SEN/11/48
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
The Senate
Summary Report of the Annual Monitoring of Taught Pathways Delivered in the
Academic Year 2009/10
1.
Introduction
1.1
The purpose of this paper is to provide a summary to the Senate on the annual
monitoring process for pathways delivered in 2009/10, conducted between
September 2010 and March 2011.
1.2
The five Faculty Board overview reports (Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences
(ALSS); Lord Ashcroft International Business School (LAIBS); Faculty of
Education (FoE); Faculty of Health & Social Care (FHSC); Faculty of Science &
Technology (FST)) are attached as Appendices 1-5 and were the main sources
of information for the Summary Report. All overview reports were approved by
the relevant faculty boards at meetings held in February/March 2011;
1.3
The Senate is invited to consider this report, agree appropriate action
where necessary and conclude the annual monitoring process of delivery
in 2009/10.
2.
Process
2.1
The main structure and organisation of the annual monitoring process was
largely unchanged and operated as outlined in the Senate Code of Practice on
Curriculum Approval and Review.
2.2
In response to feedback from the process conducted in the previous year, two
faculties agreed to convene the meeting of their Annual Monitoring
Subcommittee earlier than in previous years (before Christmas) in order to
bring forward the conclusion of the Faculty stage of the process. This change
worked well with no difficulties reported from either Faculty.
2.3
It was agreed that the FoE could use the self evaluation documents (SEDs)
produced for PSRB purposes as part of Anglia Ruskin’s annual monitoring
process instead of completing a separate AMR.
2.4
The LAIBS Overview Report for 2008/09 noted that due to the large number of
pathways and delivery locations for the Undergraduate Programme, detailed
analysis proved challenging including significant challenges for the
Undergraduate Programme Leader in completing detailed comparative
analyses of the large number of deliveries of each of the pathways. In April
2010, the Senate agreed to permit the Head of Quality Assurance and
Institutional Quality Assurance Officer to work with the LAIBS Deputy Dean and
Faculty Quality Assurance Officer to agree a minor amendment to the annual
monitoring process for LAIBS which is not solely based at the level of the
Programme in order to address the concerns above.
Summary Report to the Senate
1
Annual Monitoring of 2009/10
2.5
This year’s process incorporated two briefing events, held in early September
2010, for those colleagues involved in the process which included a detailed
session on access to and use of Programme and Pathway statistical reports
and the provision of exemplar annual monitoring reports.
2.6
In general, it can be reported to the Senate that the process in the year to which
this report refers has operated smoothly and efficiently.
3.
Conclusions
3.1
All five Faculty Board overview reports confirm that the annual monitoring
process of the delivery of pathways in 2009/10 was conducted effectively and
undertaken in a sufficiently critical and reflective manner.
Essential Requirements of the Annual Monitoring Process
3.2
All the faculties report that satisfactory AMRs and Readers’ Reports for each
Programme have been received and considered by the Faculty Board Annual
Monitoring Subcommittees
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports (for implementation during
2009/10)
3.3
All the overview reports confirm that, following some minor interventions by the
Faculty subcommittees, the vast majority of actions identified in the previous
year’s SMART Action Plans had either been completed or rolled forward for
inclusion in the Action Plan for 2010/11, due to the medium-long term nature of
the issue or where timescales had required revision. In some cases, Action
Plans were referred back to AMR authors for further information as progress on
actions was not clear.
Statistical Data
3.4
All five overview reports confirm that Programme Leaders used and analysed
statistics available via the Oracle Portal in the compilation of their reports. In
several cases, this data was supplemented with locally held data in order to
improve the detail of the information.
3.5
A number of the Faculties suggested that the statistical data provided should be
enhanced to provide diagrammatic and pictorial representations of the
information in order to aid analysis and understanding (the current presentation
of data is solely statistics provided in a tabular format). This development will
be considered for further years.
3.6
The ALSS report noted that statistics via the Oracle Portal do not support the
non-modular provision in the Anglia Law School and that local arrangements
were made to provide the data. The current arrangements do not support nonmodular provision and this will be reviewed for future years.
Summary Report to the Senate
2
Annual Monitoring of 2009/10
Curriculum Efficiencies
3.7
The majority of Faculties reported that the Spring 2010 Curriculum
Rationalisation Project had led to efficiencies as a result of the reduction in
modules and pathways. FST expressed concern at the speed at which the
Project had progressed and that work is continuing during 2010/11 to embed
the revised curriculum offering.
3.8
FHSC noted the continuing challenges in securing good, high quality
placements for its students in accordance with the revised curriculum and the
need for this to be monitored closely within the Faculty.
External Examiners’ Reports
3.9
All the overview reports confirm that External Examiners’ reports were used
effectively as part of the annual monitoring process. In general, responses to
the actions identified reports had all been provided and the overview reports
confirm that SMART Action Plans included reference to External Examiners’
comments where applicable (although some minor interventions by the
subcommittees were required in relation to a few action plans which required
amendments). It should be noted that Faculty responses to the few ‘academic
standards as risk’ areas highlighted by External Examiners was received by the
Senate at its November 2010 meeting.
3.10 The LAIBS report highlighted that external examiners had some concerns over
the number of missing marks from Departmental Assessment Panel meetings
and that, whilst this has improved, further improvement is still required.
3.11 Several of the Faculty reports highlighted the need to ensure consistency in
feedback comments to students on assessed work, ensuring a positive and
constructive approach and equivalence to the mark awarded. The recent
Quality Enhancement Audit on Student Feedback on Assessed Work has
reported on this issue to the Senate’s Quality & Standards Committee (QSC)
and an action plan for the outcomes of the audit, including the issue of
consistency of feedback, will be considered by the QSC in June 2011.
3.12 The increasing workload on external examiners as a result of higher student
numbers and increased collaborative activity was highlighted by LAIBS which
has recently appointed two extra external examiners to help address this
situation.
Future Action Plans (ie for implementation during 2010/11)
3.13 The Faculty Overview Reports confirm that, in general, the action plans
attached to the individual AMRs reflected the issues identified in the associated
reports, were informed by statistical analysis (where appropriate) and followed
the SMART format. There were a small number of action plans which required
revision following the meeting of the subcommittees; either to include actions
which had been noted in the text but omitted in the plan, or to ensure the plan
met the ‘SMART’ format.
Summary Report to the Senate
3
Annual Monitoring of 2009/10
4.
Issues of Institutional Significance
4.1
The following issues of institutional significance were identified:
(a)
the reduction in participation in the module evaluation process since the
on-line systems replaced the paper based system (although it is
acknowledged that the new systems did lead to a speedier provision of
outcome data). This issue is currently being considered in detail by the
Student Satisfaction Improvement Group (SSIG).
(b)
the effective implementation of the new Curriculum Management
Committees at partner institutions. The Academic Office is currently
reviewing this area.
(c)
word limits for major project modules which are considered to be very high
in comparison to other institutions. This issue has been considered by the
Academic Regulations Subcommittee and is subject to proposals for
amendment in a separate paper to the Senate.
(d)
the application of the existing regulations regarding word counts for
assessed work. This issue has been considered by the Academic
Regulations Subcommittee and is subject to proposals for amendment in
a separate paper to the Senate.
(e)
the need to make DAP meetings less paper based. The Academic Office
is piloting an electronic approach to DAPs during June 2011 with the
Department of Psychology in the Faculty of Science & Technology with a
view to introducing such innovations to all DAPS during 2011/12.
(f)
limits on file storage size on the VLE. Several faculties requested that this
is reviewed particularly in relation to modules which involve work video
and other multimedia formats. It is proposed to refer this matter to
Learning Development Services and Information Systems and media
Services for review and feedback to the faculties.
5.
Examples of Good and Innovative Practice and Commendable and/or
Significant Achievements for Wider Dissemination
5.1
Anglia Ruskin University defines good practice as:
"a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which has, over an
appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an
enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to
stakeholders (eg: students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners,
employers etc.) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in
other areas of the institution."
5.2
The Senate is invited to endorse the examples of good and innovative
practice listed below listed in each Faculty Summary Report (see
appendices 1-5) which shall then be disseminated to the wider Anglia
Ruskin community with details of colleagues who can be contacted for further
details. The information will be provided to all Deans and Deputy Deans of
Faculty, Directors of Studies, Heads of Department, Programme Leaders and
HE Co-ordinators at partner institutions.
Summary Report to the Senate
4
Annual Monitoring of 2009/10
5.3
It is proposed that further information is required prior to circulation in order to
demonstrate the impact of these examples on the student experience and
therefore aid colleagues when considering their adoption within their own
practices.
6.
Further Enhancements and Amendments to the Future Process
6.1
In previous years, this section of the Summary Report highlights enhancements
and other proposed changes to the annual monitoring process for
implementation during the following academic year.
6.2
During the 2010/11 academic year, the Senate’s Quality & Standards
Committee has considered proposals for a fundamental change in the approach
taken to annual monitoring with a view to moving away from a process based
on narrative reports to a series of Departmental based meetings where the
focus is on statistical data and other performance indicators (including
outcomes from surveys such as the NSS and comment from external
examiners’ reports). This follows the successful use of a series of similar
meetings held in Autumn 2010 and the adaptation of these meetings to
introduce a revised annual monitoring process.
6.3
Full detailed proposals for this new approach are being considered by the
Senate as a separate item for discussion at its meeting of 22nd June 2011.
PAUL BAXTER
Director, Academic Office
April 2010
Summary Report to the Senate
5
Annual Monitoring of 2009/10
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ARTS, LAW AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
QUALITY AND STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE
ANNUAL MONITORING OVERVIEW REPORT
Prepared by:
Dr Apurba Kundu
Based on discussions of the above meeting held on: 21 January 2011
Present at the meeting:
Sarah Burch (FHSC), Nikki Dibb, Sarah Fitt,
Apurba Kundu (Chair), Shaun Le Boutillier,
Vicky McCormick, Richard Monk
1. Essential requirements
Consider any matters arising in respect to the following criteria ( see guidance note 2.2 (a) – (k)
I can confirm that the following Annual Monitoring Reports (AMR) and Reader’s Reports were received and
considered by the Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences (ALSS) Quality and Standards Subcommittee:
 Art, Design and Media / Dr Apurba Kundu*
 Communication Film and Media / Julia Ramsay
 English and Writing / Julia Ramsay
 English as a Foreign Language / Dr Zoe Bennett
 English Language and Intercultural Communication / Dr Zoe Bennett
 Humanities / Sarah Fitt
 Law (Academic) / Melanie Bell
 Law (Professional) Dr Shaun Le Boutillier
 Music / Dr Shaun Le Boutillier
 Performing Arts / Dr Mick Gowar
 Social Sciences / Sarah Fitt
I can further confirm that:
 The list of pathways within the scope of the AMR has been completed
 Last year’s Reader’s Reports were attached as an appendix
 Last year’s Action Plans were attached as an appendix
 The External Examiners’ reports were attached as an appendix to each AMR
 The response letters to External Examiners’ reports were attached as an appendix to each AMR (with
the exceptions noted as Actions 5.a.3-4 below)
 SMART Action plans for 2010/11 have been attached as an appendix to each AMR
*Due to a delay in the submission of this AMR, this Reader’s Report was received and considered by Chair’s
action.
2. Readers’ Reports
The Subcommittee notes that appropriate actions have been taken in response to any and all issues raised
in the 2009-10 Reader’s Reports in all cases with the following exceptions and, where necessary, actions:
That the good practice in relation to student feedback identified by the Reader for Law (Academic) had not
been followed through in 2009-10.
Action 2.1: Law (Academic) Programme Leader Kathy Quinlan to see how this good practice can be
disseminated in the department and/or faculty, perhaps at departmental staff meetings or the annual
6
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
faculty away day.
That, while the Department of English, Communications, Film and Media has discussed teaching only posts
in the English as a Foreign Language programme, additional clarification of what measures have been/are
being taken is necessary.
Action 2.2: English as a Foreign Language Programme Leader Nick Hillman
3. Last year’s action plans
The Readers’ Reports detail the extent to which the changes included in last year’s SMART action plans
were successfully implemented in 2009-10. Where these have not been successfully concluded, they have
been carried forward to the relevant 2010-11 Action Plans (see, for example, those for Arts, Design and
Media, Performing Arts, and EFL).
4. Statistical analysis
The Reader’s Reports state that statistical data from our university portal and within various programme
areas has been accessed and analysed appropriately in most areas and, in the main, the data has been used
to inform future action plans with following exceptions and, where necessary, actions:
Central statistics are not available for the Law (Professional) courses, and so the AMR author had to make
use of appropriate departmental statistics.
The statistics for the English Language and Intercultural Communication programme are presented in a
format which suggests that each language combination is a pathway in its own right. This is somewhat
confusing, especially in the case of part-time students.
The Subcommittee recognise that statistics for the English as a Foreign Language programme provided by
our university portal have not been particularly reliable due to a combination of the nature of the short
courses on the programme and the way our university records and/or reports students as full-time
equivalents (FTEs).
A discrepancy in the retention rate data for the BA (Hons) Psychosocial Studies at core should be reported
to Academic Office Assistant Director (Strategic Planning) Ruth Bourne.
Action 4.1: Social Sciences Programme Leader Liz Bradbury
The Subcommittee requests that target 3 of the action plan in the AMR for the Law (Academic) programme
be clarified as to the specific action being referred to, and its reference to “C.1.2” be deleted.
Action 4.2: Law (Academic) Programme Leader Kathy Quinlan
5a. Academic Standards: Key issues, themes and trends
The Reader’s Reports confirm that the AMRs demonstrate a reflective and evidence-based evaluation of
both curriculum delivery and student achievement. Any issues of significance regarding the efficiency of the
delivery of the curriculum or other streamlining activities as they pertain to “academic standards” are noted
and, where necessary, actioned as follows:
Curriculum delivery and achievement
The Reader for Law (Professional) programme believes there is “some scope for design modification at the
module/course level—as indicated from the external examiners’ comments on specific courses”. However,
as the course is due to be updated for 2010-11 to conform to demands of the Solicitors Regulatory
Authority, no specific actions are recommended.
7
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
Curriculum efficiency
The Subcommittee discussed the discontinuation of two-subject awards within the Law (Academic)
programme, and the negative impact this has had on work placements. No specific action points are
considered necessary as it is understood that the newly designed LLB has an explicit focus on employability
skills.
The Subcommittee requests the Reader of the AMR for Performing Arts provide a more detailed response
to this section of the Readers’ Report, ensuring that each subsection of the template is addressed.
Action 5.a.1: Performing Arts AMR Reader Dr Mick Gower
External Examiners reports
External Examiners’ reports are almost uniformly positive, and our AMRs have responded satisfactorily to
any issues or areas of concern raised by them, with the following notes, exceptions and, where necessary,
actions:
The Subcommittee notes the two matters pertaining to academic standards at risk as reported to Senate,
and the (satisfactory) responses given by the Heads of Department.
The Subcommittee discussed the issues raised by the Performing Arts external examiner Joshua Abrams,
and noted action point 5 (concerning partner University Centre Peterborough) within the action plan. The
Subcommittee considered that faculty-level support should also be included in the monitoring of this target,
and suggests that the Deputy Dean (Academic Development) be included within the named monitors.
Action 5.a.2: Performing Arts Programme Leader Gianna Bouchard/Deputy Dean (Academic
Development) Dr Apurba Kundu
The Subcommittee requests confirmation on whether a response has been made to the report of Law
(Academic) External Examiner Prof Maria Tighe and, if yes, that the response be appended to the
programme’s AMR.
Action 5.a.3: Law (Academic) Programme Leader Kathy Quinlan
The Subcommittee requests confirmation as to whether a response has been made to the report of Music
External Examiner Simon Atkinson and, if yes, that the response be appended to the programme’s AMR.
Action 5.a.4: Music Programme Leader Justin Williams
The Subcommittee notes the Reader’s comments re whether a formal response to English and Writing
External Examiner Prof Raymond’s comments last year has been sent on behalf of our university and
request confirmation from the Academic Office.
Action 5.a.5: ALSS Faculty Quality Assurance Officer Vicky McCormick
The Subcommittee is concerned that actions within the British Council Action Plan of the English as a
Foreign Language AMR which relate to our University Accommodation Service remain outstanding in spite
of repeated requests from the programme leader. The Chair of the Subcommittee agreed to refer this
matter to the Chair of Faculty Board.
Action 5.a.6: Deputy Dean (Academic Development) Dr Apurba Kundu
The Subcommittee suggests that comments by Music Therapy External Examiner Donald Wetherick in
relation to word limits are referred to our university’s Academic Regulations Subcommittee.
Action 5.a.7: ALSS Director of Studies Dr Shaun Le Boutillier
5b. Quality of Education: Key issues, themes and trends
8
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
Key issues, themes and trends concerning “quality of education” are noted and, where necessary, actioned
as follows:
Student feedback
The Subcommittee notes all that all our programmes use the student module evaluation questionnaire
(SMEQ) as a key tool in understanding the performance of our learning and teaching efforts within modules.
However, a number of Readers point out that programmes suffered a sharp drop in response rates
following the introduction of an online SMEQ from Semester 2, 2009-10.
The AMRs report considerable student engagement at programme subcommittee meetings, but some
Readers note that the minutes from these meetings are not always appended to the AMRs. The
Subcommittee suggests that, in future, these minutes are included as an appendix to the AMR.
Action 5.b.1: ALSS Faculty Quality Assurance Officer Vicky McCormick
The Subcommittee notes the Reader’s concern regarding the Communications, Film and Media
programme’s Action Plan: “ Insufficient information is given as to the nature of one particular issue
concerning a module at Peterborough making it impossible for a Reader to report as to what the issue was,
whether it comes under the heading of a ‘key issue’ or whether the action taken is appropriate and needs
an action point in the future action plan” The Subcommittee recommends the author review this section of
the report and include an appropriate action point in the 2010-11 Action Plan.
Action 5.b.2: Communications, Film and Media Programme Leader Dr Nina Lübbren
The Reader of the Performing Arts AMR has removed the subheadings within this section of the report. The
subcommittee request he revisit this section of the report and addresses each subheading included on the
AMR template.
Action 5.b.3: Performing Arts AMR Reader Dr Mick Gower
Student retention
The Subcommittee notes that a number of positive measures have been implemented across the faculty,
including: improved attendance monitoring procedures in the Music, Performing Arts, and Communications,
Film and Media programmes; improvements to the Personal Tutor system in the English Language and
Intercultural Communication, and Social Sciences programmes; and a new mentoring system by second year
students within the Music Therapy pathway of the Music programme.
Physical resources
The Subcommittee discussed a number of issues relating to our university’s new virtual learning
environment (VLE) as a theme running across several programmes. The Subcommittee is concerned about
the size limits for file storage as this can be limiting, particularly where files include video and other
multimedia resources.
Action 5.b.4: Learning Technologist Julian Priddle to continue to raise this concern at the VLE
Implementation Board and/or other meetings.
The lack of IT facilities was identified as a resource issue in the programme areas of Law (Academic) and
Communications, Film and Media programmes.
Readers have identified a perceived lack of library resources in the English and Writing, and Law (Academic)
programmes.
The Subcommittee discussed comments raised by the Reader for the Social Sciences AMR in relation to staff
turnover at University Centre Peterborough, and whether there is a link between this and student
retention.
9
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
Stakeholder feedback
No significant issues are noted by the Readers.
Enhancement activity by staff
The Subcommittee is pleased to note Readers consider that staff in the majority of our programmes are
carrying out significant enhancement activities, but request that each Reader provides two examples per
report.
Action: 5.b.5: ALL AMR Readers
5c. Issues requiring attention by Anglia Ruskin in 2010/11 at institutional level
The Subcommittee notes that, in a number of cases, Curriculum Management Committee meetings at
partner institutions are being held in an inconsistent and/or irregular manner (e.g., lack of documentation in
advance, no minutes, no student representatives in attendance, etc), if at all. The Subcommittee asks for
this matter to be referred to the Academic Office.
Action 5.c.1: ALSS Faculty Quality Assurance Officer Vicky McCormick/Deputy Head of Quality Assurance
(Partnerships) Peter Worker
6. Good and innovative practice
Good practice is defined as a method, strategy or system, procedure or process, which has, over
an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an enhanced quality of
education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (eg students, staff, partner
institutions, employers etc) and which can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in
other areas of the institution.[Overview report template]
Good and innovative practice in learning, teaching and assessment
The actions taken and planned to improve performance in first year modules [on the Law (Academic)
programme], particularly regarding feedback, as well as the planned enhancement of the role of the
Personal Tutor, are impressive and appear to be examples of good practice.
Fine Art External Examiner Margaret Ayliffe cites the
use of off site exhibitions/projects to develop individual ambition and transferable skills key to
working in the creative industries. The use of external projects and staff exhibitions to
enhance the regional and national profile of the programme. The Fine Art catalogue both
promotes the course in a strong professional and aspirational light but gives students enhanced
professional development. Study trips provide students with the opportunity for formal and
informal learning outside of the University and clearly inform progression and ambition within
a wider context. The integration of postgraduate and PhD students within the department
provides a clear progression route for students and an aspirational model.
The enhancement of [Communications, Film and Media programme] students’ understanding of the
connection between critical theory and creative practice, for example, by screenings and analysis of work
of established creative practitioners embedded into a range of theory and practice modules, often via
special events.
Art, Design and Media External Examiner Robert Kurta cites the “use of the blog on the final major
project. Not only is it easy to chart the performance of the students across the module and for staff
to track this to make timely interventions, the blog itself contains a wealth of detail on the technical,
10
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
artistic and collaborative nature of the project the students have engaged in. This is excellent.”
Art, Design and Media External Examiner Robert Kurta is
very impressed with the peer assessment checklist that was used for the group project in the
Animation module. Group work is very important in degrees and allowing for students to
comment on and mark the performance of others within the group is excellent practice. The
grid expresses clearly and unambiguously what the expectation and behaviour of students
should be in order to achieve high marks and is to be commended.
The Social Sciences programme makes good progress in the adoption of explicit marking criteria for all
assessed work and has been at the forefront in the integration of wiki, blogging and other social
networking facilities alongside the new VLE.
Photography External Examiner Andrew Golding cites the
written feedback for the module Specialisation AC230001S was particularly well written and
exemplary in summarising achievement and qualities of the work, and in making creative,
supportive suggestions for students to advance and improve their understanding and
practice…this module produced feedback, which could become an exemplar for all.
The provision of entire cohort grades to external examiners of the English Language and Intercultural
Communication programme is noted by a Reader.
Student support
The role or involvement of the Music’s programme leader and pathway leaders in the attendance
monitoring process goes beyond ARU expectations.
Tutorial support and regular informal meetings with the English as a Foreign Language programme leader
that enhance the student experience.
Organisation and management
External Examiner Tim Holmes of the Communications, Film and Media programme cites the “ways in which
the two satellite colleges (Harlow and Peterborough) co-ordinate their approaches to teaching and
learning with each other and within the context of the degree ...”.
The work-based learning module on the Social Sciences programme is an example of good practice as
evidenced by students who report that “the placement helped them to confirm their career choice, added
to their confidence in applying for Post Graduate training in such work and helped motivate them for their
final year of study.” (Social Sciences external examiner)
Details of any such items from last year’s process (disseminated in May 2010) which have been
adapted/adopted by Programme areas in 2009/10
The incorporation of PDP as an integrated element within the compulsory core modules of all pathways at
all levels in the Communications, Film and Media programme.
The excellent use and modes of constructive feedback, detailed comments and feed-forward on the
Communications, Film and Media programme has previously been praised by external examiners on the
Law (Academic) programme.
The design and delivery of interdisciplinary modules in the Performing Arts programme.
11
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
The creation of a reference collection of student work as a means of sharing good assessment practice in
the Performing Arts programme.
The forms of continuous assessment being introduced in the Performing Arts programme to try and
overcome problems of poor attendance, which can have particularly unfortunate effects on the quality of
work and morale of fellow students when students are engaged in group work.
See also Action 2.1 above.
Significant and/or commendable achievements to be highlighted to a wider audience
Fine Art External Examiner Margaret Ayliffe states that
The BA (Hons) Fine Art “is now a well established and confident course. It is recruiting good
students who are achieving strong results. The course structure is providing students with the
conceptual, material and professional acumen to pursue a variety of careers in the cultural
industries and to make successful applications to postgraduate courses. The academic
infrastructure within the department is developing a strong profile with the new MFA course,
PhD students and a reader in Fine Art. Externally the course is continually creating
opportunities to boost the profile of the university through student and staff exhibitions and
staff contributions to national and international symposia and conferences. This constitutes,
in my opinion, quite a remarkable development…over 5 years.”
External Examiner Finlay Taylor admires the “opportunities taken within Cambridge to show the students’
work beyond the institutional site” on the Master Fine Art pathway.
Re graphic design, External Examiner James Brogden notes the “strong evidence of creative typography
across the available software media outcomes. Several students have been commended / nominated for
national design competitions, including Penguin Books, YCN.”
The Reader of the Communications, Film and Media AMR states that
The range of work placements, non-assessed work experience and extra-curricular activity
directly relevant to pathways within the Programme area and which are undertaken by
students is extremely impressive. The AMR includes details of a whole host of activities too
numerous to mention individually here but which clearly build and enhance students’
employability skills.
Communications, Film and Media External Examiner Tony Sampson states that the “link between the
Cultures of the Digital Economy research institute and the degree programme should be stressed”.
The Reader of the English and Writing AMR cites the quantity and quality of student’s external
achievements on the MA Creative Writing pathway of the English and Writing programme, including one
gaining Arts Council funding and an Escalator award, a second achieving a two-book publishing deal, and a
third being shortlisted in national competitions.
The success of the English and Intercultural Communication programme’s “Routes into Languages”
programme with schools.
The growing relationship between the Humanities programme’s history section and the Imperial War
Museum is commendable, especially with regards to how a traditionally non-vocational subject is showing
innovative ways of demonstrating employability.
12
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
The Reader of the Performing Arts AMR cited this programme for a number of notable achievements,
including its: work-based and practice-based learning through Peterborough NHS Trust, CanDoCo, etc;
efforts to address assessment problems at University Centre Peterborough through standardisation
meetings and sharing examples of good practice; and providing greater student learning support through
new ‘drop-in surgeries’ and e-feedback.
7. Future action plans
The Subcommittee endorses the Reader’s Reports confirmation that the 2010-11 Action Plans for the ten
programmes in the faculty adequately cover issues identified in the annual monitoring reports.
8. Additional comments
None.
9. Outstanding actions
All relevant actions are listed above and below in the body of this Overview Report.
10. Effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and its operation
The process has been conducted relatively effectively within the faculty. Only four (of 10) AMRs were
received before or by the deadline of 12 November 2010, and the corresponding Readers’ Reports were
also then delayed. However, with one exception, all AMRs and Reader’s Reports were completed before the
winter break. The subcommittee operated effectively, and found the actions grid provided by the Academic
Office to be very useful.
It is difficult to comment on the information contained within the individual AMRs as no one academic is
responsible for viewing all the AMRs and Reader’s Reports in any detail. That said, inconsistencies are
apparent in the appendices provided in the various AMRs. Also, while the quality of statistical data provided
to support the annual monitoring process has improved, the Subcommittee notes that non-traditional
programmes like Law (Professional) remains dependant on data held locally rather than by our university.
In general, the Subcommittee is satisfied with the quality of the Reader’s Reports, although better use could
be made of External Examiner’s comments to illustrate issues of concern, as well as of good practice and/or
commendable achievements. The Subcommittee noted that the AMR action plans were not always SMART,
and suggests that their authors are reminded of this requirement, perhaps by a better template and/or
guidance notes. In particular, some Readers identified the re-use of generic action points in AMRs from the
previous year rather than the identification of new action points through the evaluation of specific issues
raised by students, staff and External Examiners.
The Subcommittee was informed by the Academic Office representative that the university’s overall annual
monitoring process is currently under review, and this may be the last year it is delivered in its current form.
This is a welcome development if it reduces the number of steps that the annual monitoring process
currently undergoes; e.g., AMR-Reader-Quality and Standards Subcommittee-Overview Report-Faculty
Board-Academic Office-Senate, etc. This development will also be welcome if it decreases the time lag
between the academic year being monitored, any necessary analysis, and when changes can be
implemented (as noted in last year’s Overview Report, it is “difficult for programmes to adapt/adopt good
practice identified in the Faculty Board overview report or Senate Summary report if these documents are
not available until March and April of the academic year, leaving very little time for good practice to be
adopted in that academic year and for meaningful evaluation of its impact in the next Annual Monitoring
report”).
The subcommittee notes that the Faculty Annual Monitoring Overview Report will be submitted for
13
Appendix 1 (ALSS Summary Report)
discussion and approval to the next meeting of the ALSS Faculty Board scheduled for 2 March 2011.
Action 10.1: Deputy Dean (Academic Development) Dr Apurba Kundu
The subcommittee agrees that confirmed AMRs should be submitted in electronic format with amendments
(where necessary) by 31 March 2011 to the Faculty Quality Assurance Officer who will arrange for their
distribution to our external examiners.
Action 10.2: ALSS Faculty Quality Assurance Officer Vicky McCormick
Date completed:
1 March 2011
14
Appendix 2 (LAIBS Summary Report)
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
AIBS QUALITY AND STANDARDS SUBCOMMITTEE OVERVIEW REPORT
Prepared by: Sue Stirk
Based on discussions of the above meeting held on: 31st January 2011
Present at the meeting: Sue Stirk (Chair), Dr Mahmoud Al-Kilani, Dr Penny Hood, Jonathan
Knowles, John Rayment, Dr John Webb, Graham Webster, Caroline
Watts, Claire Moorey (Secretary)
1. Essential requirements
Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) were considered for the following programmes:
-
Postgraduate Pathways
Undergraduate Pathways
Professional pathways
It was confirmed that all the essential requirements of the AMRs had been met.
2. Readers’ reports
The sub-committee confirmed that the actions from last year’s Readers Reports had either been
carried out or rolled forward into the AMRs action plans.
3. Last year’s action plans
It was confirmed that some actions from the Professional AMRs action plan from last year had not
been completed nor brought forward. It was noted that student dissatisfaction with the Michael
Ashcroft Building was ongoing, but that it had already been raised and discussed at Senate. A
further action which was carried forward was the unavailability of the results of professional exams
to the faculty. This was problematic and placed restrictions on the AMR author as it was impossible
to comment on results that were unavailable. However, it is not possible to carry this further as the
Professional bodies do not provide such results as a matter of policy.
4. Statistical analysis
Statistics were used thoughtfully for postgraduate pathways and retention on postgraduate awards
was good. At undergraduate level, the situation is more complex. The Faculty has a large number
of collaborative partnerships, each of which often delivers a number of pathways. This makes it very
challenging to make comparisons between the same pathway delivered at different locations. On
campus, the statistics show low continuation numbers, however many of these are actually
transfers to other pathways. The discontinuation rate is around 4 to 5% at the end of Level 1.
Although report authors were able to make sense of the statistical data provided, it was thought that
the presentation of the data was somewhat old fashioned and that it should be provided in a more
visual and graphical way to enable immediate comparisons to be made between pathways and in
particular between pathway delivery locations. It was also noted that much of the pathway data is
repetitive due to the commonality of modules across pathways. Although details of how to access
statistical data is provided to Module and Pathway Leaders, it was clear that there is a need for
training in order for them to be able to access and manipulate the data available.
15
Appendix 2 (LAIBS Summary Report)
5a. Academic Standards: Key issues, themes and trends
The AMRs could have provided a more reflective evaluation of both curriculum delivery and student
achievement. However, it was thought that the Annual Monitoring process and templates
themselves limits free-text reflection by report authors. For example, in some cases pathway
reports had not been received, or were in themselves insufficiently detailed or reflective.
Nevertheless, the curriculum was discussed in detail, including the Undergraduate Review 2010
which helped to maintain the currency of the curriculum and to remove some of the problem areas
identified the previous year. The potential for further streamlining of postgraduate pathways was
highlighted by one Reader. Concern was noted at the lack of Pathway Reports received from
international partners and some undergraduate pathway leaders. (See section 10)
In general, External Examiner reports were very positive, though there were two main issues raised
in relation to academic standards. The first concern was that of attendance by academic staff at the
DAPs. One difficulty is that Semester 1 DAPs coincide with the first week of teaching. In an
attempt to respond positively to the External Examiner’s comments the Faculty asked Timetabling
to ring fence DAP meetings as a constraint so that attendance could be ensured. However, the
Faculty was told this was not possible therefore another solution is being sought.
The second concern was the number of missing marks at DAPs and the resultant number of Chair’s
actions. Although this has improved enormously in 2010/11 this is still an issue of concern for the
Faculty and is subject to an internal review.
Other External Examiners commented on the variable quality of feedback provided to students. In
some cases, comments were also made on inconsistencies in marking between delivery centres.
The Faculty will be placing much greater emphasis on the moderation process and on the need for
Module Leaders to communicate with their teaching teams to ensure consistency.
Additionally, some Externals expressed concern about their own workload, which has led to the
appointment of two further External Examiners. A full mapping of External Examiner workload is
currently being undertaken.
One report is outstanding due to an External Examiner being on maternity leave.
5b. Quality of Education: Key issues, themes and trends
A number of key issues have been raised via the National Student Survey (NSS) and it was noted
that these had been carried through to action plans. The issues concerned teaching and feedback
and are of great concern to the Faculty. Two pathways in particular were identified which had
satisfaction rates below 50%. In both cases recruitment to the pathways has been suspended until
improvements are put in place. On the Accounting and Finance pathway course meetings have
been held regularly and any academic and operational issues are addressed quickly, in order to
improve both satisfaction rates, and retention on this pathway. The Pathway Leader has increased
interaction with students, through visiting during classes, emailing job notices, and generally
promoting course identity. Stronger links have also been developed to the professional bodies
(ACCA\CIMA\CIPFA) via visits and inviting representatives from these bodies to speak to students.
On the Tourism Management pathway, the curriculum has been changed to ensure that it is fit for
purpose, external visits and speakers have also been arranged and students appear to be much
more satisfied. Many of the difficulties experienced by students on these pathways appear to have
also arisen due to previous curriculum difficulties which have been addressed both in the new
curriculum and subsequent revisions.
In line with university policy, on-line Module Evaluation was used to collect student feedback but
16
Appendix 2 (LAIBS Summary Report)
had an extremely low response rate and methods need to be found to encourage students to
complete these.
Partner colleges (home and overseas) have held meetings and used paper based evaluation forms
to elicit student feedback. In all cases feedback appears to be positive.
Students have raised issues with the suitability of teaching rooms both at Cambridge and
Chelmsford often reporting them as too small for the size of group (MAB), or having poor acoustics
making it difficult to hear lecturers (COS 405/6)
5c. Issues requiring attention by Anglia Ruskin in 2010/11 at institutional level
Consider purchase of a more sophisticated statistical tool to interact with SITS’ data in order to
provide greater clarity and graphical presentation. Staff present at the annual monitoring subcommittee all commented that as external examiners themselves, they had seen more effective
methods of presentation at other universities and that it would be useful if ARU were able to provide
statistical data in this way.
External Examiners have commented on the wordcount policy being inconsistently applied. As a
result, staff have requested that the word count should be + or – 5% before penalty which, they
claim, would result in greater buy-in by staff.
Consider a request raised by Muslim students at Programme Committee meetings that Friday
afternoons be free of teaching as Muslim students miss sessions due to being at prayer.
Consider a different method of annual reporting which is more action focussed and which takes
place earlier in the year to ensure benefit for students, and so that academic staff can see the value
of the process.
6. Good and innovative practice
BA (Hons) Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Management has been recognised as an
innovative degree with the embedding of entrepreneurs in the teaching and assessment as a
differentiator. The pathway was submitted to the “Times Higher Education” in the “Outstanding
Employer Engagement" category.
The use of guest speakers and external visits on a number of pathways enhances the student
experience at all levels and supports the practice-based curriculum.
The conduct of master classes with an International partner was warmly received.
7. Future action plans
It was noted that the Professional AMR’s action plan should include an action point about the
university policy on deduction of 10% for exceeding the word count as this was identified as being
inconsistently applied.
8. Additional comments
17
Appendix 2 (LAIBS Summary Report)
None
9. Outstanding actions
An updated Action Plan for the Professional AMR should be provided to include an action point on
the word count and cross site moderation.
10. Effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and its operation
The engagement of academic staff and collaborative partners in the AMR process is questionable.
Submission rates of Pathway Reports was as follows:




Undergraduate pathways
Postgraduate Pathways
Professional Pathways
Collaborative partner reports
39%
61%
100%
31%
This clearly made it very difficult for the authors of the overall Programme reports to produce high
quality summaries.
The current process of providing programme summary reports of pathway reports results in an
overall report which is somewhat anodyne in nature and which does not always critically assess the
issues and their impact on students. The complexity within AIBS in terms of its large number of
international partners contributes to this difficulty. The Readers’ Reports were rather brief and often
contained Yes or No answers and no commentary, which is not always helpful.
The general consensus was that another method of annual reporting might be more effective.
Date completed:
23/2/2011
18
Appendix 3 (FoE Summary Report)
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Education Quality and Standards Subcommittee
Overview Report 2009/10
Prepared by: Dr Jenny Gilbert, Deputy Dean, FoE
Based on discussions of the above meeting held on: 20th January 2011
Present at the meeting: Dr Jenny Gilbert (Chair), Dr Simon Pratt-Adams, Dr Margaret
Hutt, Dr Anne McKee, Robin Jennings, Viki Muller (for Ray Petty), Sara Cobbett
(Secretary)
1. Essential requirements
For the two programme areas in the Education Studies Department Annual Monitoring
Reports (AMRs) were produced. Within the Teacher Education Department one AMR
was produced to address Masters and Secondary phase Programme (partial, Masters
only). The remaining areas in Teacher Education require annual report documents to
be produced and submitted to the Ofsted, the PSRB either directly or through the
Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA). These Self Evaluation
Documents (SEDs) have a different focus from that of the Annual Monitoring Reports
(AMRs), and there is a higher level of scrutiny with more in-depth analysis of data
required. In view of the level of scrutiny coupled with the time involved in producing
the SEDs, and the fact that the deadline was later than that for AMRs, it was agreed
that for the three areas concerned the SEDs could replace the AMRs. These three
SEDs address
a) PGCE Secondary Phase SED corresponds to Masters and Secondary phase
Programme (partial)
b) PGCE and BA Primary Phase SED corresponds to Primary and Further Education
Programme (partial)
c) Further Education Phase SED corresponds to Primary and Further Education
Programme (partial).
The Teacher Education programmes described above reflect the new programme
structure not the 09/10 structure where the Primary Phase SED would have cut across
two programmes. The programme structure has been recently altered to best match
the Ofsted reporting requirements.
All reports included the list of pathways within the scope of the report. Readers’
Reports from the previous year were attached to the AMRs but are not a SED
requirement. The previous year’s SMART action plans were included in the AMRs
and the SEDs as were the current year’s SMART action plans. External Examiners’
reports were included in the AMRs but are not a SED requirement. The SEDs do,
however, comment on the effectiveness of the quality assurance procedures and
include relevant comments from External Examiners. Not all responses to External
Examiners’ reports were included in AMRs and they are not required in SEDs.
Authors have been asked to provide them.
19
Appendix 3 (FoE Summary Report)
2. Readers’ Reports
Action was taken in response to last year’s Readers’ Reports. In respect of the only
outstanding action the Subcommittee agreed that the issue raised by the External
Examiner which was the recommendation for criteria to distinguish/provide greater
articulation between work awarded a mark over 70% and that over 80% would be
best dealt with by devising Faculty wide criteria. This has already been implemented
in some Teacher Education Department modules and it is recommended that the
Faculty Learning and Teaching Advisor should share and adapt the model as
necessary.
3. Last year’s action plans
Some actions have been rolled forward into 2010/11 and in certain cases queries
were raised regarding their continuing suitability. It was noted that in Teacher
Education previous action places have been superseded by the Secondary
Improvement Plan and the Primary Recovery Plan devised following the March 2010
Ofsted visit.
4. Statistical analysis
No problems were reported in respect of access to the statistical data. However, the
Subcommittee did feel that better use could be made of the statistical data available and
that this could give more authority to the claims being made. One of the AMRs
commented on the statistics from pathways covered by a SED. This was helpful given
that SEDs do not include any analysis of module statistics. The SEDs do, however,
include data on admissions, on performance during school experience as a whole and
broken down by different aspects and on employment. The data is also analysed by
different categories so that, for example, teaching performance is compared with
classification of entry degree for post-graduate students.
Performance of different
groups is also analysed e.g by gender, by ethnicity. A small proportion of the SED data
is available from the TDA but most is collected and analysed within the Faculty. If this
data were made available more generally it could be useful as an analytical tool on other
programmes. In one programme the reader felt that the data was not being used to set
targets,
5a Academic Standards: Key issues, themes and trends
The major issues raised in Teacher Education relate to auditing and tracking
trainees’ progress, knowing trainees well and clarifying roles and responsibilities for
Quality Assurance. Consistency of support for partners or across partners is an
issue for placement in school and for partner delivery in FE. In Teacher Education
this is being addressed through a newly constituted partnership model, a revised
school experience grading system and new student support mechanisms. In
Education Studies overlap between modules has been highlighted and this will be
addressed in a forthcoming review of the curriculum. The only common theme in
External Examiners’ comments relates to lack of consistency of feedback between
markers, moderators’ comments and moderation paperwork. The Subcommittee
was advised that the Faculty was aware of the need for consistency in these areas
and that it would also be discussing our processes with External Examiners to
ensure familiarity.
20
Appendix 3 (FoE Summary Report)
5b. Quality of Education: Key issues, themes and trends
Action taken by the Education Studies Department to promote retention has
focussed on more appropriate selection to the pathways and enhanced support
offered to students to assist in their transition to higher education. The role of
Personal Tutors is also key and the role within the Teacher Education Department is
an extended role. In terms of learning resources it was acknowledged that the
Faculty should consider looking at more efficient ways of monitoring work loads in
order to identify staffing issues. In relation to specialist art and science space the
Faculty is well aware of the need to ensure all rooms it has at its disposal are put to
full use in order to ensure the space continues to be available.
6. Good and innovatory practice
The following good and innovative practice was identified within AMRs


the use of patchwork text for Teacher Education Art provision, together with the
External Examiner’s comments which referred to ‘a positive role model for other
institutions that have not as yet embraced patchwork text’;
The ‘retreat’ held at Belstead House: staff and students were invited and this was a
good example of building a strong academic community.
The SEDs identified
 Fast developing tracking system for trainee performance
 Stronger relationship with schools through new Partnership model and strengthened
roles for staff within this to improve trainee support
Further examples to celebrate are




Newly launched Educational Society;
Internal conferences open to staff and usually also to students;
Increase in Research Groups;
Project to explore the use of white boards.
7. Future action plans
Action plans generally covered the necessary issues but in many cases authors were
required to tidy up and clarify action plans. In one instance an additional target was
suggested. Action Plans in SEDs are not in the same format and do not make clear
the owner of the action or the precise timescale.
8. Additional comments
Given the combination of AMRs and SEDs it was agreed with the Academic Office
that we would not expect Readers’ Reports for the SEDs. They have been subject to
a high level of internal scrutiny before being submitted to the PSRB.
9. Outstanding actions
All requirements identified by the Subcommittee have been completed.
21
Appendix 3 (FoE Summary Report)
10. Effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring Process and its operation
The annual monitoring process has been challenging for the Faculty this year due to the
reliance on different styles of report: AMRs and SEDs. The current annual monitoring
process does not easily lend itself to PSRB requirements and the lack of convergence
generates additional work and complexity.
It is noted with concern that the current annual monitoring process failed to pick up on
the serious quality assurance concerns that were raised by the professional body in the
year in question. Accordingly, the Faculty would welcome a change, ideally to a more
real-time process that would allow Faculties to respond to the issues identified in a
timelier manner.
The standard of the Readers’ Reports was good and the statistical data had been
provided in good time this year. The SMART Action Plans have varied in quality and
further revisions were necessary to ensure these were completed appropriately and
met the required standard. This suggests a possible training need.
22
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
Faculty of Health & Social Care
Overview Report of
Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2009/2010
for Discussion at Faculty Board Meeting of 10 March 2011
1. Essential Requirements
Annual Monitoring Reports have been received and considered from the
following Programmes:Acute Care Pre-Registration
Acute Continuing Development
Allied Health
Child and Community
Foundation Programme
Interprofessional Learning
Mental Health & Learning Disabilities
Primary and Public Health
Social Work & Counselling
These reports meet the essential requirements for AMR.
2. Readers’ Reports
No action was required in response to 6 readers’ reports from last year.
The remaining 3 AMR authors provided the additional information and/or further
detail in their action plans as per readers’ requests.
3. Last Year’s Action Plans
The panel noted that a number of plans were carrying actions forward or there
was lack of clarity re completion/success of all actions.
The following AMRs gave detailed feedback on last year’s action plan with
actions carried forward in some cases:
Child and Community
Foundation Programme
Interprofessional Learning
Social Work & Counselling
Primary and Public Health
In the remaining programmes the narrative did not always make it clear where
actions had been completed and/or achieved successfully.
Carrying forward actions over one or more years means that quality
enhancement within the programme is not always explicit. This practice was
referred to in last year’s AMR overview report and continues to happen in some
cases. Programme leads and their colleagues need to review SMART actions
and consider what is measurable and achievable within the year.
The programme sub-committee standardised agenda, implemented in the FHSC
from Semester 1 2010, requires programme subcommittees to review and report
on AMR action plans at each meeting and is explicit in its requirement for
programme leaders to identify enhancement as an outcome of AMR. Feedback
23
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
on progress from AMR action plans and programme enhancements achieved will
be clearly reported on via the summary of programme subcommittee meetings
forwarded to Faculty Board.
4. Statistical Analysis
8 of the 9 reports have used statistical data to inform their action plans. Data
is also used in the 9th report’s action plan but the link between the report text
and the action plan is less evident to the reader.
Four reports did not identify a problem with the statistical information provided
by Oracle. Difficulties associated with the use of this missing data or
inaccurate, data include Oracle not reporting data by cohort, and Regional
partners inability to access data. These AMR’s used local data to supplement
Oracle.
The analysis of retention in each report was variable with 3 reports indicating
improved retention rates, supported by the data. The remaining reports
required further data or analysis to support their broader discussion.
There is an improving trend in relation to modules with a high level of
academic failure which has been reduced by several strategies including
additional work with students around study skills and formative assessment,
review of assessment strategy or discontinuation of the module. Similar
strategies to improve academic standards are being utilised to address
modules identified with a mean mark of less than 50%.
Improving or acceptable continuation and/or award classification is identified
in 4 reports. Other AMRs discuss these issues broadly and would benefit
from a more detailed analysis of the data.
5a. Academic Standards: Key Issues, Themes and Trends
All reports provided a narrative analysis of key issues with reference to
External Examiner reports, PSRB reviews and student and stakeholder
feedback. Within some reports there was a tendency to rely on External
Examiner feedback extensively. There remains scope to strengthen the
student perspective within the review process but this area was improved by
comparison with last years AMR’s.
Curriculum efficiencies continue to be achieved via archiving modules and the
UG and PG framework has resulted in a reduced number of pathways.
Placement learning is discussed in 3 reports where it is noted that the
availability of good quality practice experience continues to prove a challenge
to course teams. Student expectations around some aspects of work-based
learning, e.g. travel are being managed more effectively. There has been
24
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
significant activity to develop the number of practice based mentors to support
students’ learning in practice, and to update already qualified mentors via
online mentor updates. Academic staff taking the role of ‘Educational
Champion’ have been utilised and evaluated positively to align practice and
academic learning and support students in practice.
Clinical support
documents for students with learning difficulties have been developed. The
Educational Champion role has been commended in 3 separate external
reviews of the curriculum, the NMC review in November 2010, the RN
approval in February 2011 and the PQAF review in March 2011
Key strategies noted across the faculty to enhance the efficiency of curriculum
delivery and pedagogy include more extensive use of the VLE to provide
blended learning, with several reports indicating their intention to offer fully
distant learning options in the next academic year. Several reports note
actions relating to streamlining assessment methods to reduce the
assessment load for students and teachers. Staff have engaged in workshops
related to assessment feedback and good academic practice, with extensive
use of ‘Turn it in’ across our Faculty.
External examiner reports have been very positive in relation to the content
and currency of the programmes, the support for students, the quality of
student work in some areas, e.g. research projects; and in most cases the
quality of assessment and feedback. Where concerns have been highlighted
actions are in place to address these.
5b. Quality of Education: Key issues, Themes and Trends
As mentioned above some reports noted low response rates especially in
relation to online module evaluation but 7 of the 9 reports reviewed,
summarised key issues raised through student feedback. These included
organisation related to timetabling, access to e-vision and communication of
changes. Student evaluation within programmes also referred to specific
concerns with some aspects of placement learning, the use of HPLs, the
sequencing of modules and academic support. There is a detailed strategy in
place within our faculty to improve the response rate in online evaluation to at
least our university target of 40%.
Every programme is implementing actions to promote student retention with
emphasis on the joining points in pathways, e.g. induction, buddying and
student support schemes, and early intervention with learning difficulties via
study skills, tutorial support and formative assessment. While the AMRs
indicate appropriate strategies to improve retention, the impact of these in
relation to benchmark targets is not explicit.
Data cleansing currently
underway in our Faculty should provide statistics to encourage this impact
analysis.
VLE was the learning resource discussed extensively in most reports and its
use in all modules noted. It is recognised as a useful addition to other
learning resources available to the students and its flexibility is appreciated.
25
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
Limitations of learning and other resources are noted on the Peterborough site
and will be resolved with our move to Guildhouse on the 18th March 2011.
There were several references to good partnership working with
employers/stakeholders and one programme within Allied Health has created
a facebook site for students and alumni after stakeholder feedback. Issues
raised by stakeholders/employers from the NHS centred on the need for
further input within the pathways for clinical skills. Several stakeholders
recorded their involvement with curriculum delivery, assessment and
development of the all graduate nursing curriculum and via these mean their
ability to influence course content. It was evident that some stakeholders are
seeking further engagement in programme/pathway delivery and management
and it would be beneficial to disseminate the best models of stakeholder
engagement across all FHSC pathways.
The following staff enhancement activity was noted:





An increasing number of staff engaged in doctoral study-47 undertaking
internal and external PhDs/Prof Docs with 7 completing this year.
Priority given to teaching qualifications for all newly appointed staff
Increasing number of staff publications and conference presentations.
All FHSC staff have undertaken staff development for VLE and its use, in
2010
Attendance at professional conferences.
5c. Issues requiring attention by Anglia Ruskin in 2010/2011 at
institutional level.




External Examiners comments related to paper free DAPs
Institutional actions that may help support faculty attempts to promote
online module evaluation
Data cleansing, and mechanisms to provide accessible data that will
support more detailed analysis of AMR evidence with particular
emphasise on the impact of programme enhancements and action plans.
Review of the AMR process to reduce time lag between pathway delivery
and final review.
6. Good and innovative practice
Strategies conforming to the Anglia Ruskin definition of good practice were:
The Education Champion and link team strategy offering support to
practice learning for students and practice staff. This was identified as
‘outstanding’ in the NMC review in November 2010. This means that
external reviewers consider the strategy worthy of national dissemination
and that it could with adaptation provide a useful model for other faculties
supporting work based learning
26
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
Work based learning for non traditional students based in full time
employment-Allied Health
The adaptation/adoption of good practice highlighted in previous reviews was
noted in the Child and Community Programme where mid semester reviews
were utilised to consider module and pathway experience
Also adapted from last year is the Midwifery team’s fine grading of practice,
supported by their own specifically developed assessment tool which is being
applied to the graduate nursing programme.
Achievements to be highlighted to a wider audience include;



The introduction of induction for returning students
The provision of a minimum standard of VLE material to support all
modules offered within FHSC
External examiners commendations re the quality of assessment
feedback to students would appear to validate the provision of
marking/feedback workshops across the faculty.
The innovative
assessment methods in Social Policy were also commended by External
examiners
7 Future action plans
Readers indicated where action plans had omitted to address issues raised in
the report and several identified that action plans should be quantifiable or
more specific. Following recommended amendments, action plans address
the issues raised in the AMR adequately.
8. Additional Comments
Readers indicated that AMR reporting was generally sound, meeting the
criteria indicated in the AMR template. The strongest AMRs were those
where a balance was achieved between reflective and analytical accounts
supported by evidence. Readers indicated that a couple of the reports tended
to generalise and would benefit from developing an analytical stance.
9. Outstanding Actions
No outstanding actions.
10. Effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring Process
27
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
The process has been conducted effectively and staff have fully engaged with
it at programme and faculty level. Reports have been submitted within the
required timeframe. The subcommittee meeting was attended by readers and
the external panel member made a valuable contribution. The summary
spreadsheet of the AMRs by the academic office and the administrative
support offered by the Faculty Quality Officer support the process well.
The quality of the AMRs was on the whole good with some excellent
examples submitted. However a number of reports would be enhanced by
adopting a more analytical stance with reference to supporting evidence.
The statistical information provided was adequate for some programme
analysis but local data was used in some reports where data in Oracle proved
incomplete.
The reader’s reports reflected the key areas that comprise the faculty
overview and supported the debate in the AMR subcommittee effectively
The smart action plans address the issues raised in the AMRs adequately.
Several reports made explicit links, with the text supported by evidence, to
generate their action plans but there was a tendency to generalise in some
accounts. This combined with the number of actions carried forward into a
second year suggests a need for actions to be realistic in terms of what is
manageable within the year as well as SMART.
The process of annual monitoring is currently under review in our university.
The FHSC AMR subcommittee agreed that the timeframe of the current
process means that issues reflected in the reports have often moved on by the
time our faculty and university overviews are reported. The time between
initial reporting and completing the AMRs makes the link between the quality
enhancement of pathways and programmes and the AMR process less
explicit. In order to overcome this FHSC now require action plans from the
AMR to be reviewed regularly as part of the programme subcommittee and
progress on them reported via this mechanism. Programme and pathway
leads are required to identify ongoing quality enhancement, supported by
evidence, which will be recorded in a programme/pathway library in ‘My
Workplace’. The aim of this strategy is to develop an ongoing engagement
with quality monitoring and enhancement and steer away from an AMR which
may be perceived as a once only activity undertaken in the autumn.
Date Completed: 24 March 2011
Anne Devlin Deputy Dean Teaching, Learning and Quality FHSC
28
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY QUALITY AND STANDARDS
SUBCOMMITTEE OVERVIEW REPORT
Prepared by: Leigh Stoeber, Director of Studies, FST-Cambridge, 28 February 2011
Based on discussions of the above meeting held on: Monday, 10th January, 2011
Present at the meeting: Jo Bowman, Nikki Dibb, Robin Jennings, Jacqui McCary, Vicky
McCormick, Julia Ramsay, David Reid (Chair), Andy Stevens, Leigh Stoeber
1. Essential requirements
An AMR has been received and considered for each programme area within the Faculty of Science
and Technology. These programme areas include:
Programme
Animal and
Environmental
Biology
Reader
Author
Andy Stevens
Julian Doberski
Architecture &
Planning
Jo Bowman
Gil Lewis
Biomedical &
Molecular Science
David Reid
Leigh Stoeber
Computing
David Reid
Antony Carter
Computer Science
David Reid
Ian Oxford
Construction
Robin Jennings
Phil Mellow
Design &
Engineering
Leigh Stoeber
Habtom Mebrahtu
Forensic Science &
Chemistry
Andy Stevens
Sarah Hall
Ophthalmic
Dispensing
Ian Oxford
Richard Calver
Optometry & Optical
Management
David Reid
Rupal Lovell-Patel
Richard Calver
Rachel Cook
Psychology
29
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
Sports &
Sciences
Exercise
Jacqui McCary
Roy Luckhurst
Surveying
Robin Jennings
Stephen Fenton
Technology
Robin Jennings
Phil Mellow
This report confirms that
 an AMR for each Programme has been received and considered by a Reader* ;
 the list of pathways within the scope of the AMR has been completed;
 the external examiners’ reports have been attached as an appendix to each AMR**;
 an action plan, following the SMART format, has been attached as an appendix to each AMR;
 the previous year’s SMART action plan, with details of progress made against all the actions,
has been attached to each AMR;
 the previous years associated Reader’s Report (with a formal response from the AMR author
where applicable) has been attached to each AMR.
* The AMR for Optometry and Optical Management was received late due to staff illness and
thus the AMR and associated Readers’ report were not considered at the meeting on 10 Jan 2011.
However, the author has subsequently considered this Readers’ report for the purposes of
constructing this AMR overview report.
** One external examiners’ report from both Construction and from Design and Engineering and
from Architecture and Planning were not included; two external examiners’ reports for Surveying
were not included as of the meeting on 10 Jan 2011. Since the meeting, external examiners’
reports from Construction and Design and Engineering have been received but those from
Architecture and Planning and Surveying are still outstanding.
2. Readers’ reports
The AMRs described appropriate actions taken in response to Readers’ Reports on the previous
year’s AMRs in all programme areas. In Design and Engineering, the reader indicated it would be
desirable to comment in greater breadth and depth about how the previous year’s targets were
actioned and what the outcomes were.
3. Last year’s action plans
12 out of 14 AMRs were carrying forward action points from last year’s SMART action plan. In
programme areas Construction and Technology, there were no outstanding actions to carry
forward.
It was noted that in two programme areas (Optometry and Optical Management and
Technology), the previous years’ SMART action plan (2008-2009) was attached but not updated.
4. Statistical analysis
Statistical data from the University portal and within various programme areas had been accessed
and analysed to highlight trends in student continuation, retention and award classification(s) in
most programme areas but the following comments were made:

Portal data for Construction was not accessed or analysed. This resulted in: (a) no information
on student retention offered, and, (b) a lack of analysis of the high mean mark in EB215041S.
30
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)

The Reader recommended that in future portal statistics be used to prepare the report as per
recommended practice. The committee indicated that they would like to see a review of the
assessment addressed in the action plan, as the high mean mark raises a concern as to
whether internal moderation is working appropriately. The committee also indicated that they
would like to see information on student retention provided. (Action Phil Mellow)
The Sports & Exercise Sciences AMR refers to additional data having to be locally gathered
from Faculty and partner college SEEVIC as there were issues with centrally held data. (Action
David Reid/Sheila Pankhurst)
5a. Academic Standards: Key issues, themes and trends
Curriculum delivery and achievement:
The committee has considered that the AMRs could provide a more reflective evaluation of
curriculum delivery/ achievement with the addition of a histogram of grades (produced centrally, if
possible). A request will be sent to the strategic planning and policy unit for the provision of
histograms for pathway grades. (Action Nikki Dibb)
Curriculum Efficiency:
Specific points raised include:
 the reduction of pathways in some programme areas, without a concomitant reduction in
modules delivered;
 the effect curriculum rationalisation has had on the Annual Monitoring process and
curriculum efficiency; it was discussed that the haste in which CR was implemented may
have had an adverse impact on efficiency;
 the lack of information on student retention and continuation within the Construction
AMR. The Reader raised concern(s) that the facility for students to retake modules with
attendance may mask a population of struggling students. (Action Phil Mellow)
 the problems with the use of part time staff (in one module in particular) in the Animal &
Environmental Biology programme area. The committee considered this may put
academic standards at risk. There was no reference within the AEB action plan as to
how this will be dealt with in future, and the committee request(s) the author provides an
additional action point within the plan for 2010/11. (Action Julian Doberski)
External Examiners Reports:
Feedback from External Examiners was generally positive and acknowledged that issues raised by
them during the year have generally been satisfactorily resolved.
Points to be noted (or which required response) included (external examiners names in italics):



the six matters pertaining to academic standards at risk as reported to Senate, and the
(corresponding) responses given by the Heads of Department. Specifically, the AMR
committee discussed the problems relating to the quality of written English (Kathleen
Thurman) and felt this is an institutional problem. It was suggested that an action point
within the Architecture and Planning Action plan relating to this standard at risk be
introduced. (Action Gil Lewis);
(Anthony Westbury) In Life Sciences, the committee discussed the improvement in
dialogue with partner colleges and the appointment of a partnerships manager to help
facilitate this. However, an additional action point on the Sports & Exercise Sciences
2010/11 relating to how consistency will be monitored at level 3 is desired (Action Roy
Luckhurst);
The committee noted the comments from the Director of the Academic Office in
response to the comments made by Anthony Ward (Psychology) in relation to the on
line module evaluation. The committee felt the low response rate since the introduction
of the electronic system is disappointing and likely to have an adverse affect on the NSS
31
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)

scores, and;
The committee noted the comment from the Surveying External examiner in relation to
“generous marking” and request(s) that additional detail be included in (3) on the
2010/11 action plan in order to clarify how the internal moderators will actually effect
cross module checking. (Action Steve Fenton)
5b. Quality of Education: Key issues, themes and trends
The committee identified a number of emerging themes relating to the quality of education provided
from within the Faculty of Science and Technology including:
i.
the poor response to the Module evaluations since the introduction of the
electronic questionnaire. Specifically, in some modules the student response is
below 10-15% resulting in module tutors being unable to draw meaningful
conclusions from this feedback;
ii.
the varied use of the VLE and lack of adequate storage capacity for files
containing video footage, and/or files of large size;
iii.
the poor quality of written English from some proportion of students from within
the Faculty;
iv.
the problems with access to the Mumford learning zone computers at
weekends and during peak times (eg, computer ‘blocking’);
v.
the dissatisfaction with portable classrooms/ temporary buildings. (Specifically,
with respect to Opthalmic Dispensing, the GOC have informed the department
that it may withdraw accreditation if suitable permanent facilities are not
guaranteed for the future.)
vi.
the timing of the Annual Monitoring process and the availability of statistical
information—the committee noted that due to the latter the AMRs cannot be
completed until the second half of semester one in each academic year.
vii.
the mentoring of PT/HP staff. It was noted by the committee that the Law
School have recently introduced a mentoring scheme for PT/HP staff and the
committee believed that this could be an element of good practice which
could/should be incorporated in future, especially in light of PT/HP staff utilised
to help support our ASNs in 2010-2011.
Student retention:
Various actions to improve student retention figures have been implemented across the Faculty
including:
 the early identification of non-attendees and providing an appropriate response to these
students;
 the provision of more structured tutorial time, and;
 the splitting of 30 credit module(s) (which had proved to be a particular barrier to progression)
into two 15 credit modules with positive results.
Employer/ Stakeholder feedback:
 It was noted that the Sports and Exercise Sciences report made no mention of
employer/stakeholder feedback and the committee have requested the author revisit this
section and provide appropriate comments. (Action Roy Luckhurst.)
 It was noted that the Forensic Science & Chemistry AMR discusses an action point relating to
establishing a meeting each semester with various Forensic Science providers. However, this
does not appear on the action plan. The committee request(s) it be included. (Action Sarah
Hall.)
Enhancement activity by staff:
The committee was very pleased to note that the majority of Departments are carrying out
32
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
enhancement activity but are concerned that the department of Architecture and Planning are
finding teaching pressures are having a negative impact on research and consultancy. The
committee would like to see this addressed within the action plan for this programme area. (Action
Gil Lewis)
5c. Issues requiring attention by Anglia Ruskin in 2010/11 at institutional level
With respect to the institutional timing of the AMR process, a suggestion was made by the
committee to include an additional section in future AMRs in which an update on what has
happened between the end of the academic year and the writing of the report can be provided
(Action Vicky McCormick/ Nikki Dibb) The committee also considers the lack of evidence of
representation from Pathway Leaders within the AMR to be regrettable.
6. Good and innovative practice
Good practice is defined as "a method, strategy, system, procedure or process, which
has, over an appropriate period of time, resulted in improved academic standards, an
enhanced quality of education and/or an improved level of service to stakeholders (e.g.
students, staff, external examiners, collaborative partners, employers etc.) and which
can, when appropriately adapted, be implemented in other areas of the institution
[Faculty Overview report Guidance Notes].
Within the Faculty, the following were considered elements of good or innovative practice:








the introduction of the Ruskin week (in Department of the Built Environment) to specifically
focus on giving individual students formative feedback;
the use of a mid semester review process (closely aligned to NSS satisfaction indicators) in
Construction;
the use of “Dragons Den”-style exercises to assist in the development of entrepreneurial skills
(Computer Science)
the introduction of generic feedback sheets in Computer Science so as to provide more timely
feedback to students;
the introduction of a project supervision contract which describes the responsibilities of project
students and their supervisors (Psychology).
the provision of a compulsory module entitled Learning and Skills Development in Higher
Education within the programme area Design and Engineering. This module overviews writing
skills, good academic practice and styles of referencing etc;
the introduction of a standardised formatting system to help assignment marking across partner
colleges within Sports and Exercise Sciences. (The latter was inspired by the example from
the ALSS benchmarking process between the Cambridge & Kings Lynn programmes.)
the introduction of the provision of audio feedback on student assessment(s) within Sports and
Exercise Sciences which has been very well-received by students within the programme area..
Significant Achievements for 2009-2010:
The achievements of the Sports and Exercise Sciences programme area were commended by
the committee. Specifically, these achievements included: (a) three validation events; (b)
curriculum review (rationalisation); (c) one pathway revision; (d) the organisation and preparation
for the first two week residential block of the Judo degree, with corresponding mention of the Judo
degree in The Times and a schools 6th Form conference, and; (e) outstanding research and
scholarly activity as evidenced by seven conference papers and abstracts, ten conference
presentations, numerous scholarly activities including commencement of a PhD, appointment as a
reviewer for a The International Journal of Sports Medicine, membership of several external
committees as well as coaching and development activity related to Judo. (Recently, one of their
33
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
first class honours graduates has been appointed to the UKA Apprentice Coach-Paralympic for
sprints and wheelchair racing and as such will be preparing United Kingdom Paralympic athletes
for the 2012 Paralympics.)
Psychology should be commended as they underwent a successful Periodic Review in 2009/2010.
In Optometry and Optical Management, the excellent NSS scores achieved in 2009-2010 placed
the department in the top 4 institutions in the country.
7. Future action plans
The Readers were generally satisfied that the future action plans are adequate in addressing
specific areas of concern. However, the committee noted that not all issues raised in External
Examiners’ reports have been developed into specific action points on the 2010/2011 Action plans,
although all have been responded to in the response grid.
It was felt that additional points should be incorporated within the action plans for the programme
areas of Construction, Animal and Environmental Biology, Technology and Architecture and
Planning. Specifically, it was felt that the External Examiners’ comments about weaker students in
Surveying should be embodied within the Action plan (Action Gil Lewis).
8. Additional comments
N/A
9. Outstanding actions
Please see Action Grid at the end of this document (Appendix 1).
10. Effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and its operation
With the exception of two AMRs all reports were received before or by the deadline. Where there
were delays these were due to staff absence or illness and as a result of these late submissions
the corresponding Readers reports were also delayed.
Some specific points were raised by the committee:







The committee raised some concern that there is no evidence of staff from partner colleges
engaging with the process and consider this would be beneficial.
The subcommittee found the grid provided by the Academic Office to be very useful and
commended it.
The committee considered the ease of access to the statistical data has improved again this
year.
The committee was satisfied overall with the quality of the Readers reports.
The committee considered that the action plans are not always SMART (Specific
Measurable Agreed Relevant and Realistic and Time bound) and suggests that Authors are
reminded of the requirements.
As mentioned previously, the committee raised the issue that courses starting in February
fall outside of the present review period and the committee requests that any new process
adequately addresses this anomaly.
A query was raised in relation to comments made by External Examiners on student exam
papers or other assessments. Currently, it is understood that these comments go back to
the department—as such, the current annual monitoring process does not include any
reference to these comments. The committee considers that for the purposes of a
34
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
satisfactory audit trail the comments should also be included within the AMRs.
Date completed:
28 February 2011
Appendix A: Faculty of Science & Technology Quality Standard Subcommittee:
Annual Monitoring Action Grid
Note/Programme
3.4 Academic
Office
3.5 Academic
Office
5.6
Action Required by 31st
March (unless otherwise
stated)
A discussion took place
regarding the timing of the
AMR process and a
suggestion was put
forward for an additional
section to be included
relating to an update on
what has happened
between the end of
academic year and the
writing of the report. This
is to be fed back to the
Academic Office.
Action by
Monitored
By
Vicky
McCormick/Nikki
Dibb
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
A request will be sent to
the strategic planning and
policy unit for the provision
of histograms for pathway
grades.
A query was raised in
relation to External
Examiner comments on
exam papers and
assignment tasks which
are sent to them for
comment. It is understood
that these comments go
back to the department
but the current annual
monitoring process does
not include any reference
to these comments. The
committee consider that
for the purposes of a
satisfactory audit trail the
comments should also
included in the AMR’s and
Nikki Dibb
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Nikki
Dibb/Caroline
Watts
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
35
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
suggest this is referred to
the Academic Office.
3.5 Animal &
Environmental
Biology
Problems with the use of
part time staff are noted in
the Animal &
Environmental Biology
programme area, and the
committee considered this
may put academic
standards at risk. There
was no reference within
the AEB action plan as to
how this will be dealt with
in future, and the
committee request the
author provides an
additional action point
within the plan for 2010/11
The committee discussed
the problem raised by
External Examiner (
Kathleen Thurman)
relating to the quality of
written English. There is
no action point within the
Architecture and Planning
Action plan relating to this
standard at risk. The
committee requests the
Author includes an action
point detailing the
measures the department
will take to attempt to
improve this
Julian Doberski
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Gil Lewis
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
3.6 Architecture &
Planning
The report states that
teaching pressures are
having a negative impact
on research and
consultancy. The
committee would like to
see what steps the
department is taking to
address this within the
action plan.
Gil Lewis
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
3.4 Construction
Portal data for was not
accessed or analysed,
and information regarding
the high mean mark in
EB215041S was not
adequately addressed.
The committee would like
Phil Mellow
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
3.5 Architecture
and Planning
36
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
3.4 Construction
3.6 Forensic
Science &
Chemistry
3.5 Optometry &
Optical
Management
3.4 Sports &
Exercise Sciences
3.5 Sports &
Exercise Sciences
to see a review of the
assessment addressed in
the action plan, as the
high mean mark raises a
concern as to whether
internal moderation is
working appropriately. The
author is to examine the
portal data and provide an
update to the report.
No information on student
retention given in relation
to the Portal data. This is
a specific requirement
within AMR. The author is
asked to provide
additional information.
The AMR mentions
establishing once a
semester meeting with
various Forensic Science
providers but this does not
appear on the action plan.
The committee request it
be included.
The committee noted the
comments from External
Examiner (David Gartry)
but as this Annual
Monitoring Report was not
available were unable to
comment on whether his
comments had been
adequately addressed in
the Action Plan. The Chair
will review the report and
comment accordingly 31st
January 2011
The Sports & Exercise
Sciences AMR refers to
additional data having to
be used which was
supplied by the faculty and
SEEVIC as there were
issues with centrally held
data. It was agreed that
the Chair would refer this
to the Head of
Department. By 31st
January 2011
The committee noted
External Examiner
(Anthony Westbury’s)
37
Phil Mellow
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Sarah Hall.
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
David Reid or
nominee
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
David Reid or
nominee
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Roy Luckhurst
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Appendix 5 (FST Summary Report)
3.6 Sports and
Exercise Sciences
3.5 Surveying
3.10 Surveying
3.6 VLE
comment relating to
monitoring level 3 at
SEEVIC and recommend
an additional action point
on the Sports & Exercise
Sciences 2010/11 Action
plan relating to how they
will monitor consistency at
level 3
It was noted that the
Sports and Exercise
Sciences report made no
mentioned of
employer/stakeholder
feedback and the
committee have requested
the author revisit this
section and provide
appropriate comments.
The committee noted the
comment from the
Surveying External
examiner in relation to
“generous marking” and
request that additional
detail be included in action
point 3 on the 2010/11
action plan in order to
clarify how the internal
moderators will actually
effect cross module
checking.
Furthermore the Reader
recommends the External
examiners comment
(Surveying) relating to
weaker students (item 2 p
25) is embodied within the
plan
Issues relating to the VLE
were discussed as this
was a theme across
several departments. The
committee are concerned
about limited storage
capacity particularly where
files include video skills.
The committee would like
to pass this comment on
to the VLE project board.
By 31st January 2011
38
Roy Luckhurst.
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Steve Fenton
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Steve Fenton.
Deputy
Dean/FQAO
Jacqui
McCary/Jo
Bowman
Deputy
Dean/FQAO