonstrations and practice sessions in a safe environment before demonstration on the wards or before
examining a patient. This approach worked well but managing such large numbers of students was problematic. A new
approach is planned for 2012.
Scripting new material for the PALs tutors to use in situated history taking sessions received positive feedback.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Moodle was better this year (some video podcasts made and lecture capture employed).
Action: develop Moodle course (Moodle 2) further next year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students reported too many lectures in the first week, and many did not recognize the importance of understanding how
the NHS works.
Action: Early introduction to ward based teaching for 2012. More contextual learning about safety, the NHS and
data protection.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
With the introduction of the new curriculum in September 2012, a new Introduction and Orientation Module (IOM) is
required. Four weeks will be allocated; therefore more time will be available for teaching.
More communication is needed with teachers about what is required in the IOM. Introductory workshops for all teachers
are planned. It is hoped that the actions taken will improve the consistency of the students’ experience.
The plan for 2012 is to pilot/prototype some new content, with many more engaging activities. The students’ numbers will
be dealt with by running parallel parts of the course.
34
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
General Medicine including Medicine in the Community
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Dr Paul Dilworth
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The students are provided with weekly consultant led bedside teaching, bedside teaching from junior and middle grade
doctors, seminars/lectures and tutorials, are allocated to outpatient clinics and to observe relevant clinical procedures. A
JCCP session now takes place across all sites. Radiology teaching has been variable across sites, but a dedicated
anatomy and imaging session has been devised for the new curriculum. Prescribing, which is another key area which
has been less well taught, will also have a dedicated session within this module (Module A) in the new curriculum, with
some of the teaching provided by pharmacists.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Access to patient results (bloods and x-rays) - PACS: students receive a password but nevertheless are not provided with
a login to access Trust PCs and rely on PCS being left logged on by one of the clinicians on the wards. Students are still
unable to access Cerner. Discussions on both these are ongoing at a higher level.
There are concerns regarding changes in service provision at the Whittington Hospital. These changes will have a direct
impact on teaching. Appropriate alternative sources of teaching are to be included instead, such as community/ nurse/
ambulatory clinics.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
The module has good student feedback overall, with students feeling that they had a good introduction to the module,
reporting a high standard of teaching across all firms and during the GP attachment, and feeling well supported by a
module tutor.
Respiratory teaching fared less well overall: at the Whittington, this has been dealt with at senior management level; at
Bloomsbury, discussions have been at a local level between the module lead and teaching leads; at the Royal Free, a
new consultant has been appointed and is able to monitor the delivery of teaching more closely.
Students are generally unhappy with the process - which varies slightly from campus to campus - for being signed off at
the end of the module; it is difficult for teachers to get a comprehensive picture of each student because the students are
taught by many different individuals. Ways to improve this are being examined for the new curriculum, where the aim will
be to obtain feedback as widely as possible.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
N/A
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
35
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
General Medical Specialties Module
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Dr J Lambert
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
This is now a well-established module, blending a mix of formal lectures, seminars, bedside teaching and more
increasingly, web-based student-led learning. Fewer MDT sessions, especially at the Bloomsbury site, were welcomed by
students. JCC is highly-regarded by students and teachers alike.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Intermittent problems reading UCLH encrypted memory sticks in Cruciform lecture theatres (i.e. for lecturers’
presentations). Plan: UCL IT staff have been asked to resolve.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned

Variable renal teaching, especially at Bloomsbury – seminars cancelled, some (but only intermittent) teaching at
the St Pancras dialysis unit. Whittington students attending Edgware dialysis unit. Plan: formal renal teaching
for Bloomsbury students at St Pancras unit now agreed with Dr Crawford, and Moodle-based renal
teaching module devised.
 Attachments too short (3 weeks). Plan: NC4 attachments will be 12 weeks.
 Oncology teaching at Bloomsbury campus didn’t always happen. Plan: Oncology moved to shorter, more
focused attachment in NC5.
 Some concerns from students regarding exposure to only limited range of clinical specialities. Plan: New NC4
module will significantly increase cross-specialty teaching.
 Outstandingly good haematology teaching at Whittington (Drs Davis and Yap) highlighted by numerous students
over the year.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
None
36
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
Surgery and Anaesthetics
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Mr. James Crosbie
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Students are allocated to firms, which have a range of sub specialty interests and receive a variety of teaching including
bedside, clinic, lectures and tutorials. The MMG requires that each site and thereby each firm delivers a minimum of two
hours consultant led bedside teaching but individual site leads are given a degree of freedom to structure the weekly firm
based timetables alongside the fixed timetable of lectures.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There is a definite lack of clinic space on the Bloomsbury site (UCLH) and no communal space for students. There is also
no dedicated notice board unlike the Whittington and Royal Free campuses which have undergraduate centres which
include a room/space where students can sit etc. Access to administrators on each site provides an opportunity for short
feedback groups and pastoral support. However, at the Bloomsbury site, the undergraduate office is remote from the
clinical and lecture teaching areas. Students have now been allocated lockers at the Bloomsbury site.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students identified a disparity in clinical teaching between each of the three main sites. At Bloomsbury, students are
rotated through a number of specialities in 2 week blocks while at the Royal Free Campus, students are allocated to a
base firm for the 9 week block of teaching. It is interesting that some students at Bloomsbury would have favoured the
Royal Free model of teaching and vice versa. The perceived difference in teaching is related to the teaching resources at
each site and analysis shows that each site covers the same topics of the surgical syllabus and therefore no action is
planned. With the introduction of the new syllabus in 2012, it is anticipated that this problem will disappear.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
1.Persistent negative feedback with surgical teaching at the Royal Free Hospital, lead to an interim measure where the
number of students rotating through the Royal Free in Surgery was reduced in all blocks of the academic year. The
Whittington were allocated 5 extra students each block last year, with another 9 students having their surgical attachment
at Luton & Dunstable Hospital instead of the Royal Free Hospital for Block 3 and 9 for Block 4; the feedback from this
attachment was positive.
2. Feedback from the Introductory Course in Clinical Medicine was positive and in the new curriculum will take place over
4 rather than 3 weeks.
3. The surgical lectures, as part of pathological science week, were well received and delivered.
4. Introduction of the ‘Surgeon of the Week’ at Bloomsbury allowed the students greater exposure to emergency surgery
than in previous years.
5. Student attendance in the last block of the academic year was consistently poor despite fixed teaching sessions such
as Grand Rounds, Radiology MDT’s and bedside teaching. Many teachers were frustrated with the lack of attendance of
students.
6. A significant part of the Surgical MMG’s was dedicated to planning the implementation of Surgical teaching within the
New MBBS curriculum.
7. Anaesthetic teaching across all 3 sites was well received.
37
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
COOP
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Dr Dean Noimark
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The course has once again been well received, and on the whole received positive feedback from students. The students
have been enthusiastic and have worked well throughout the module. Mainly positive feedback on the teaching.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Mealtime restrictions did not affect access to patients. Norovirus outbreak did restrict student access at the Royal Free at
the end of 2011.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Issues around lectures being cancelled were sorted out as best possible.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Nil identified.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
38
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
Taught Course In Medicine And Use Of Medicines
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Prof. Raymond Macallister
Number Enrolled on Module
351
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Prescribing Skills - sessions are now more focused on practical rather than therapeutic aspects of prescribing.
Drug Projects - Following on from last year’s feedback, the mark scheme has been updated to help ensure
consistency of marking. All projects will also be reviewed by a second marker and moderated if necessary.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Taught Course in Medicine - Medicine lectures are currently broadcast via Livenet and the therapeutics lectures
delivered locally on each site. As of next year, both lectures will be delivered via Livenet. Videos and slides of the
lectures will continue to be uploaded to Moodle.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Prescribing Skills - Students have queried whether it would be possible to hold ward-based prescribing sessions
(rather than a tutorial) and also at the mid-point of the year. As these sessions are scheduled by the Medical School, it
was not thought that it would be possible to change the timings. It would also be necessary to recruit additional tutors
so that smaller groups could be taken onto the wards.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no
comment is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Prescribing Skills - There were some difficulties recruiting clinical tutors in the previous year. Therefore, the dates for
12/13 will need to be confirmed as early as possible to ensure that staff are available.
It was noted in a Use of Medicines MMG that the vertical spine is unlikely to change in the new curriculum. It was
thought that it was important for therapeutics and prescribing to be integrated into teaching throughout the new
curriculum.
39
Year 3
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Number Enrolled on Module
PDS Clinical Epidemiology
MBBS Year 3
Prof. Martin Bobak
351
Average Mark Gained
Not assessed separately
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The clinical epidemiology module consists of 4 sessions, each in turn consisting from a lecture and small group teaching.
The content of the course has been completely revised a few years ago. The new course focuses on small group (30
students) work related to several important aspects of epidemiology (research design, screening, use of evidence for
clinical decisions and evidence for prognosis). The small group work is popular among students and feedback is very
good.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
We have been fortunate to have 4 teaching rooms close to each other. This is the main limitation of the current format but
there have not been any problems in recent years. The second occasional problem is the availability of small group
teachers with appropriate experience and expertise. Again, there were no serious issues with this in the last year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Each year, some students tend to complain in their feedback that they have to travel to Bloomsbury. However, this is the
only way to ensure good quality teaching by experienced teachers. These comments have become less common since
the course has been re-designed.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
40
Year 4
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 4 Programme Organiser Report
Programme Statistics
Title & Code of Module/ Course
CFHD
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
Year 4
Dr Eddie Chung
368
Average Mark Gained
OSCE 76.2%
SBA
71.0%
Percentage Distribution
Not Complete
Average Mark Gained
Absent
Year 4
Dr Chris Turner
352
Fail
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
Pass
CN
Merit
Title & Code of Module/ Course
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
n/a
n/a
21.5%
79
73.6%
271
4.9%
18
0
0
0
0
OSCE
69.8%
SBA
75.2%
Percentage Distribution
Not Complete
Absent
Fail
Pass
41
Merit
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
Number of Students
%
Number
n/a
n/a
21.3%
75
76.1%
268
2.0%
7
0.6%
2
0
0
Year 4
Title & Code of Module/ Course
WHCD
Year
Course Organiser
355
Year 4
Dr Melissa Whitten
351
Average Mark Gained
OSCE
79.5%
SBA
75.8%
Percentage Distribution
Number of Students
%
Number
n/a
n/a
21.4%
76
76.6%
272
1.7%
6
0.3%
1
0
0
100
80
60
40
20
Not Complete
Absent
Fail
Pass
Merit
0
Distinction
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
I feel this is a satisfactory and the teachers are prepared for the upcoming transition year.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There is a continuing need to review space and simulation facilities and equipment and this is underway.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Organisation of out-patient clinics and the need for multi-professional support in allowing access to women in labour is
being addressed by the module leads.
42
Year 4
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
The introduction of some pilot faculty development days during which specific topics relating to learning styles,
communications teaching and advanced communications were addressed proved popular in bringing teachers in contact
with each other and enhancing sense of community.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please
confirm that the PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their
updated PSs by email each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to
the Academic Support website.
None
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
See Faculty of Medical Sciences Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
43
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Child and Family Health with Dermatology
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Dr Eddie Chung
Number Enrolled on Module
349
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The quality of student work has been satisfactory as reflected by the record and performance in the portfolio and
assessment. The module is an integrated course with its teaching being delivered by lectures, small group seminars, and
clinical teaching, There are three 4-week clinical attachments (2 in paediatrics and 1 in general practice). Continual efforts
and improvement in recruiting teachers, tutors, and examiners from NHS staff as well as academics from Institute of Child
Health.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The problems of noise level and overcrowding at the Bloomsbury Clinical Skills Centre hopefully will be greatly improved
by the one final OSCE at the end of the year.
Once again, the module administration team had to move office a few months ago, the second time in two years! This
caused some degree of anxiety and disturbance. Hopefully the team is now in a more permanent place!
A lot of the teaching activities are supported by the academic clinical fellows; the number of which I hope will continue to
be maintained.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback from students on the whole has been excellent. A few not so good areas such as outpatient teaching and
communication skill seminars have been restructured or revised. Feedback has improved over the last 12 months.
There are recognized differences in the experience/teaching amongst the three core sites: continual efforts in aligning the
teaching material across the sites.
Teaching in dermatology has been greatly improved by the appointment of the appropriate Leads. We continue to seek
improvement in this area and community paediatric experience by incorporating more input from general hospitals.
There is at present, little revision time between the end of module and the assessment which will be greatly improved by
the structure of the New Curriculum commencing from September 2012.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Reports/comments have been highly favourable. There are two recurring concerns: overcrowding and noise level at the
OSCE. These will hopefully be improved by having one OSCE at the end of the year. This will also allow for the
opportunity to include children in the OSCE; this will however, be a daunting task.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
As we are approaching the implementation of the New Curriculum, there lie many challenges ahead as well as
opportunities to improve and refine the delivery of the teaching and assessment of the Module. We are in the process of
re-defining the module syllabus which should better aid the students in their studying and learning. We are revamping the
intranet site and will continue to increase the available on-line learning resource material.
44
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Clinical Neuroscience (Psychiatry-specific report)
Year
MBBS Year 4
Module Organiser
Chris Turner and Emma Weisblatt
Number Enrolled on Module
349
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
General issues regarding students passing on exam questions from morning to afternoon sessions addressed by MMG
and Dr Turner.
The Psychiatry department collects written feedback on block teaching in addition to general online feedback and it was
agreed this should be sent to QAU as well as used internally.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
A problem with an examiner who arrived late and then left early causing difficulty running the OSCE was reported –
Emma Weisblatt dealt with this directly with the examiner concerned who has taken appropriate action with her
supervisor, very unlikely to be a problem again.
Recruitment of OSCE examiners does work but is often tight – this will continue to be a challenge with OSCEs at three
sites in 2013 exam.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback largely positive and previous concerns acted upon.
Poster presentation change to PowerPoint presentations carried out in three groups very successful, students more
engaged with process than with posters. Generally popular with students, who were offered additional guidance re
timings, how to share presentation etc.
Ongoing issue with ophthalmology signoffs at one site (attempted to address by Dr Turner)
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Generally very positive report; advice taken and acted on re 1) using generic drug name not trade name for
methylphenidate and 2) changing paraphrenia to late onset schizophrenia in an SBA answer.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Portfolio was introduced – initially some problems with students not getting themselves signed off sufficiently, after action
taken on this no further problems (support offered to students who were finding it hard to get tutors to sign them off).
Additional guidance for students given by Medical School and by administrators at beginning of block.
45
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Women’s Health and Communicable Diseases
MBBS Year 4
Melissa Whitten (Jonathan Cartledge Acting Chair for MW Maternity Leave
April 2012-Jan 2013)
Number Enrolled on Module
349
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Changes during the past year include:
1. Active working group in process for the introduction of the New Curriculum.
2. Introduction of formative OSCE practice (organized by the new O&G Student Society).
3. Introduction of a new interactive ethics lecture within core teaching.
4. Introduction of the new Training Record Card – extensive guidance needed for students regarding what is
expected by way of sign off. The format of this guidance was reviewed by the Module Lead and Teaching
Committee members following the completion of the Autumn Term 2011 and reinforced successfully to students
during the remaining two terms.
5. Continued development of the end of module Poster Presentation day which has been regarded positively by
students and assessors.
6. Introduction of new methods of in course assessment – some teachers not providing detailed constructive
feedback to students – this has been addressed directly with teachers via tutor communications.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
1. Continued problems with tutorial room facilities at the Royal Free – alternative sites have been identified but this
caused some confusion for students and tutors during the past year resulting in some missed tutorials.
2. Existing Module Administrator now acting as Module Co-ordinator and appointment of new administrator to
support the Module Co-ordinator now resulting in better cross-site admin cover for students.
3. Quality of mannequins and simulated models used for clinical skills sessions in poor state of repair at all three
sites. Funding being applied for replacement of models from the Medical School.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
1. Tutorial provision for O&G at Royal Free campus – clashes of tutorial timetables and clinical sessions caused
confusion and difficulty for students. The Module Co-ordinator has worked hard to re-organise the timetable to
address these problems to good effect – this will continue to be monitored by the Teaching Committee.
2. Access to labouring women continues to be a problem for some students. Midwifery leads at all sites have
worked hard to reinforce student learning needs and objectives with colleagues and to review timetables to try
and reduce potential difficulties with numbers of student midwives on site at same time. Standing agenda item at
UG Teaching Committee.
3. Computer access at DGHs – not uniformly available. This was a particular problem for students at DGHs for the
last block of the term preceding assessments. Has been raised at the SSCC and at the Year 4 Teaching
Committee.
4. Teaching of Communicable Diseases at Royal Free – some instances of teachers not attending planned
sessions. This has been addressed by the Communicable Diseases Leads with their colleagues.
5. GP sessions – some instances of cancellations by GP tutors at short notice. This has been addressed by the
Primary Care Lead. Situation much improved on the previous year and overall good feedback by students
regarding their GP session experience.
46
Year 4
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
1. External Visitors at the OSCEs – there are often visitors at the OSCEs (e.g. GP tutors who have not attended
previously wanting to see how it runs prior to attending as an examiner in the future; colleagues from other
institutions wanting to view our practice). Visitor badges introduced to avoid confusion occurring amongst staff
and students.
2. Module Lead has introduced more extensive guidance for examiners at the start of each session which was
positively regarded by the External Examiners.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
In general the past year has seen a lot of administrative and timetabling changes which have now resulted in better
communications with students and more stability to the student timetable.
Continued monitoring of the student experience on the labour ward will be needed and the midwifery tutors across all
three sites will be focusing upon this.
DGH placements generally receive good feedback from students and we will be looking to explore these in more detail
over the coming year.
The introduction of the New Curriculum in Sept 2012 will not see any content change for this module however there are
some assessment changes which are taking place which will be monitored. The introduction of the New Year 5 Women’s
and Men’s Health module is under construction and will form a major piece of work over coming months.
Note that a new Module Lead was appointed in July 2011 (Melissa Whitten). MW on maternity leave from April 2012January 2013, with Jonathan Cartledge acting as Module Lead during this time (with remote support from MW).
47
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Year
Module Organiser
Number Enrolled on Module
Public Health Component of Clinical Modules
MBBS Year 4
Prof. Martin Bobak
349
Average Mark Gained
Not assessed
separately
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
In Year 4, public health is taught in all 3 clinical modules of Year 4 (Clinical Neurosciences, Child & Family Health with
Dermatology, and Women’s Health). Public health accounts for a relatively small proportion of these modules. Public
health is assessed within the modules by a written paper.
As documented in previous years, the module has been repeatedly updated and modified. In 2011-12, teaching on
alcohol and drugs (Clinical Neurosciences) has been further streamlined, to remove duplications between lectures. Global
health teaching (part of Child & Family Health with Dermatology) has also been updated and students were given a
choice of topic for their presentations (student feedback on this changes was very positive).
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
As every year, there have been occasional issues with availability of adjacent teaching rooms for parallel presentation in
the Global Health course.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Apart from the issue of allocation of topics for global health presentations (see above), students have also identified a
large overlap of global health lectures in one block. We have investigated this problem and it turned out that this was an
organisational mistake, when a tutor gave the wrong lecture by mistake. We discussed this issue with the tutors and we
made sure that this will not happen again. In addition, the course will change further in 2012-13, which will prevent such
situations.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
48
Year 4
Title & Code of Module
Professional Development Spine
Year
MBBS Year 3 and 4
Module Organiser
Dr Deborah Gill
Number Enrolled on Module
700
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
There were no changes to sessions or assessment this year due to the impending changes to the curriculum in
September 2012.
The quality of student work remains good.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
New Communication Skills video equipment purchased and installed at the Royal Free site ensuring we now have a
tailored made Communication Skills suite on all three central campuses.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback almost wholly positive – no specific issues.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
2012 sees the introduction of the Vertical Modules that will replace teaching previously addressed in the PDS in Years 3
and 4. The small group work and simulation approach will remain.
49
Year 4
MBBS Year 5
MONITORING REPORT
2011/12
UCL Medical School
University College London
50
Year 5
Faculty of Medical Sciences:
Sciences Year 5 Programme Organiser Report
Programme Statistics
Title & Code of Module/ Course
Year
Course Organiser
Number Enrolled on Course
Marks
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Absent
Not Complete
MBBS
MBBS1005
Year 5
Dr Anita Berlin
367
Average Mark Gained
73.9 (written papers)
77.9 (OSCE)
Number of Students
%
Number
10
37
9.5
35
95.4
350
3.54
13
0
0
1
4
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems . You are also asked to look particularly at issues of student progression.
The second year of the revised final year curriculum
curriculum has proved a great success thanks to the commitment and maturity
of the students. This is reflected in the success of student in final MBBS examination and 100% pass rate for retake
students.
The guiding principle - "Think like a doctor, act like a doctor” emphasized to students the need for them to take a very
active role in their learning. Labelling the whole core block the “assistantship” – incorporating 12 weeks at district general
hospitals (DGHs) and 4 weeks General Practice – highlighted their
ir direct role in patient care as part of a clinical team.
Student engagement with Case of the Month (CoTM) has been excellent and reciprocated by excellent on
on-line tutor
support.
The support provided for the electives and SSCs ensure these are valuable and safe learning experiences.
The success of this approach was only possible of careful planning and unerring support from all the site and GP leads
and the team of administrators and librarians who support them and the students; local consultants, junior doctors, GPs
pharmacists and CoTM tutors all share in the success of the programme.
This has set the bar high for the introduction of the new MBBS 2012 throughout the rest if the programme in the coming
academic year.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The greatest resource challenges remain : IT & accommodation
51
Year 5


IT access – to both the VLE & to clinical systems: The medical school Supplementary Guidance and the review
of the RACS project has been very helpful but on-going issues remain
Accommodation – quality is improving but variable, some sites are undertaking major refurbishments but issues
such in-room internet access and infestations still arise. Quality visits remain the key mechanisms for promoting
change.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Overall the student evaluation is exceptionally, good – and for DGHs shows huge improvements since the introduction of
the new curriculum and Assistantships. DGH 81% placements and 88% of GP placements were rated good or excellent.
(And only 1 student rated either a DGH or GP placement as poor!)
The following areas identified from student feedback in last year’s reports have been resolved:
Allocation, safety performing procedure, inductions, prescribing teaching and quality of core teaching.
Ongoing issues from this year’s students remain:



Consultant teaching: there lack of consistency in terms of quality and quantity – especially during times of staff
holidays etc.
Information technology: improving – (see B above )
Accommodation (see B above )
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
Generally extremely positive regarding quality of candidates and of the examination process. A few minor changes need
to be made.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
UCL MBBS programme has been rated top in London in the NSS for the 2nd year running. Some of the credit must go to
all the staff who worked so hard to introduce this exciting new final year ….and to the students who have used the
opportunities offered to them so well.
The constant reorganisation of services at various NHS trusts provides an ongoing challenge and requires constant
adjustments to the placement of our undergraduates.
Action to improve IT, accommodation and ensure uniform consultant involvement will continue this year with a new team
leading form the Medical School. I wish Dr Aroon Lal (new Lead) and Chloe Marshall (admin lead) and her colleagues
well for 2012-13. The students are in good hands.
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the
preceding year which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please
confirm that the PS has been reviewed and updated. Programme Organisers are then requested to send in their
updated PSs by email each year to Rob Traynor in Academic Support (r.traynor@ucl.ac.uk) for uploading on to
the Academic Support website.
See above – small changes made to PDS OSCE assessment format
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
See Faculty of Medical Sciences Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
52
Year 5
Faculty of Medical Sciences: Year 5 Module Organiser Reports
Title & Code of Module
Electives
Year
MBBS Year 5
Module Organiser
Jane Zuckerman
Number Enrolled on Module
367
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
The quality of the students’ work remains unchanged and of a good standard, with the many of students being awarded a
B grade for their elective module. The majority if not all students, enjoy the Elective module which affords them the
opportunity to experience the practice of medicine in a variety of different countries and often, experience in Global
Health.
Students receive advice and approval for their electives on Tuesdays and every other Wednesday throughout the year.
When appropriate, advice is sometimes relayed via email and then confirmed at the elective approval meeting. The
elective approval meetings are face to face meetings to ensure that each student receives guidance regarding health and
safety aspects of the elective period (occupational and travel related) e.g. the procedure to follow if exposure to a blood
borne virus were to occur. Academic guidance is provided similarly regarding the elective project which is completed in
order to provide an assessment of the six-week elective attachment together with the supervisor’s report on the student’s
clinical abilities. The lecture on the elective period was given in December to students progressing through Year 4 to Year
5 to enable them to understand the process of application to host institutions as well as the elective approval process as a
whole, well in advance. The same structure for the lecture session was applied as previously with the lecture being
divided into distinct sessions with an overarching introductory session, followed by a session for those planning an
elective in North America and a separate session on those planning an elective in Australia, New Zealand or Europe.
Attendance at these lectures was noted and accepted as initial elective approval having been obtained. All the lectures
were followed by a question and answer session which was well received.
The elective projects were marked by the Sub Dean for Electives, the Faculty Tutor and a teaching fellow in Primary
Care. The standard of the submitted elective projects remains unchanged with the majority attaining a grade C. The
annual award of a first and second elective prize was made.
The method of assessment of the elective period is to be reviewed with the likelihood of replacing the written project with
an e-portfolio initiative within the next couple of years.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
The web-based learning materials, which provide specific guidance regarding the learning objectives of the elective,
continue to be updated annually to reflect any changes in the procedure to be followed to obtain elective approval.
Lectures followed immediately with a question and answer session held over a period of two hours in December
continues to be well received by students.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Appointments continue to be available on both Tuesdays and alternate Wednesdays throughout the year which enables
students to receive advice and approval as well as accommodating the inevitable “last minute rush”! Students are well
supported by the Electives Administrator.
The elective information provided on the Phase 3 Year 5 web site continues to be updated and reflect any additional
information regarding the approval process and any specific issues and requirements at elective placements which have
come to our attention. These include awareness of the change of health and safety standards at an institution in a
developing country and to ensure that communication with an elective institution takes place via an institutional email
address rather than a personal email address to avoid the issue of a “bogus” elective placement, i.e. one which is
confirmed but does not actually exist.
53
Year 5
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
The Electives team continues to provide superb preparation and support for the students of national renown. The team is
developing a web tool to help student choose their sites by viewing their predecessors’ reports.
The new curriculum MBBS 2012 provides the opportunity to review the academic by piloting an “electives portfolio” linking
the elective to elements of the Social Determinant of Health module especially Global Health and comparative health
systems.
54
Year 5
Title & Code of Module
Final Year GP Assistantship
Year
MBBS Year 5
Module Organiser
Dr Richard Meakin
Number Enrolled on Module
367
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to
resolve any problems
Final Year GP Assistantship is a 4-week out-of-London course, including a departmental introductory and debriefing
day. Teaching methods include presentations by GPs and Foundation Year doctors to large groups, and small group
work for simulated actor role-play, significant event analysis and mock OSCE practice. One-to-one teaching occurs in
the GP practice.
As reported last year, the Medical School-based teaching on the final day needed updating. This was implemented this
year. This has gone well but feedback would suggest that further adaptation is needed. Action – This will continue to be
developed.
The allocation of students doing their DGH attachments in Luton and Stevenage to local practices has allowed collective
teaching of students in those practices. It has been decided to develop this further by moving the introductory and final
day medical school based teaching so that this is delivered locally by locally-based teaching fellows. Action: Evaluate
this change.
Assessments are formative. All students complete supervised written work and present this work to the GP and practice
team. A prize was awarded for the best clinical audit and the best healthcare needs assessment completed during the
year. GP tutors were informed of these awards.
The pace, content, teaching methods and assessments are appropriate to senior clinical students, focusing on clinical
method, clinical communication skills, communication with colleagues, professional development and reflective learning
in preparation for the Foundation Year. Course materials were revised and updated to reflect changes made.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
None
55
Year 5
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Students’ overall impression of the placement remains very good, with 88% giving a positive rating (60% excellent and
28% good) with a 68% response rate.
There was one poorly rated practice.
Action - The practice was contacted by the team and appropriate advice, support or action taken. The practice will
continue to be monitored closely.
15 confidential comments were made: 2 of which were very positive comments.
Four tutors received specific adverse confidential comments. Action: These were followed-up by the Year 5 GP course
organiser. These were mainly specific issues related to teaching or assessment.
Other less specific confidential comments have been addressed in covering letters to all tutors, newsletters and website
updates.
Travel costs remain an issue (38% reported spending over £100 during the rotation). 77% were not intending to try and
claim for travel expenses from any source. Action - We continue to raise student awareness of Student Support Clinic
for advice on eligibility for reimbursement of travel costs.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
The GP placement remains a “jewel in the crown” – a popular, high quality and relevant learning opportunity. It has
provided the template for The Assistantships which have been successfully implemented throughout the final year.
56
Year 5
Title & Code of Module
Professional Development Spine
Year
MBBS Year 5
Module Organiser
Dr Deborah Gill
Number Enrolled on Module
367
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
There were no changes this year other than introduction of new series of cases to Case of the Month. Student feedback
on the learning generated by these activities was good. The quality of student work, which is tested both in Case of the
Month and in very challenging practical assessments, remains very good.
Due to connectivity issues at remote sites, we rotated cases so that students could complete all six cases in a way that
best fits their timetable so that students had no case of the month work to complete over the elective period. This caused
some administrative difficulties but improved student feedback. We will continue this approach for 2012.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
See above re connectivity.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Some students still feel the resolution of images used in Case of the Month is poor despite significant efforts to improve
them. There remains a fine balance between the size of files and the clarity. As this is a complaint from the minority of
students we will keep images at the resolution most suitable to the task.
The turnaround time for tutor feedback was reduced to two weeks and this was maintained for all cases bar one (which
was 48hrs late). This ensures that feedback for the case is received before embarking on the next case.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
Case of the Month
Changes to the ‘PDS’ stations in summative assessment this year have aligned these stations more closely to both
learning and other stations types.
57
Year 5
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc
BSc &
Student Presidents Reports
MONITORING REPORT
2011/12
UCL Medical School
University College London
58
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Title of Module/Course Unit
SSC
Year
MBBS Year 3 and 5
Module Organiser
Dr Peter Raven
Number Enrolled on Module
716
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Year 3 SSCs
In Year 3 SSCs were offered across a wide range of clinical specialties with a total over 30 SSCs were available for
students to choose from.
This was the last ever iteration of the SSC block in Year 3.
Year 5 SSCs
In Year 5 SSCs were offered across a wide range of clinical specialties, with over 60 SSCs available for students to
choose from. There was a reduction from the previous year in the number of SSCs on offer, which was the result of a
strategic decision to concentrate numbers in SSCs with a proven track record, rather than offer the same specialty on
multiple sites. The option of arranging a Self-Organized SSC continues to be popular with students, enabling them to
explore areas of special interest. There remains a strong interest in peer learning SSCs. Students were also allowed to
take time off in lieu for a small number of ‘volunteering’ SSCs, including Target Medicine, and Sexpression where the
work carried out over the six years of the programme was significantly in excess of a four week SSC period equivalent
and a suitable project was submitted.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
No issues identified.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and Action Taken or Planned
Year 3 SSCs
Students were asked to make three preferences and we were able to allocate all but a handful of students to one of their
choices.
Year 5 SSCs
The SSC programme in Year 5 is built around a number of well-established SSCs with an excellent track record, and
student feedback is generally very positive. The allocation process was simplified this year which resulted in a more
equitable matching of students to one of their preferred choices. As in previous years, in their feedback, students singled
out for particular praise, SSCs with high levels of contact time with consultants and individual attention to learning needs.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
59
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
E. Comments from Chair of Phase Curriculum Sub Committee and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable.
Where no comment is required, please see the overall MBBS report)
This year saw the development of an overall strategy for SSCs in anticipation of the new curriculum in 2012 which
reduces the number of SSCs and which places one SSC after finals. This has allowed us to create a typology of SSCs to
allow blueprinting of the SSCs throughout the course, to ensure students reach the expected outcomes for SSCs in
keeping with Tomorrow’s Doctors 2009. This review of existing SSCs, including a clarification (and at times modification)
of objectives, methods, assessments together with an expansion of the range and type of SSCs available, will enable us
to ensure that students undertake a range of SSCs which vary in subject matter, method of delivery and the way in which
they are assessed.
2011/12 will be the last year of Year 3 SSCs as we switch over to a new MBS curriculum.
A new type of post finals SSC will be introduced in 2012. Careful management of feedback and sign off of this SSC will be
necessary to ensure progression boards can run smoothly.
60
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Title & Code of Module
Cancer Patient Project
Year
MBBS Year 3
Module Organiser
Dr Ursula McGovern
Number Enrolled on Module
349
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Students are allocated a cancer patient to follow for the academic year. They attend outpatient appointments,
chemotherapy and radiotherapy sessions with the patient and submit an essay at the end of the year about the case,
where they can focus on a particular aspect that they found interesting and can write about in some depth. Throughout
the year, they also attend tutorials/small group teaching sessions about the common cancers – breast, lung, prostate and
colorectal cancer.
Tutorials are supervised by oncology consultants or senior SpRs. The tutorials also provide students with opportunities to
discuss any problems or issues they may have with their patient or case with their tutors. Tutorials are also accompanied
by podcasts on Moodle and clinical scenarios/cases are given to students for discussion during tutorials.
Essays are marked by the tutors and outstanding essays are nominated for shortlisting for the Evelyn Boesen prize,
which is awarded after a viva examination in July.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
2011/2012 was the first year essays were marked online via Moodle. Significant problems were encountered by many
tutors accessing Moodle via NHS computers where the site was extremely slow. As most of the tutors are NHS clinicians,
this caused significant frustration and meant essay marking was far more time consuming than it needed to be. This issue
is being addressed by the Moodle team for the 2012/2013 academic year.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Feedback on the project was generally good with most students reporting that it was a good learning experience and
increased their knowledge of cancer. However, many students identified the lack of written feedback on their essays
frustrating. For 2012/2013, we plan to introduce a more detailed marking scheme and tutors will have to enter feedback
comments as a compulsory element of the marking scheme if their essays are to be accepted on Moodle.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
61
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Title & Code of Module
MBPhD Programme
Year
2011-2012
Module Organiser
Prof. Gordon Stewart
Number Enrolled on Module
52
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
These students are spread across PhDs and MBBS clinical teaching. The main ‘teaching methods’ are those of MBBS
itself, where the usual problems apply: excessively large ward groups, habitual non turn-up by tutors.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
Not applicable.
C. Issues identified by students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Inadequate back-up from Registry and Fees. This is an unusual course which uses unconventional timings. In spite of
the course having been in existence for 18 years in exactly the same form, Registry are always late with documentation
and stipend payment.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
This course does not have dedicated external examiners. The clinical (MBBS) uses MBBS externals, covered elsewhere;
the PhDs are examined by individual external examiners.
E. Chair of Teaching Committee’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment
is required, please see the overall departmental report)
By and large the course continues to thrive. We have a selection of very clever, dedicated students who strive to excel in
both ward and lab. The PhD submission rate is good: it’s not 100%, but 100% is never guaranteed in any speciality.
62
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Title & Code of Module
Pathological Sciences
Year
All Years – Vertical Spine
Module Organiser
Dr Kate Ward
Number Enrolled on Module
NA
Average Mark Gained
NA
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken to resolve
any problems
Year 1 & 2 teaching - has received consistent positive comments both from students and from colleagues. As well as the
ongoing commitment to the Infection and Defence module, Pathological Sciences teachers contribute significant sessions
on other modules. In addition to his role in Infection and Defence, Professor Delves led on formative assessment, and
satisfactory results were achieved.
Year 3 teaching - overall the Pathological Sciences programme has run smoothly. Professor Howie, although retired,
continued to teach pending his replacement. Dr Paul Bass has just been appointed and will take over Professor Howie’s
teaching role in the coming academic year. The Pathological Sciences contribution to the GenMed MiC was ranked
particularly highly followed by GMS, COOP and Surgery. Case study and tutorial teaching were particularly commended.
Individualised feedback from student questionnaires has been given to all teachers by the Chair; minor issues were drawn
to the attention of the lecturers concerned with the result that there were improved scores for many sessions as the year
progressed. The handbooks scored well and the availability of additional material on Moodle was appreciated. Peer
review of teaching was highly valued by those staff who participated in it.
Year 4 teaching - continued with little change. Dr Balakrishnan remains the lead for Communicable Diseases.
Finally, Dr Elizabeth Benjamin has taken on Professor Howie’s overall role in teaching & assessment for clinical years.
New curriculum – The main issue of the year was planning for NC4. This was an onerous task but was completed on
time. The main changes in the IOM concern the clinical use of antibiotics and the problem of antibiotic resistance. For
each of the following three modules teaching and learning on the wards will be supplemented by a pathological sciences
workbook. The VTE project is a joint Pathological Sciences and Synthesis and Professional Practice (patient safety)
project.
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the Module (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
There were some problems with the Lecturecast recordings at Royal Free site as a result of local AV issues. Lecturecast
failures were also recorded at the Bloomsbury site as video content and sound were missing on some of the recordings.
Concerns were raised with senior staff overseeing AV support to ensure that the support for IT and AV is available for
Lecturecast. We were reassured that there will be a system in place to support this and hopefully prevent the recent
problems.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and Action Taken or Planned
Issues raised by students have been acted upon. The presence of one student representative Ms Hannah Russell in the
latter part of the year has proven an invaluable asset, ensuring that there is a contribution not only in terms of feedback
but also in terms of planning.
D. Issues identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
None
63
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
E. Comments from Chair of Phase Curriculum Sub Committee and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable.
Where no comment is required, please see the overall MBBS report)
The change in the format of student feedback for Years 1, 2 and 4 is a major issue. Lecturers no longer receive individual
ratings. Outstanding teachers are easily identified from general comments but other lecturers have been disappointed by
the lack of specific feedback. Without such feedback it is not possible to drive quality of teaching, to support teachers in
the early stages of their career or help and advise failing teachers. In the absence of such feedback there is a very real
risk that teachers may feel undervalued or under motivated, and certainly will be unaware of "blind spots" in their
teaching. This problem has been reported to the Quality Assurance Unit.
The support, hard work and commitment of the Pathological Sciences Teaching Group was outstanding throughout a very
busy year involving much complicated planning and reorganisation for NC4. The problem of double running for teaching
of communicable diseases was accepted without complaint. The enormous contribution of teaching administration was
essential for the smooth running of this complex vertical spine.
64
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Title & Code of Degree
Programme
Programme Organiser
Number Enrolled on programme
Intercalated BSc
Dr B A Cross (Chair of IBSc Steering Committee)
258
Average Mark Gained
Programme Statistics
Marks
Class 1
Class 2.1
Class 2.2
Class 3
Percentage Distribution
Number of Students
%
Number
26.7
69
64.0
165
7.3
19
0.8
2
Not Complete
Absent
Fail 0-20
Fail 21-34
2
Pass
0.8
Class 3
Not Complete
Class 2.2
1
Class 2.1
0.4
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Class 1
withdrawn
2.1
A. Quality of student work, pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods and action(s) taken or
planned to resolve any problems
The quality of student work was almost invariably acknowledged as very good, with the standards achieved by the
students frequently cited as similar to, if not higher, than in previous years (although the overall percentage of first class
awards was 7% lower than last year).The high achievement of IBSc students again resulted in a significant number being
placed on the Dean’s list and being nominated for Faculty and Departmental/Divisional IBSc prizes. In light of the large
number of nominations for the Dean’s list in the 2010/11 session, Departments/Divisions were asked to limit the number
of nominees to the ‘very best’ students from each IBSc programme in 2011/12.
The pace, content and teaching methods were considered appropriate/excellent for most programmes and the variety of
teaching methods employed were acknowledged as enhancing the learning experience. Extra tutorial provision around
the Easter break was mentioned in two programmes as being very welcome additions to the programmes. The
accessibility and helpfulness of project supervisors was also cited as valued and important aspects of IBSc programmes.
A least one programme identified that the opportunity to undertake a laboratory research project will in future be limited to
those who achieve at least 55% in their second year, as is the case for science students and for at least one other IBSc
programme; those with <55% will in future be offered a library project.
In some programmes the research project is randomly allocated, which does not currently appear to be a major issue but
will need to be monitored as this is not common practice across IBSc programmes. If random allocation is to be continued
it will need to be well publicised in the IBSc booklet to manage student expectation and avoid possible disappointment.
The IBSc in Paediatrics and Child Health having experienced some teething difficulties in the 2010/11 session, worked
much better in 2011/12 with the introduction of clear objectives and marking guidelines issued from the onset of the year
and timetables planned and published well in advance for most teaching sessions. The ‘Health Research Methods’
module, which received poor feedback, will be replaced in the 2012/13 session by a ‘Critical Appraisal Module’, run jointly
with the Primary Health Care IBSc.
65
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
B. Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the programme (quality of lecture or
tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities and action taken or planned
For the majority of programmes no significant problems were identified. Problems raised last year for two programmes
had now been satisfactorily addressed. The most notable was the major overhaul of AV equipment in October 2011 and
resolution of a long standing issue relating to IT support (appointment of an IT technician) with the ability to upload
lectures onto Moodle and Lecture Cast, which proved to be significant and very well received improvements for those
involved in the Orthopaedic Science IBSc.
Four programmes identified problems with allocation of rooms that were unsuitable for teaching (too small, chairs with no
desks, issues with lighting, heating and/or high levels of background noise). The most serious issues were reported for
two programmes run on the Royal Free campus; those raised with respect to the Surgical Sciences IBSc are expected to
be largely resolved for the 2011/12 session by allocation of more appropriate space. In addition to disruption caused by
the need to relocate some teaching sessions as a result of restrictions placed on the availability of the dedicated teaching
room on the U3 floor, the Clinical Sciences IBSc identified continued problems with medical student access to imaging via
PACS and to medical records via Cerner.
Further module/programme specific issues have been dealt with by the relevant department/division.
C. Issues Identified by Students (from questionnaires, staff-student committees etc.) and action taken or planned
Student feedback on their IBSc experience was generally very positive. Some concerns were raised about the lack of
preparation for IBSc in terms of necessary study skills: essay writing, critical thinking/evaluation of evidence, reading
scientific papers and appropriate use of statistics in research projects. These issues had already successfully been
addressed in some programmes, notably in the Neuroscience IBSc, where a module specifically dealing with these skills
was very again highly rated by students. Changes to the content and assessment of a previously much criticised
‘Research Methodologies’ module in the Orthopaedic Science IBSc were also very well received. Where provision was
considered inadequate or absent, steps are being taken to implement changes to meet the perceived needs of the
students in the 2012/13 session.
Timeliness and quality of written feedback supplied to students was identified as an issue for three IBSc programmes.
Steps are being taken to address this for the 2012/13 session.
Further course specific issues (e.g. lack of timely information on Moodle related to timetabling of teaching sessions,
uploading of slides and course material, lack of clarity of information about availability of modules and possible clashes,
complaints about teaching style and punctuality of clinical teachers ) are being addressed by the relevant tutors where
possible.
The use of the harmonised scheme for award in the IBSc resulted in disappointment for a small number of students
whose degree classification, while more consistent with their performance in the first two years, was lower than would
have been achieved if based solely on the IBSc year.
66
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
D. Issues Identified by External Examiners and action taken or planned
External examiners were highly complimentary of the standard of student work, particularly with respect to research
projects. The ability of students to defend their projects, given the increasing complexity of the questioning was praised in
programmes that utilise vivas. Also praised was the breadth and depth of content and use of different types of
assessment was in some programmes.
Concerns where they were expressed tended to relate to the marking process. Lack of uniformity of marking between
modules, inconsistencies and paucity of annotation of scripts and under use of the full range of marks were identified as
issues. One examiner criticised the practice of knowledge of the project supervisor opinion and overall student grade,
prior to viva. This examiner also questioned the need to triple mark project theses and recommended that projects only be
randomly selected for marking by the external as a check of the process. Other concerns raised by external examiners in
relation to project marking, which applied to more than one programme, included the notable discrepancy between marks
awarded by the supervisor and the internal marker(s) with the former frequently 10% or more higher, spanning a degree
boundary and contributing significant weighting to the overall project mark.
Lack of consistency in project dissertations was identified for more than one programme. Although it was appreciated that
due to the time constraints the input of students to research projects was limited, it was evident that some students were
more involved than others. The examiner requested that in future students should be asked to give a clear indication of
the extent of their role in the research carried out.
There are plans to address all of these issues for the 2012/13 session.
One examiner raised concerns about the appropriateness of the harmonised scheme for the award of honours for the
IBSc programmes in which marks achieved in the first 2 years are capped (at 45 or 49) for candidates who are
unsuccessful at first sitting of their examinations and felt this disadvantaged one candidate whose performance in IBSc
year was consistently of a higher class than was subsequently awarded.
E. Specific Programme Organiser Comments and action taken or planned
Recruitment remains an issue for some programmes. Appointment of new tutors/teachers, collaboration between IBSc
programme tutors to improve the student experience, changes to course unit options, delivery and content in response to
student feedback and improved marketing are some of the strategies planned for the 2012/13 and/or 2013/14 session to
increase applications.
The IBSc Programme Review recommended a limit to the number of IBSc programmes to maximise student experience
and ensure viable numbers on available programmes. Merger of existing programmes and shared modules between
others remain strong recommendations. The unwillingness of FLS to consolidate Philosophy Medicine and Society and
History of Medicine into one coherent and strong degree in History and Philosophy of Medicine continues to be a major
cause for concern.
The programme organiser for the Orthopaedics IBSc expressed concern over the decision to no longer accept external
applicants, as the programme is unique in the UK and deprives excellent students the opportunity of graduating from UCL
with this specialty IBSc. There are currently no plans to reopen the opportunity for external students to intercalate at UCL,
for well documented reasons.
The programme organiser for the Clinical Science IBSc expressed concern about impact of harmonisation on student
morale. All degrees at UCL now follow a harmonised scheme and there are no plans to change the current harmonised
scheme for award of an IBSc. All non-graduate medical students are aware on entry that they will need to intercalate
immediately after year 2 and that their degrees will be classified using a ratio of 1:1:6 ( year 1: year 2: IBSc year), where
the marks obtained at first sitting of their examinations (rather than those obtained at resit) will be used in the calculation.
67
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
F. Programme Organiser comment on any structural changes to the programme which have been made in the preceding year
which might necessitate an updating of the existing Programme Specification (PS). Please confirm that the PS has been reviewed and
updated. Approved by external examiner and UCL.
The IBSc in Anatomy and Developmental Biology is under review and will not be offered for the 2012/13 session.
Clinical Sciences and Orthopaedic Science– weighting of project has been decreased from 2 units to 1.5 units to ensure
consistency with respect to other IBSc laboratory research projects. The Programme Specifications have been updated,
approved by external examiner and UCL.
A new Critical Appraisal Module will be taught between Primary Health Care and Paediatrics and Child Health in the
2012/13 session. A revised PIQ has been submitted and signed off by Mrs Irenie Morley.
A common scheme for award (including the requirement for students to pass their project to be awarded a degree) and
the consideration of borderline candidates has now been agreed and confirmed with Mrs Morley for all IBSc programmes.
G. If the Programme is subject to accreditation by a Professional, Statutory or Regulatory Body (PSRB), please
include the following information:
See Faculty of Medical Sciences Year 1 Programme Organiser Report
68
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Junior
RUMS Junior Student President 2011-12
Years
MBBS Year 1 and 2
Completed by
Kian Sabzevari
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc
-
Both pace and content were perceived as rather challenging, but students were generally able to keep up.
Content was well received and generally thought of as very interesting.
The practical sessions were enjoyed, and group work (especially in the endocrinology module) was appreciated.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities
-
The loss of the room used for the problem solving sessions of the endocrine module will mean that future years
may not receive these tutorials and as such will miss out on a different learning style.
The Cruciform cluster rooms were constantly booked out by other departments meaning it was rare for students
to gain access to computers in the building.
st
nd
LAPT continues to be appreciated by 1 and 2 year students.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned
N/A
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)
Overall, the reaction to second year was a very positive one. It was seen as a very challenging but worthwhile year of
content. Parts of it are under review, and I’m sure improvement.
69
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Senior
RUMS Senior Student President
Years
MBBS Year 3 - 5
Completed by
Gareth Chan
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc
2012/13 sees the move to the new MBBS curriculum. There has been constant and thorough student input into the
design and implementation of the new curriculum throughout the 2011/12 session. The Year 6 curriculum has already
been implemented and from feedback from students, it seems to be running well and has been well received. However,
concerns still exist within Year 6 about the perceived shortening of revision time at the end of year due to examinations
being held earlier to accommodate Foundation School’s requirements.
This year’s Year 5 students will be undergoing a “transitional” year between the old and new curricula. The success of this
can only be judged at the completion of the year.
The new Year 4 is implemented this year starting with a new introductory module. There has been significant student
input into the design of this new curriculum and the student representatives have reported back as saying that they have
been listened to and felt valued in the discussions.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities
There continues to be a number of “teacher no shows” in the clinical curriculum. Whilst the blame cannot and should not
be solely attributed to either students or teachers, this is an issue that does need to be addressed. There has been
increased use of the no show texting service.
The level of access to hospital computers across the three main sites still varies and needs to be addressed. However
internet access at DGHs appears to be improving compared to previous years.
Medical students continue to suffer from lacking their “own building” as shown with the Cruciform Library and Computer
rooms. These spaces are often occupied by non-medics especially during examination periods, and many of these
students have their own departmental facilities. This leaves the medics with nowhere to revise/study, with many choosing
to relocate to the British or BMA libraries.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned
We, as student representatives, need to increase student participation in Medical School committees and this is
something we are working towards in the new academic year with a new streamlined representation structure.
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)
Student engagement in student representation to the Medical School continues to be difficult, but acknowledgement from
UCLMS Senior Management appears to have reassured those students who have acted as reps that their input is valued
at the most senior levels. This will hopefully aid our ability to recruit more student representatives.
Further work is still required to combat no shows by students and teachers alike.
70
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Senior
Senior Vice-President for Education 2011-12
Years
MBBS Year 3 - 5
Completed by
Joseph Yoav Dangoor
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc
The pace and content of the course seem satisfactory. The new curriculum will be different and reports regarding this will
be more relevant.
It is still worth mentioning that the content and structure of the current MBBS Years 3-4 are appropriate and conducive to
progress. The new Final Year (NC6 programme) is perceived positively in view of the opportunity to re-sit final MBBS
examinations within a month of failure – thus avoiding repetition of this year and reducing anxiety about the prospect of
failing.
Student guides detailing learning objectives are very useful, as are the Taught Course lectures for MBBS Year 3. There is
concern within the student body about the suspension of this programme.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities
There is a lack of common space at UCL; a survey to gauge student opinion is in progress. We are aware of positive
efforts to reinstate common space at the Royal Free Campus. While common space at the Archway Campus is
satisfactory, the situation at Bloomsbury is less acceptable.
We appreciate the hard efforts by the Undergraduate Medical School to support us in lobbying for this space.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned
There is demand within the student body for a list of OSCE stations to be published a day or two prior to the examinations
in order to eliminate the advantage of candidates whom are briefed by colleagues who have taken the OSCE at an early
session.
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)
This year the SSCC had a very slow beginning, taking place in February. A governing document has been produced and
approved, and year representative roles will be advertised better to ensure a fully functioning SSCC earlier on in the year.
71
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Medical and Postgraduate Student Officer 2011-12
Years
MBBS All Years
Completed by
Neil Chowdhury
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc
From what I could perceive from a Union perspective, at the time of my post, there was no direct feedback about
the various parts of the course that some up the features that make the course. There was slight nervousness
about the change of the degree as there was a crossover to the new curriculum, and how different things were
going to be. Most direct feedback was passed to my associates of the Union; the RUMS officer, VP (1,2,3) and
VP (4,5,6). Generally, people still felt confident in the course and supported. There is also a rise of concern for
the shortened period of revision for Finalists’ with the exam period moved closer.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of
lecture or tutorial rooms, laboratory or IT facilities
Most of the feedback I collected during my year was focussed on this. The main requirement was the availability
for 24 hour libraries during exam periods, and whether they can be elongated for the whole period of revision,
rather than just the selected days, especially for finalists. Also, there was a request towards an increase in
printing quota to allow those that require slide printing or other printed resources from Moodle. This seems to be
a continuing concern that resources that once were provided are no longer so. On top of this, the difficulty with
the cluster room being booked out for classes, without any where for medical students to go, which makes things
difficult when some of the course is online during university hours. This is fortunately being considered in the
Medical Hub plans.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned
Most of this information would have appeared in the JSSC meetings, and is covered by my colleagues with the
details that they collated over the year.
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is
required, please see the overall departmental report)
This year has been overall quite successful in developing the course for its role out in the 2012/13 academic
year, taking into account a student’s perspective regarding certain aspects of the changes in the curriculum. It is
important that the Medical School stays in close contact with the Union, which has also tried to develop the
representative roles with a new framework at UCLU. This will take effect from 2012/13, and will be an effective
way of recruiting students into the Rep roles. It will both satisfy the medical school’s requirement to get feedback,
whilst also making the students feel useful to the medical school.
There are also huge developments in the medical school estates division, which the Union, and myself, will be
involved in. The Estates will dictate the ability for the course to work effectively. UCL’s resource of space is finite,
and so it is important to make sure that the Estates takes into consideration the Medical Schools demands in
location and learning space. In my own personal capacity, I will be providing perspective on the Royal Free
development, and the Cruciform hub development.
72
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Junior
Junior Vice President for Education 2012-13
Years
MBBS Years 1 & 2
Completed by
Ravi Mistry
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc

First years found the introduction of the new curriculum before the official launch to work fairly smoothly. The
gradual build up of content was appreciated – particularly the workload gradient from FHMP to C&B. This helped
school-leavers acclimatise to university learning and helped graduate and gap-year students get into the rhythm
of studying again without feeling overwhelmed.

Workshop sessions in C&B and FNM and the Endocrine were incredibly popular and students were grateful for
having such sessions in place.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities

On the whole, students were impressed with the IT provision.

Lecturecast and LAPT are both highly valued by both first and second year students.

Histology CALs with Slidesurfer were immensely popular and well received too.

Anatomy Lab Self-Directed-Learning Sessions are also much appreciated by students.

Many students would like lecturers to take advantage of the TurningPoint (PRS) system to increase studentlecturer interactivity.

There was the occasional hitch with lecturers and microphone usage resulting in delays to lecture
commencement - sometimes by 15 minutes. This results in a rushed, or sometimes incomplete, delivery of the
lecture.

Given the popularity and appreciation of the workshop sessions in the histology lab, students are concerned at
the Medical School’s loss the room but would very much like workshops to continue in any way possible despite
the loss of said space.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned

The back-to-back embryology lectures (FHMP) and psychology lectures (I&D) resulted in students struggling to
keep up and led them to feel incredibly overwhelmed. This however has been rectified for 2012-13 due to the
result of end-of-unit feedback by having intervals between said lectures.

Handouts (Course Material) for the FHMP often just contain a list of objectives. unit that contain more detail
relating to lecture content than solely the list of objectives would be a fantastic improvement and bring it in line
with the other units in the course. Many first years feel incredibly lost in some FHMP lectures not knowing what to
take from them, particularly those who have started higher education for the first time. Having some notes on the
course material would rectify this and give students some much needed direction.
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)
N/A
73
Vertical Modules, MBPhD, IBSc & Student Presidents Reports
Senior
Senior Vice President for Education 2012-13
Years
MBBS Years 4, 5 & 6
Completed by
Alice Harper
A. Course summary i) Pace and content, appropriateness of teaching methods etc


It is felt that students are satisfied with the pace of the course. Students feel that course content is not always made
clear. In particular, they are given a list of conditions to know about but the depth of knowledge required is not always
made clear. Students would appreciate more guidance on course content to help navigate and make the most of the
many and diverse clinical placements which the medical school organizes for them.
In all three clinical years, it is felt that there is an appropriate balance between lectures and clinical teaching. If there
were an area of improvement, it is that not all students feel there is enough bedside teaching; students are always
very appreciative of this method of teaching.
B. (ii) Any Learning Resources problems which have affected the provision of the course-unit (quality of lecture or tutorial
rooms, laboratory or IT facilities







There is on-going congestion in the student cluster room in the basement of the Cruciform building. This has been
fed-back to the UCL ISD services, with the suggestion that those booking the room be flexible in allowing medical
students to use those computers that are available.
A lack of more informal student space amenable to group learning at the Royal Free Hospital is being addressed with
the building of a student hub (to be completed in June 2013).
The lack of common-room space and lockers for students at Bloomsbury has been addressed to some extent by the
creation of student hub areas in the Cruciform and the Rockefeller buildings. Students are grateful for areas where
they can eat lunch but would still welcome an area dedicated to medical students, as these hubs are for all UCL
students.
Moodle course units that required an enrolment key have now been made open-access.
Not all lectures, particularly in the Clinical Neurosciences module in Year 5, are made available on Lecturecast. This
has been fed-back to the Year 5 administrator.
Students were unhappy with the lack of provision of hard copies of course material pertaining to pathology week
lectures, a decision taken to be in accordance with UCL’s paperless policy.
The provision of internet access at DGH sites has improved. Students would however welcome a more permanent
solution than that provided at QEII/Lister sites where students are given an allowance to buy an internet dongle rather
than having an internet connection in each room.
C. Particular Modular Issues Identified by Students and Action Taken or Planned


Year 3 students not placed at the Royal Free for General Medical Specialties felt at a disadvantage during this
module as most specialties are based at this hospital. This has been fed-back to the medical school and online
learning resources for renal teaching has been planned.
Year 4 students in WHCD reported difficulties, particularly for male medical students, to gain access to labour wards.
The module leads have been made aware of this problem.
D. Student President’s Comments and Action Taken or Planned (Where applicable. Where no comment is required,
please see the overall departmental report)

The Years 4, 5 & 6 Staff & Student Consultative Committee met three times throughout the year. Student
representatives appreciate this commitment from the medical school and feel that their feedback is listened to and
acted upon.
74