ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
The Senate
Summary Report of the Annual Monitoring of Taught Pathways Delivered in the Academic
Year 2008/09
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 2008/09, conducted between September 2009 and March
2010.
1.2
The following reports are attached as Appendices 1-6 and were the main sources of
information for the Summary Report:

Five Faculty Board overview reports: Faculty of Arts, Law & Social Sciences (ALSS);
Ashcroft International Business School (AIBS); Faculty of Education (FoE); Faculty of
Health & Social Care (FHSC); Faculty of Science & Technology (FST). All overview
reports were approved by the relevant faculty boards at meetings held in
February/March 2010;

Annual Institutional Review of Edexcel Licensed Centre BTEC Programmes (this
report forms the annual reporting process for Edexcel and complements the
monitoring of Edexcel higher nationals within the Programmes undertaken as part of
the Anglia Ruskin standard process).
1.3
The Senate is invited to consider this report, agree appropriate action where
necessary (see paras 4.4, 4.7, 4.10, 4.11, 4.17, 6.2, 7.1d) and conclude the annual
monitoring process of delivery in 2008/09.
2.
Progress on action points contained in the Summary Report for 2007/08
2.1
The following actions regarding our processes for annual monitoring were taken in response
to suggestions contained in last year’s Faculty overview reports:
a)
To commence the annual monitoring (AMR) template with the updated action plan from
the previous year;
This proposal was implemented and positively commented upon within the FHSC
overview report (see Appendix 4, para 1a).
b)
Including reference to Programme level responses to the NSS results and action plans
within the AMR template;
The following question was included within the AMR template: ‘What responses have
been made at Programme level to the National Student Survey and Student Experience
Survey?’
c)
Earlier distribution of the AMR template and guidance in May/June 2009;
This was achieved.
d)
To hold Annual Monitoring subcommittees in December, rather than January, so the
meeting coincides more closely with the completion of the Readers’ reports.
All Faculties were asked if they wished to bring forward their subcommittee meetings to
December; FST opted to do so and held their meeting on 17th December 2009. The
remaining four took place in January 2010 (see also para 7.1 a).
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
1
Academic Office
2.2
In last year’s report, it was noted that some of the FoE external examiners had identified a
lack of specificity in the generic assessment criteria in the ranges <40% and >70%. It was
agreed to refer this matter to the Assistant Director (Quality Systems) of the Academic Office
to consider when preparing the Procedural Document 2009/10 to accompany the Senate
Code of Practice on Assessment. The Assistant Director (Quality Systems) has consulted
senior academic colleagues across the Faculties and it was agreed to leave the criteria
unchanged at this time. Colleagues were confident that the existing criteria were fit for
purpose and in general, external examiner reports support this view.
3.
Process
3.1
The main structure and organisation of the annual monitoring process was largely unchanged
and operated as outlined in the Senate Code of Practice on Approval, Annual Monitoring and
Periodic Review.
3.2
As for last year, the Academic Office arranged for the main statistical reports to be
downloaded and stored on a public electronic area in October 2009. This permitted quick
and easy access to the statistical reports for Programme Leaders, Readers and members of
the Annual Monitoring subcommittees and none of the overview reports mentions any
difficulty with access for Anglia Ruskin staff. Access for partner institutions continues to be
problematic, although Quality Assurance Division staff have provided statistical reports for
partner colleagues where requested.
3.3
The Quality Assurance Division organised two briefing events, held in early September 2009,
for those colleagues involved in the process. A total of 38 staff attended these which
included a detailed session on access to and use of Programme and Pathway statistical
reports and the provision of exemplar annual monitoring reports.
3.4
The main sessions were complemented by four further sessions delivered jointly by the
Assistant Director (Quality Systems), Academic Office and the Head of Student Records,
dedicated to accessing and using the statistical data provided to support the annual
monitoring process. Due to availability of the training rooms, it was only possible to hold
these sessions at the Chelmsford Campus. The sessions were attended by 20 colleagues.
3.5
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.
4.
Conclusions
4.1
All five Faculty Board overview reports confirm that the annual monitoring process of the
delivery of pathways in 2008/09 was conducted effectively and undertaken in a sufficiently
critical and reflective manner. The FST report notes that the Readers’ reports had been
completed comprehensively and the FHSC report states that the Readers’ reports had
continued to demonstrate year on year improvements.
Essential Requirements of the Annual Monitoring Process
4.2
All the faculties report that satisfactory AMRs and Readers’ Reports for each Programme
have been received and considered by the Faculty sub-committees.
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports (for implementation during 2008/09)
4.3
All the overview reports confirm that, following some minor interventions by the Faculty
subcommittees, all actions identified in the previous year’s SMART Action Plans had either
been completed or rolled forward for inclusion in the Action Plan for 2009/10, due to the
medium-long term nature of the issue or where timescales had required revision.
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
2
Academic Office
4.4
The FHSC overview report notes that Programme Leaders should engage with AMR action
plans at the Semester Two (or equivalent) Programme sub-committee meetings (as stated in
the Senate Code of Practice on Approval, Annual Monitoring and Periodic Review, para
7.4.2). In order to facilitate this, and other programme sub-committee responsibilities, the
Deputy Dean and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer are preparing a template agenda for use
by all FHSC Programme subcommittees next academic year. It is recommended that the
adoption of a template agenda for Programme subcommittees is implemented within
all Faculties from the 2010/11 academic year.
Statistical Data
4.5
All five overview reports confirm that Programme Leaders have used and analysed statistics
available via the Oracle Portal in the compilation of their reports. Whilst there continues to be
some variability noted in the ability of colleagues to drill down into the statistics, there does
appear to be a greater level of engagement with the data evidenced within all Faculties.
4.6
The AIBS overview report notes that due to the large number of pathways and delivery
locations for the undergraduate Programme, detailed analysis proved challenging. To
address this, and to facilitate the analysis of trends and the comparison of deliveries at
different locations, it was proposed in last year’s report that the Pathway Leaders should take
a more significant role in monitoring and reporting mechanisms within the Faculty.
4.7
Although this did occur, particularly at postgraduate level, the AIBS overview report still notes
significant challenges for the undergraduate Programme Leader in completing detailed
comparative analyses of the large number of deliveries of each of the pathways. It is
therefore proposed by AIBS that separate AMRs should be produced for the UK and
international deliveries (see section 10 of the AIBS overview report, Appendix 1). The
Senate is recommended to endorse this proposal and permit the Head of Quality
Assurance and Institutional Quality Assurance Officer to work with the Deputy Dean
and Faculty Quality Assurance Officer to agree an annual monitoring process for AIBS
which is not solely based at the level of the Programme.
4.8
The FST report notes a request for more than one year’s data set to be provided for annual
monitoring. Colleagues are advised that this is available also through the Oracle Portal, by
selecting the option for ‘Periodic Review’ statistics.
Key Issues and Themes
4.9
The items of note included under this heading within the overview reports are primarily
Faculty-specific; there are no cross-university matters which need to be brought to the
attention of the Senate.
Curriculum Efficiencies
4.10 Questions relating to the issue of curriculum efficiencies were introduced to the annual
monitoring process for the first time in 2007/08 following a recommendation contained in the
2008 Senate report on Retention. Each of the overview reports details examples of actions
undertaken to improve efficiency of the curriculum. It should, however, be noted that these
reports were written prior to the implementation of the Curriculum Rationalisation Project
which commenced in February 2010. This has already had a very significant impact on the
curriculum offering to be delivered from September 2010, particularly within ALSS and FST.
The Senate is recommended to agree the continued inclusion of a separate section
within the AMR template, specifically focussing on curriculum efficiency and other
streamlining activities.
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
3
Academic Office
Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
4.11 It was agreed that in the 2007/08 annual monitoring process, that Programme Leaders be
asked to comment on the implementation and usefulness of Anglia Ruskin’s generic
assessment criteria and marking standards following their introduction from September 2007.
All five overview reports indicate that use of the generic assessment and more usually,
specific assessment criteria is now commonplace and therefore the Senate is
recommended to agree that a separate section in the AMR template focussing on
these marking criteria is no longer required.
4.12 Last year’s FHSC overview report noted that the assessment criteria and marking standards
had been well received by staff and students as a useful reference point but that there was
some difficulty, particularly for students, in interpreting these in relation to their field of study.
The Faculty response to this was to propose the development of an assessment criterion that
utilised student-friendly language, and this had been successfully piloted with the preregistration nursing programme. This was adopted by a number of other pathways and
positive feedback was received from both staff and students.
External Examiners’ Reports
4.13 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 2009 meeting.
4.14 The Senate is advised that the current AMR template requires the attachment of External
Examiner reports as an appendix and a narrative of the actions taken in response must be
included within the text of the report. The Senate is recommended to agree that the
Departmental letters sent in response to each External Examiner’s report are also
required as part of this appendix.
4.15 Both the AIBS and FHSC report note some actions, arising from External Examiners’ reports,
regarding our moderation processes. The FHSC report advises that there is a need to
standardise the use of moderation within some Programmes; the AIBS report states that
there is a need to review assessment and moderation processes and to consider whether
alternative models are necessary, particularly for partner institutions’ assessments. The
Senate is advised that our internal and external moderation processes are currently the focus
of a Quality Enhancement Audit, the outcomes of which are due to be reported to the
Academic Standards, Quality and Regulations Committee meeting of June 2010.
Future Action Plans (ie for implementation during 2009/10)
4.16 The 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. Both the FoE and FHSC reports note a year on year improvement
in the compilation of the action plans.
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
4
Academic Office
Issues for Special Consideration during 2009/10
4.17 Following the commencement of the VLE Implementation Project which has involved the
completion of closed and open pilots of the new Learning Management System (LMS) during
the 2009/10 academic year, the Senate is recommended to agree that a separate section
focussing on the implementation and use of the new LMS is included within the AMR
template for next year’s process.
5.
Issues of Institutional Significance
No new issues of institutional significance requiring further action emerged through the
annual monitoring process on delivery in 2008/09.
6.
Examples of Good and Innovative Practice and Commendable and/or Significant
Achievements for Wider Dissemination
6.1
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."
6.2
The Senate is invited to endorse the examples of good and innovative practice listed
below listed below 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.
6.3
These examples have been distilled from the Faculty Overview reports; only those which
appeared to meet the definition above have been included. It is proposed, however, 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.
ALSS
 Printing costs for students in the Cambridge School of Art have been slashed by 60%
 Wi-Fi has been installed in the Ruskin second floor studios serving Illustration
 The incorporation of PDP into the pathway by the Philosophy team
 The negotiation of titles for coursework and the engagement and benefit students gain
from this within Languages and Intercultural Communication
 Introduction of a mentoring system for Year 1 MA Music Therapy students by Year 2
students
 BA (Hons) Music pathway has continued to collaborate fruitfully by creating compositions
for student projects in other subject areas such as Media, Drama and Art
 Performing Arts staged the introduction and monitoring of seven sets of subject specific
assessment criteria
 Introduction of a benchmarking process between the Cambridge and King’s Lynn
programmes in Art, Design and Media
 The use of highly weighted modules in Art, Design and Media is indicative of good
practice in a process orientated discipline
 Use of a Learning & Teaching Fellowship project on ‘Evaluating English Language
assessment for international applicants to study at Anglia’
 Ongoing offering of a Dissertation Support Group for students in Languages and
Intercultural Communication
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
5
Academic Office
AIBS
 BA (Hons) Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Management is recognised as an
innovative degree with early involvement of entrepreneurs in delivery
 Wider adoption of explicit marking schemes and an improving speed of return of marked
scripts
 Changes and innovations have occurred to support the changing vision of the School to
become increasingly international in its appeal and become practice based.
FHSC
 Development has taken place to identify areas within clinical placements where support
and adjustments can be made for students with learning difficulties
 The PG Cert Disability Equality Practitioner Team has published a paper on using
positive discrimination to develop a new knowledge base
 The Radiography Team has developed an on-line virtual Freshers’ Week and a national
virtual poster presentation
 The Midwifery Team has introduced fine grading of practice supported by their own
specifically developed assessment tool
FST
 The Surveying Team make excellent use of a mid-semester review
 Forensic Science and Chemistry have introduced a novel weekly feedback method
designed to identify recurring themes and to address them before the next lecture
7.
Further Enhancements and Amendments to the Future Process
7.1
A small number of suggestions have been returned via the overview reports about the annual
monitoring process as follows:
a) to ensure that annual monitoring subcommittees do not take place in the same week as
Departmental Assessment Panel and Student Review meetings;
As noted in para 2.1 d) above, the Quality Assurance Division liaises with Faculties to
set the dates of the meetings, and such clashes would be avoided if the meetings took
place in mid-December.
b) to include reference to the Faculty Strategic plan in the advice to AMR authors on
possible sources of evidence for the reports;
c) to consider earlier publication of the examples of good practice identified in AMRs;
It has been customary to seek both the Faculty’s and the Senate’s endorsement of the
examples of good practice; however, if all subcommittees were to take place in midDecember, it would be possible for this summary report to be submitted to the February
meeting of the Senate.
d) The FoE report specifically requests consideration of the bringing together of its PSRB
(TDA/Ofsted) monitoring reports for its initial teacher education provision (required to be
submitted by mid-December each year) and our university annual monitoring processes
in order to avoid unnecessary duplication. The Senate is recommended to endorse
this proposal and to permit the Head of Quality Assurance and Institutional
Quality Assurance Officer to work with the Dean and other Faculty colleagues to
progress this.
7.2
Overall, the Senate can be confident that the annual monitoring of the delivery of
pathways in 2008/09 has been conducted effectively.
CAROLINE WATTS
Head of Quality Assurance, April 2010
Summary Report to the Senate, March 2009
6
Academic Office
Appendix One
Subcommittee Summary Report
Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences
Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Overview Report for 2008-2009
CONTENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Essential requirements
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports (i.e.: for 2008/09)
Statistical data
Key issues and themes
Curriculum efficiencies
Generic Assessment criteria and marking standards
External examiners’ reports
Future action plans (i.e.: for 2009/10)
Examples of good and innovative practice
Issues for consideration during 2009/10
Outstanding actions
Comments on the effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and the operation of the process itself
Appendix A – Summary of outstanding actions arising from Readers’ Reports
Appendix B – Examples of good and innovative practice
7
1. Essential Requirements
Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) for the following programmes were considered at the Faculty Board’s
Annual Monitoring Subcommittee held on 27 January 2010:
 Art, Design and Media (author Paul Marris)
 Communication, Film and Media (Patricia Coyle)
 English as a Foreign Language (Nick Hillman)
 English and Writing (Dr John Gardner)
 Humanities (Dr Jonathan Davies)
 Languages and Intercultural Communication (Sarah Fitt)
 Law (Academic) (Kathy Quinlan)
 Law (Professional Courses) (Louise Mckeon)
 Music (Dr Gianna Bouchard)
 Performing Arts (Dr Gianna Bouchard)
 Social Sciences (Dr Liz Bradbury)
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 year’s associated Reader’s Report (with a formal response from the AMR author where
applicable) has been attached to each AMR.
*With the exception of the Communication, Film and Media AMR (see Appendix A, action 1.0).
2. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports (i.e.: for 2008/09)
The AMRs described appropriate actions taken in response to Readers’ Reports on the previous year’s
AMRs, and successfully implemented SMART actions plans, with only two exceptions, on in Art, Design and
Media, and one in English and Writing (see Appendix A actions 2.1, 2.2).
3. Statistical Data
All of the AMRS used statistical data provided by Anglia Ruskin in their analysis of reports effectively, with
very few exceptions; e.g. the Humanities AMR included information on the Cambridge Theological
Federation which used its own locally generated statistics as these were more accessible and informative
(see Appendix A actions 3.1, 3.2).
Additional matters of note to the Faculty Board are:
 The Art, Design and Media AMR noted the positive effect of the introduction of the Merit band for PGT
pathways.
 Communication, Film and Media: University Centre Peterborough (UCP) appears not to have access to
the Oracle statistics (see Appendix A action 3.3).
4. Key Issues and Themes
No common key issues or themes emerged from across the eleven AMRs this year. (Actions specific to an
individual programme are listed in Appendix A actions 4.1, 4.2).
However, there are a number of actions for noting by the Faculty Board, including staffing:
 English as Foreign Language: The AMR refers to the need for a full-time Learning Centre Co-ordinator,
and the need to maximise the number of consistently available language laboratories (Appendix A action
4.3).
 Music: The appointment of a Programme Leader for Music was identified for action by the
Faculty/Department (Appendix A action 4.4).
 Social Sciences: The AMR and Reader highlight the need for the appointment of a (Work) Placements
Officer (Appendix A action 4.5).
8
and relations with UCP:
The Performing Arts AMR highlights the need for “communication from UCP to Programme needs to
improve, and staff at UCP need to be given time to attend meetings (at Cambridge or at Peterborough)”
(Appendix A, action 4.6).
There is also a request for consideration of the following regulatory matter by Anglia Ruskin (see also
Appendix A):
 The Performing Arts AMR and Reader state that: ‘Consideration needs to be given to introducing a
regulation that includes a penalty for non-attendance on modules that include group work’ (Appendix A
action 4.7).
5. Curriculum Efficiencies
Curriculum efficiency measures are addressed in all eleven AMRs. For example: the Readers of four AMRs
specifically state that modules have been archived or did not run where they recruited insufficient numbers;
Art, Media and Design are examining issues issue regarding 60-credit core modules at Levels 1 and 2 and
their negative effect on progression; English and Writing is looking to digitise certain teaching materials so
students can download them as MP3 files; while issues of curriculum efficiency are being addressed by
Music and Performing Arts as part of Periodic Review during 2009-10.
6. Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
With the exception of non-modular areas, Law (Professional) and English as a Foreign language, all the
AMRs confirm that generic assessment criteria and marking standards are included in modules guides and
are seen to be useful. In many programmes (e.g., Law (Academic); Art, Design and Media; Communication,
Film and Media, English and Writing; Music; and Performing Arts) subject specific assessment criteria have
been developed using generic criteria as a basis.
Note that two Readers raise the issue of a lack of detail in the marking criteria at the lower and upper ranges:
In some cases on the BA (Hons) Theology degree, Anglia Ruskin’s marking grid is not seen as
particularly helpful, because of the amount of detail in it and that clearer guidelines on work in
the 80% + bracket would be appreciated by members of the Department [Humanities AMR
Reader].
The author also felt that further detail within the generic…marking criteria, particularly for marks
above 70, but also for those below 40, would aid a refinement of the Programmes marking and
feedback at both ends of the scale [Social Sciences AMR Reader].
(As part of the Faculty’s NSS Action Plan, the introduction of a generic assessment feedback is being
examined, and would go some way towards clarifying the above concerns.)
7. External Examiners’ Reports
Readers note that External Examiner reports are generally extremely positive. As reported to the Senate in
EE rpts distilled 3 Nov V6, pp 5-11, our external examiners for the 2008-09 academic year identified only
ONE instance where our academic standards were at risk. Even this sole example—raised by Adam Piette
for English and Writing re concerns that the administrative workload of academic staff may negatively
impinge on their ability to maintain their excellent standards of teaching and research—does not reflect
poorly on the current academic provision in the faculty (see Appendix A action 7.1). In contrast, the
document lists 51 separate instances of “Good Practice/Commendable Achievements” across our learning,
teaching and assessment practices.
Although readers do not note any concerns raised by externals that are not addressed in the SMART action
plans for the programmes, there are some points raised by external examiners for the English and Writing
and Languages and Intercultural Communication programmes, respectively, that do not appear to be
addressed explicitly in some action plans (see Appendix A actions 7.2-7.6).
9
8. Future Action Plans (i.e.: for 2009/10)
The Readers are generally satisfied that the future action plans were adequate and address any issues or
areas of concern, particularly those raised by external examiners. A few additional points were raised by
Readers for inclusion in the future Action Plans for the programmes of Art, Design and Media,
Communication, Film and Media, and English as a foreign language (see Appendix A actions 8.1-8.32).
9. Examples of 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].
As noted above, as reported to the Senate in EE rpts distilled 3 Nov V6, pp 5-11, our external examiners for
the 2008-09 academic year identified 51 separate instances of “Good Practice/Commendable
Achievements” across our learning, teaching and assessment practices.
For examples of good and innovative practice, as well as “examples of significant and/or commendable
achievements and/or outcomes…[to] be highlighted to a wider audience”, see Appendix B.
10. Issues for Special Consideration during 2009/10
Two key documents in the 2009-10 academic year are the Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences (ALSS)
Retention Action Plan, 2009-10, and the Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences (ALSS) response to the
National Student Survey (NSS) 2008-09: Action Plan. The first describes the Faculty’s multi-varied approach
to increasing rates of student retention via various measures including (i) addressing modules with poor
retention, (ii) improving student induction, (iii) mitigating late changes to lectures, (iv) monitoring attendance,
(v) monitoring student withdrawals, (vi) improving blended learning capabilities, (vii) improving overall service
to students, and (viii) offering opportunities to progress onto higher qualifications within the faculty.
The second action plan details the faculty’s focus on two key questions of the NSS; that is, “9. Feedback on
my work has helped me clarify things I did not understand” and “14. Any changes in the course or teaching
have been communicated effectively” via a series of measures including (i) a review of formative and
summative feedback, (ii) the possible adoption of standard feedback assessment sheets across all ALSS
teaching provision, (iii) bringing together all Faculty administrators in one office enabling them to act as a
“one-stop shop” for student enquiries, (iii) installing four Faculty “infoscreens”, (iv) revising procedures for
informing students (and staff) of staff sickness, (v) participate in the Syllabus+ timetabling pilot in semester 2,
(vi) participate in the SharePoint VLE “closed” and “open” pilots in semesters 1 and 2, and (vii) training staff
to have ALL ALSS modules use the VLE by September 2010.
Most, if not all, of the above measures will have an effect on the learning, teaching and assessment
experience of students, and may need to be considered in next year’s AMRs.
11. Outstanding Actions
See Appendix A.
12. Comments on the effectiveness of the annual monitoring process and the operation of the
process itself
The Subcommittee and Readers were generally satisfied with the process and many congratulated
Programme Leaders on the quality of their reports. The only issue on the day was the unfortunate absence
of 3 members of the subcommittee which slightly hindered discussions.
10
Two issues were raised by the Subcommittee for future enhancements and/or further consideration:
 The timing of the Subcommittee meeting: it would be preferable if the meeting was not scheduled in the
same week as either Programme Reviews or DAPs, possibly in mid-January next year.
 The dissemination of examples of good practice: the Subcommittee felt it was difficult for Programmes to
adapt/adopt good practice identified in the Faculty Board overview report or Senate Summary report as
these documents were 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.
Dr Apurba Kundu
Deputy Dean (Academic Development)
ALSS
11
APPENDIX A: Summary of outstanding actions arising from Reader’s Reports (from the meeting of Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences annual monitoring
subcommittee, held on 27th January 2010)
Programme
Action Required by 31 March 2010 (unless stated otherwise)
1.0
Communication,
Film and Media
2.1
Art, Design and
Media
2.2
English and
Writing
3.1
Communication,
Film and Media
3.2
English as a
Foreign
Language
Communication,
Film and Media
The previous year’s SMART action plan had not been appended to the report (although a detailed written summary of
action taken was included). Programme Leader to provide a copy of the previous year’s SMART plan with updates on the
action taken.
Patricia Coyle
Targets 6 and 9 of the previous year’s action plan are described in the summary in terms of their measurable outcomes of
improved scores in the NSS, but no further information is provided in terms of the measurable outcome of the Student
Experience Survey (SES). Programme Leader to provide an analysis of the SES outcomes.
Paul Marris
Reader noted that “it would appear that staffing expertise in respect of certain specialist modules may need careful ongoing
monitoring”. Programme Leader to add an additional target to the Action Plan to monitor the availability of specialist staff to
ensure that specialist modules are able to run.
John Gardner
The Reader noted a discrepancy between the continuation statistics provided for BA (Hons) Journalism at UCP in Section
B1.3 of the main AMR which did not correspond with those given in Section B1.3 of the “pathway” report provided by UCP
and appended to the main Annual Monitoring report. Programme Leader to provide an explanation for the discrepancy in
the statistics included within the AMR.
Patricia Coyle
Reader noted that “retention is good except in relation to the attendance issue which is being addressed by the Programme
team”. Programme Leader to add a target to the Action Plan to address the attendance issue.
Nick Hillman
University Centre Peterborough (UCP) appears not to have access to the Oracle statistics. The Subcommittee agreed that
this should be noted and discussed at Faculty Board, and referred to the Academic Office if necessary.
Apurba Kundu
Full accreditation of BA (Hons) Journalism by the NCTJ at both Harlow and Peterborough is mentioned in the “pathway”
action plans provided by the regional partners but does not feature in the Programme level SMART action plan. Programme
Leader to amend action plan to include professional body accreditation of BA (Hons) Journalism at Harlow and
Peterborough as a target.
Patricia Coyle
Reader highlights the discussion of lower word count in assessment of the MA Applied Linguistics as recommended by the
external examiner. This does not, however, feature explicitly in the SMART action plan. Programme Leader to amend
Target 2 of the Action Plan to show that the volume of assessment for the MA Applied Linguistics will be reviewed as part of
the re-validation and approval of the pathway for distance learning delivery.
Sarah Fitt
3.3
4.1
Communication,
Film and Media
4.2
Languages and
Intercultural
Communication
Monitored
by
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
12
4.3
4.4
English as a
Foreign
Language
Music
4.5
Social Sciences
4.6
Performing Arts
4.7
Performing Arts
7.1
English and
Writing
7.2
English and
Writing
7.3
English and
Writing
7.4
English and
Writing
The AMR refers to the need for a full-time Learning Centre Co-ordinator and the need to maximise the number of
consistently available language laboratories. This was highlighted by the Reader and requires consideration by the Faculty.
Apurba Kundu
The appointment of a Programme Leader for Music was identified for action by the Faculty/Department.
Apurba Kundu
The AMR and Reader highlight the following point for consideration by Anglia Ruskin; the need for the appointment of a
(Work) Placements Officer.
Apurba Kundu
The AMR highlights the need for ‘communication from UCP to Programme needs to improve, and staff at UCP need to be
given time to attend meetings (at Cambridge or at Peterborough). For consideration by Faculty Board.
Apurba Kundu
AMR and Reader highlight the following for Anglia Ruskin: ‘Consideration needs to be given to introducing a regulation that
includes a penalty for non-attendance on modules that include group work’.
Apurba Kundu
External Examiner Adam Piette raises the issue of the administrative load for Programme staff. This is addressed in the
action plan but only in terms of digitising teaching materials to cut down on administration. A separate action point relating
to this issue needs to be included in the Action Plan.
John Gardner
External Examiner Joad Raymond describes four areas for improvement or enhancement: (i) more teaching in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; (ii) adjustment of dissertation grades by external examiners; (iii) potentially, clarifying
and making more rigorous the double marking procedures for examinations; and (iv) more rigorous and visible
implementation of existing policy concerning word-count for essays. Point (i) is addressed by Target 1 of the AMR Action
Plan. Other points are addressed in formal response letter to external but do not feature in Action Plan. Programme Leader
to include additional targets in Action Plan.
John Gardner
External Examiner John Coyle describes two areas for improvement or enhancement listed in report: (i) with the very best
work I would still encourage that the full upper range of marks be considered; and (ii) that consideration be given to
including additional assessment tasks for modules assessed by a single item of assessment. Both points are addressed in
the formal response letter from the Programme Leader but do not feature in the action plan. Programme Leader to include
additional targets in Action Plan.
John Gardner
External Examiner Adam Piette raises various points regarding the assessment process as areas for improvement or
enhancement; e.g. “more room needs to be made a default for moderator and 2 nd marker comments [on the assignment
coversheet], drafts for all creative writing work need not be sent to externals in my view etc”. The formal response letter
deals with these points in detail. The letter does state that the issue of external examiners arbitrating in difficult/borderline
cases will be formally considered by the Academic Office but it is not included in the action plan to be referred to the
Academic Office for a decision. Where the Programme Leader has agreed to take particular action in the letters to externals
these should feature as targets in the Action Plan so they are formally recorded. Programme Leader to include additional
targets in Action Plan.
John Gardner
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
13
7.5
Languages and
Intercultural
Communication
7.6
Languages and
Intercultural
Communication
8.1
Cambridge
School of Art
Communication,
Film and Media
English as a
Foreign
Language
8.2
8.3
External Examiner Tope Omoniyi describes three areas for improvement or enhancement listed in report: (i) reduction of
assessment length; (ii) samples of assessed work should include complete grade sheets for the whole module; and (iii)that
all scripts earning first class or fail marks are included in the samples. Point (i) is addressed, but not explicitly, in Target 2 of
the action plan. Points (ii) and (iii) are addressed in the formal response letter to the external in which the pathway leaders
agree to address the points. They do not, however, feature in the Programme Action Plan. Programme Leader to include
additional targets in Action Plan.
Sarah Fitt
External Examiner Linda Taylor describes two areas for improvement or enhancement listed in report: (i) staff working
towards typewritten feedback for all formally assessed work; and (ii) plagiarism is of ongoing concern in your institution, as
elsewhere. Point (ii) is addressed by Target 7 of the action plan. Point (i) is addressed in the formal response letter but is
not included in the Action Plan. Programme Leader to include additional targets in Action Plan.
Sarah Fitt
Four specific additional points raised by Reader as included in their report and summary grid.
Paul Marris
Reader specifically recommended that the Programme Action Plan incorporate action points for partner institutions.
Patricia Coyle
Reader suggests adding a target which states that the Action Plan following the British Council Inspection Visit will be fully
implemented.
Nick Hillman
RM
RM
RM
RM
RM
14
Appendix B: Examples of Good and Innovative Practice (to be reported to the Faculty Learning & Teaching Committee)
Art, Design and
Media
Examples of good and innovative practice
Examples of “significant and/or commendable achievements and/or outcomes…[to]
be highlighted to a wider audience”

Printing costs for A4 and A3 [in the
Cambridge School of Art] have been
slashed by 60%.

Introduction of a benchmarking process between the Cambridge and Kings Lynn
programmes.


Wi-Fi has been installed in the Ruskin
second floor studios serving illustration.
The use of highly weighted modules is indicative of good practice in a process orientated
discipline.

Securing a regular formal display area for the display of the Major Project.
Communication,
Film and Media

The use of a script archive as well as archives for video, radio and print.

The professional and practical nature of modules in both taught and placement modules.
English as a
Foreign
Language

Integration of EFL students into Anglia Ruskin University, and the wider UKHEI
environment.

Use of Nick Hillman’s L&T Fellowship project ‘Evaluating English language assessment
for international applicants to study at Anglia”.

Excellent working through of issues in the first year of partnership with CRIC.


The enhancement of E-learning initiatives generally.
“Curriculum design is forward-thinking and inspired by the latest research: the
department’s strong research profile impacts favourably on its teaching performance...It
is clear that the fine performance of the department in research terms feeds directly into
excellent and innovative teaching provision” [External Examiner]
History did extremely well in the RAE, with 85% of their research being rated as
“international standard” and 60% rated as “world leading” or “internationally excellent”.
On the MA Jewish-Christian Relations, Lucia Faltin ran a major staff development
training day for the CTF and got involved in the e-resources group that has developed an
e-learning strategy for CTF.
The MA Pastoral Theology has encouraged creativity in assessment and this has
resulted inter alia in a Major Project in the form of a photographic exhibition in
Michaelhouse, Cambridge, and in two collaborations for interdisciplinary Major Projects
(using an assessor from Music as well as Theology). Major Project work has also issued
in a conference paper, and in another case in consultancy work.
English and
Writing
Humanities

The external for Philosophy offers
particular praise for the ways in which the
Philosophy team have incorporated PDP
into the Pathway. He feels that this
remains a very impressive aspect of the
assessment processes and that continues
to merit praise. Importantly, he says that
this remains “the best examples of this
form of assessment practice I have
encountered”.



15
Languages and
Intercultural
Communication

The negotiation of titles for coursework
and the engagement and benefit students
gain from this.

Law (Academic)

“In my opinion, the successful use of oral
presentations could be shared with other
Law Schools” [External Examiner].



Law
(Professional
Courses)

Music



MA Music Therapy has benefited from the
successful introduction of a mentoring
system, using the experiences of year 2
students to support those in year 1.
The BA (Hons) Music pathway has
continued to collaborate fruitfully by
creating compositions for student projects
in other subject areas such as Media,
Drama and Art.
The BA (Hons) Creative Music
Technology is commended by the external
for its increasing use of digital culture as
part of its delivery mechanisms.

The ongoing offering of a Dissertation Support Group and the encouragement of
students to attend this shows a commitment to maintain innovative good practice already
adopted.
Focused concentration on feedback and students’ use and understanding of feedback
(and feed-forward).
National Kite Mark accreditation (Skillsmark)
Adoption of “root and branch” system of document coding for transactional learning
(development of interactive VLE)
Success (again) in national interviewing competition
In the year under review, Julio d’Escrivan received a VC’s Award for contribution to the
student experience.
16
Performing Arts



Social Sciences



The ‘practical’ essay assessment
component is flagged up again by the
external as example of innovative practice.
The development of opportunities to
engage with professional practice and
environments through use of guest
speakers/visiting artists; through events at
venues such as the Junction, the Key
Theatre (Peterborough) and Mumford
Theatre; and through workshops with a
range of theatre groups is part of an
ongoing plan to get students thinking
about their work beyond the university
environment.
The staged introduction and monitoring of
the seven sets of subject specific
assessment criteria.
Externals recommend the practice by
which marks are broken down and
allocated against set criteria as a practice
by which positive marking can be
achieved without inflating marks.

In the year under review, Programme Leader Dr Gianna Bouchard received a VC’s
Award for contribution to the student experience.

Staff at UCP received funding for an innovative project with Key Theatre aimed at
encouraging secondary school students to consider a career in performing arts.
Staff at UCP led a highly successful production if 12th Night that has since been invited to
festivals throughout the region and was performed as part of the launch of Key Theatre’s
Studio space.




The External cites “the extent to which students are engaging with contemporary theory
and applying it to topical and personal issues is excellent”.
The External cites the feedback given to those taking the Disaster planning module
within the Public Service Pathway as a commendable achievement.
The External cites the integration of experiential learning into academic work.
The FdA Public Service staff’s integration
of experiential learning into assessments.
The External cites the Sociology staff’s
dealing with students with great parity and
providing a very interesting curriculum as
good practice.
17
Appendix Two
Ashcroft International Business School
Annual Monitoring of delivery of Pathways in 2008/09
Faculty Overview Report for consideration at AIBS Faculty Board in February 2009
1.
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to provide the Senate with a comprehensive account of the operations of the
AIBS Faculty annual monitoring process for pathways delivered in the academic year 2008/09 and the
conclusions deriving from this process. The report highlights key issues and themes and, where necessary,
recommends further action. Three programmes within the School have been reported on: the undergraduate
programme, the postgraduate programme and the professional programme. All three programmes operate
within both the Cambridge Department and the Chelmsford Department and within some partner institutions.
2.
Essential requirements
All essential requirements within programme annual monitoring reports have been included.
3.
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports
Of the thirteen action points in the previous year’s action plan three have been completed and achieved, one
is no longer relevant due to the removal of a pathway and the remainder are all ongoing. In these remaining
cases there has been progress but there is further work to undertake. A number of the actions relate to
partner institutions and the need for further work reflects the increase in the number of partners and the
number of pathways and students. In reflecting upon this action plan discussion focussed on the potential
benefits that the new VLE can offer in sharing materials with partners and the difficulties associated with
moderation of assessed work. Increasing volumes of marking and moderation have raised the workload for
staff and increased the problems associated with coordinating the use of External Examiners.
4.
Use of statistical data
Statistical data are not easily acquired for the professional programme as in a number of cases marks are
held by the professional body, not on SITS, and are not made available to us. Statistics were available and
were used well for postgraduate pathways and retention on postgraduate awards is good. Due to the large
number of pathways and delivery centres for the undergraduate programme detailed analysis is a challenge.
It is difficult to track students who change pathway and while they may appear lost to the Faculty they are
often in fact retained. New data has been made available on a pilot basis during the early part of academic
year 09/10 that provides a more accurate analysis. Retention is poor on the undergraduate pathways with
the largest number of students being lost during the first year. Many of these students are not discontinued
and do not withdraw formally, they simply stop attending. The taking of registers and tracking of nonattending students should help to address this problem.
5.
Key themes, issues and trends
A number of issues are raised in the reports. These include problems identified with some modules that will
be addressed during the curriculum review; increasing number of work-based pathways and two year
degrees and increasing engagement with Professors of Management Practice and Visiting Professors. The
changes to delivery and the introduction of new pathways in line with the School’s strategic direction were
noted. There was concern at the lack of discussion within the AMRs about academic standards at the
School of Administration and Management in Trinidad and the London College of Accountancy (LCA). The
statistics for both institutions indicate performance issues. The suggestion in section 9 should address this
issue.
Accommodation remains an issue on both campuses, with reference to suitability of rooms, particularly on
professional courses. There were improvements in timetabling and fewer cancelled classes than in previous
years. Reports raise the issue of adequate staffing and the matching of suitable staff to demands. This was
particularly apparent with the professional courses. Assessment was discussed again with on-going work to
improve consistency in the use of detailed marking criteria and ensure more consistency of feedback. The
need for early identification of Module Leaders and the production of Module Guides by a much earlier date
to allow for distribution to partners was flagged.
18
On campus the NSS responses were raised as an issue for concern. Off campus the growing number of
partners and the effectiveness of the current administrative structure and moderation system were debated.
The lack of consistency of various forms of documentation such as module guides was noted. The need for
staff development and more formal monitoring were seen as necessary actions.
External Examiners’ reports
6.
External Examiners (EEs) have been generally positive and Readers report that there have been actions in
response to any concerns. External Examiners have noted an improvement in the application of marking
criteria though there is still concern from some about consistency across modules in some disciplines.
There have been commendations about the nature of the curriculum and assessment in areas such as
Entrepreneurship. In Tourism there are innovative assessments and great improvements in marking criteria,
consistency and feedback. The difficulty of managing resit DAPs to tight timescales resulted in a number of
EEs questioning the need for External Examiner scrutiny for resit assessments.
External Examiners moderate many modules that are delivered on both campuses and note that there is
effective moderation to ensure consistency. However, on one module different assessments were used
inadvertently and this led to the External Examiner raising concern about standards being at risk. However,
this problem was picked up and dealt with effectively with the External Examiner’s support so demonstrates
that such issues are identified and handled on the few occasions that they occur. There are a number of
occasions when marks allocated by partner institutions are moderated, usually by lowering them and
External Examiners confirm these changes. As each partnership matures this difference in marking levels
reduces.
One EE encourages AIBS to review the balance between application of accounting regulation and
discussing underpinning rationale and theories, he believes that assessments focus too heavily on
application of technical rules and this results in bunched marks rather than a broad spread. This issue will
be addressed as part of the 2009/10 Curriculum Review. Some EEs have commended the move to
international practice based learning. The Malaysian Quality Agency reported favourably on delivery of
programmes in some partners in Malaysia and FIBAA has ranked the Cambridge /Berlin dual award as
excellent. Practical problems in delivering marks and scripts to deadlines remains a problem. This leads to
many Chair’s actions, late marks, late feedback to students and work being posted in small batches to EEs.
This is an issue mainly with Cambridge modules and relates particularly to the very large volume of post
graduate work. It is imperative that this is addressed for future assessment rounds.
One EE was worried that the increasing volume of moderation from partner institutions was putting pressure
on staff during teaching and that while this was not at present a threat to academic standards it might well
become so. The need to review assessment and moderation processes and consider whether alternative
models are necessary, particularly for partner institutions’ work was flagged as a necessary action. This is
linked with the need to plan the allocation of work to EEs in a different manner. A shortfall in EEs during
retirement and replacement has exacerbated the problem and led to the suggestion that we appoint several
more EEs and not just replace those coming to the end of their contract.
7.
Future Action Plans
The Readers report that the future action plans were comprehensive and included all actions identified by
External Examiners.
8.
Examples of good practice

BA (Hons) Entrepreneurship and Entrepreneurial Management is recognised as an innovative
degree with early involvement of entrepreneurs in delivery.

The use of guest speakers, cultural and company visits and multimedia delivery enhances the
student experience and supports the practice-based curriculum.

There has been wider adoption of explicit marking schemes and improving speed of return of
marked scripts.
19

9.
10.
Changes and innovations have occurred to support the changing vision of the School to become
increasingly international in its appeal and become practice based.
Commendable achievements

AIBS student team won their second IBM competition

Three members of staff awarded doctorates

Natalie Kite elected Vice-Chair of CIPFA course leader panel.

AIBS is a leading UK Business School in terms of textbook production with texts in English and in
translation to other languages

Rapid growth of number of partner institutions
Curriculum efficiencies
During the course of 2008/9 the curriculum review of the main shared undergraduate pathways began. The
redesign on these pathways should be approved shortly, in early March 2010 to commence in September
2010. The review is driven by a need to update the curriculum, to address the practice based curriculum
model and to reduce the number of modules. The efficiencies gained from this review should be significant.
The undergraduate pathways not included in the review comprise those recently approved pathways
specifically designed to be innovative and attract new markets. As they are marketed and embedded in our
portfolio and we recruit further cohorts decisions will be made on their long term viability. In the
postgraduate programme there are low recruiting pathways and these will be reviewed in the next year.
11.
Issues for special consideration during 2009/10
The undergraduate and postgraduate Annual Monitoring Reports, as they are currently structured, are very
time consuming to produce and unwieldy. Further thought should be given to producing separate AMRs for
UK and International deliveries. These would fall neatly under the responsibility of Programme Leaders and
also Directors of International and UK collaboration.
This would allow writers and readers to take a far
more detailed study of each delivery point for each pathway.
A companion volume presenting and
comparing statistics across module and pathway delivery points could allow thorough, critical comparison of
centres.
There was extensive discussion of the value of the creation of a Faculty Quality Review and Enhancement
Committee. It was felt that this would be an appropriate forum to consider statistics and module evaluation
feedback to compare delivery points. The data discussed could feed directly into the AMRs reducing the
need for a major analysis after the end of an academic year. It would also allow monitoring of action points
from AMRs on a regular basis and lead to enhanced delivery and improved student perceptions.
12.
Conclusion
Readers were confident about the quality of the AMRs though the lack of comment about SAM and LCA is
problematic and reinforces the need for AMRs that address partners independently. AMR writers, once
again found the task onerous and had to seek extensions. There was a high level of debate at the AMR subcommittee. The remit and constitution of the Faculty Quality Review and Enhancement Committee is
attached to this report for approval by Faculty Board and for information to Senate.
There is evidence of considerable effort and success in moving further towards our aim to be an International
practice based business school. Increasing numbers of international students on campus and a continuing
increase in new partners are other examples of success. This expansion inevitably brings with it problems in
adapting systems and managing resources to handle the additional workload. Alternative approaches and
improved planning are necessary to deal with the issues highlighted in this report.
Dr Jenny Gilbert
Deputy Dean, AIBS, 20th February 2010
20
Appendix
AIBS Faculty Quality Review and Enhancement Committee
Membership
Deputy Dean (Chair)
Faculty Quality Assurance Officer
Heads of Department 2
Faculty Business and Administration Manager
Director of Research
Programme Leaders 2
Directors of Studies 2
Directors of International Partnerships 2
Director of UK and Corporate Partnerships
Director for Joint Venture and Regional College Partnerships
Student Experience Coordinators 2
Remit
To drive enhancement of the student experience through regular reviews of the quality of delivery to
undergraduate, postgraduate and research students on campus and in partners
Detailed actions will included those below
To monitor production of AMRs and complete the work of the AMR sub-committee
To collate and consider External Examiners’ reports, summarise the actions needed and ensure that we are
responsive.
To study module statistics and discuss DAP module reports making suggestions for actions to improve
retention
To analyse overall student feedback from Module Evaluation Questionnaires, identifying examples of good
practice and forward areas for action to the HoD
To monitor assessment feedback, moderation and hand back processes and to explore more innovative and
effective ways to provide such feedback.
To monitor the quality of faculty documents, note and share good practice, make recommendations for
enhancement and ensure a necessary level of consistency. Documents will include Module Guides,
Pathway Handbooks.
To identify areas of risk and to note and share good practice through regular checking of a variety of
feedback mechanisms
21
Faculty Quality Review and Enhancement Committee
Date
October
December
February
March
Discussion items
External Examiners’ reports
Sample Student Handbooks
Review of progress on AMRs
Remaining External Examiners’ reports
Module guides Sem 2 sample checked
Monitor retention stats
Annual Monitoring Reports
Module Evaluation Questionnaire sem 1
Module Reports from DAP sem 1
Monitor assessment feedback, moderation and
hand back processes
June
Approval Student Handbook template
Nomination of replacement External Examiners
Progress on AMR action plan
July
Module Evaluation Questionnaire sem 2
Module Reports from DAP sem 2
Monitor assessment feedback, moderation and
hand back processes
Module guides Sem 1 sample checked
Faculty Quality Evaluation Meeting dates 2009/10
Twice a year
January 28th and June
Attendance1
DD, HoDs or devolved, DoSs, Prog
Leaders, Directors of Collaborative,
FQAO
DD, HoDs or devolved, DoSs, Prog
Leaders, Directors of Collaborative
FQAO
DD, Prog Leaders, designated Readers
FQAO, others as designated in Senate
Code of Practice
DD, HoDs or devolved, DoSs, Prog
Leaders, Directors of Collaborative
Partnerships, FQAO
Papers move to
AMR overview report to Faculty Board
Feb 24th
Summaries to Faculty Board May
DD, Prog Leaders, FQAO
DD, HoDs or devolved, DoSs, Prog
Leaders, Directors of Collaborative
Partnerships, FQAO
Action Plans to Faculty Board
October
Faculty Board dates
October 7th 2009
February 24th 2010
May 27th 2010
1
All members of the committee are entitled to attend all meetings, with the exception of the February Annual Monitoring Reports meeting where membership is designated by
Senate. The list of attendees notes those required at each meeting.
22
Appendix Three
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY
Faculty of Education
Confirmed 2010 Faculty Overview report of Annual Monitoring of delivery in 2008/2009
Areas covered by the report, as listed in the guidance notes:
1. Essential Requirements
2. Previous Year’s Action Plans and Reader’ Reports
3. Statistical Data
4. Key issues and themes
5. Curriculum Efficiencies
6. Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
7. External Examiner’s Reports
8. Future Action Plans for 09/10
9. Examples of Good and Innovative Practice
10. Issues for Special Consideration during 2009/2010
11. Outstanding Actions
12. Comment on the effectiveness of the Annual Monitoring process and the operation of the
process itself. This may also include any recommendations for the future enhancement of
the process.
23
1.
Essential Requirements
Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) for the following programmes were considered by a Reader
and these Reports were discussed by the Faculty Board’s Annual Monitoring Subcommittee held
on 21st January 2010:






BA (Hons) Learning through Technology and Fd Cultural Services (Ultraversity)
Combined Honours and Early Years including FdA Early Years Childcare
Continuing Professional Development/Post Compulsory Education (CPD/PCE)
Teaching Assistants
Postgraduate (Primary and Secondary) Initial Teacher Training (PG ITT)*
Undergraduate Initial Teacher Training (UG ITT)
*After consideration of all Readers Report, the Subcommittee considered that the AMR for
Postgraduate ITT required further work in order to meet the essential requirements.
The Sub-committee therefore agreed that the recommendations and conclusions of this meeting,
summarised in the Overview Report, be revised through Chair’s Action following the resubmission
and consideration of the revised Postgraduate ITT AMR.
Secretary’s note: the Postgraduate ITT AMR has since been revised to the required standard by
the Head of Teacher Education in the author’s absence on long term sick leave.
The Sub-committee noted the need to monitor the progress of Action Plans in particular for
programmes which have been affected by the Faculty restructure and may now be split between
different departments.
2.
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers Reports
With the exception of the Postgraduate ITT AMR as noted above, the Sub-committee confirmed
that Action Plans for the academic year 2008/09 and responses to Readers’ comments had been
implemented and actions completed and/or rolled forward as necessary.
3.
Statistical Data
The Sub-committee noted that centrally produced data had been used, with a variable degree of
sophistication. In some instances where data could have been used insufficient drilling down
resulted in superficial analysis and in some cases the selective use of data skewed the overall
picture of progression and quality.
Recoding of programme areas was applied historically which made it necessary to analyse the
data at pathway level, thereby solving previous years issues which were caused by relying on
programme codes (which contained very different base data). While the Sub-committee
considered the use of additional data sources to be improved, it noted the need to make more
coherent use of data to inform critical analysis. It was noted, however, that the work accomplished
by the Faculty Data Analyst has begun to aid programme leaders develop a common approach to
data analysis, however further systematic engagement with emerging data is required by the
Programme Leader in order to identify trends across pathways. Where, differences in achievement
are noted in pathways which are delivered in different locations these differences need to be
investigated and analysed.
It is evident that Programme Leaders have benefited from the centrally provided Annual Monitoring
training, and the Sub-Committee felt that in order for others to engage more proactively with the
data further training at pathway level would be beneficial.
24
4.
Key issues and themes
There were no common themes emerging from all AMRs, although two AMRs referred to staffing
capability in particular in relation to partner colleges.
5.
Curriculum efficiencies
All programmes are engaged with the efficiency agenda and had either reviewed or proposed to
review curriculum or operational delivery. Curriculum efficiency is noted as one of the key
objectives of the Initial Teacher Training review proposed for September 2010 delivery.
6.
Generic Assessment
The Sub-committee noted that adherence to the generic assessment criteria was standard practice
within the Faculty and that every module has its own tailored assessment criteria within this
framework.
7.
External Examiner Reports
The Sub-committee was pleased to note that the positive feedback received by the External
Examiners and the use of these reports was seen to be generally good; comments and
recommendations were taken seriously. In particular, the publishable quality of PGCE Art & Design
and Masters level work was commended and the cross-institution standardisation process in
CPE/PCE was again identified as good practice.
8.
Future Action Plans
Action Plans were submitted by all AM authors. While the standard of those submitted varied, the
Sub-committee agreed that the Action Plans reflected themes or issues identified within the AMRs.
The Sub-committee noted that there was an improvement in the appropriateness of the action
plans; all were ‘SMART’, however two would benefit from revision following the Reader’s and Subcommittee’s recommendations (see Outstanding Actions below). The Sub-committee noted that
the action plans would need to be monitored on a pathway – cross department level following the
reorganisation of the Faculty.
9.
Examples of good and innovative practice
The Sub-committee identified the following as examples of good practice:

Improved engagement with recommendations from University Sub-committees.

All programmes are now seeking to adopt common modules across their pathways
within and across programmes to address the efficiency agenda. The Subcommittee commended these as good practice.
25
10.
Outstanding Actions in relation to the AMRs
Programme
Report
Action Required
Action
monitored by:
(by 29th January 2010 unless otherwise stated)
CPE
The Authors should review the Action Plan to
AD
consider further issues/points raised by the
Reader.
completed
PG ITT
The Author is required to resubmit the Annual
AF/AS
Monitoring Report direct to the Reader. The
amended report will take into consideration the
comments contained in the Reader Report.
completed
Teaching
The Author should review the Action Plan to
AD
Assistants
consider further issues/points raised by the
Reader.
completed
UG ITT
The Author should review the Action Plan to
AD
consider further issues/points raised by the
Reader.
completed
Key: AD= Alyson Dawes; AF= Alison Feist; AS= Alison Shilela; CC= Chris Curran
11.
Conclusions:
The Subcommittee noted that although the quality of AMRs has improved overall, there remains
inconsistency within the Faculty to interrogating data. The Sub-committee recommended the
following actions for the Faculty:







Action plans should relate to the Faculty Strategic Plan, and this could also be made more
explicit on the template
The instigation of a post-DAP procedure to capture essential time-related data to start the
AMR process earlier and ensure it becomes an on-going mechanism for improvement
The linking of module evaluation results to module success/failure rates
More detail paid to recruitment and retention issues (Authors and HoDs)
The inclusion of an analysis of mitigation and appeals received in relation to cohort size,
would also enable Programme Leaders to report on this aspect of their provision in terms of
retention
Half day training for Pathway Leaders led by Programme Leaders and Heads of
Department with Deputy Dean, to address the AMR in view of the recent departmental
restructure and the need to monitor Action Plans at pathway rather than programme level
Continued meetings of Programme Leaders chaired by the Director of Studies or Deputy
Dean to share common issues and good practice
University Action
The Sub-committee recommended the following actions for our University:



To consider bringing its various PSRB and University reporting systems together to avoid
unnecessary duplication and fragmentation.
To explore a consistent approach to meeting and monitoring recruitment and enrolment
targets in partner colleges especially in relation to curriculum efficiency and modules with
high failure rates.
To share examples of good recent AMR submissions.
26
Appendix Four
Cambridge, Peterborough & Chelmsford
Faculty of Health & Social Care
Overview Report of
Annual Monitoring of Delivery in 2008/09
for Discussion at Faculty Board Meeting of 25 February 2010
1. Essential Requirements
Annual Monitoring Reports meeting the essential requirements, including requisite attachments, have been
received and considered from the following Programmes:Acute Care Pre-Registration
Acute Continuing Development
Allied Health
Interprofessional Learning
Radiography and Healthcare Scientists
Child & Family Health
Continuing Care Practice
Common Foundation Programme
Primary Care
Mental Health & Learning Disabilities
Social Policy & Regulation
Social Work & Counselling
1a
Previous Year’s Action Plans and Readers’ Reports
The revisions to the Annual Monitoring template, which included feedback on the previous year at the
beginning of the current AMR was a helpful modification and was welcomed by the Sub Committee.
One reader indicated that the AMR author’s response to the previous year’s actions plans could have been
more detailed and one reader sought an additional response. Ten readers indicated that the AMRs
addressed this section well.
6 out of 12 AMRs were carrying forward action points from last year’s SMART action plan. The Committee
emphasised the need for all Programme Sub Committees to revisit the action plans at each meeting and to
ensure that all points are addressed within a reasonable period. It is not acceptable for issues to be returned
to over three years without a clear target date for completion.
Faculty Programme Leaders should engage with AMR action plans between AMR review periods, eg at the
summer Programme Sub-committee meeting and a mid-year follow-up.
2. Statistical Data
The majority of reports did not identify a problem with the statistical information provided by the University;
however, in line with previous years’ reports, this information was often being supported by locally produced
data.
There were still issues relating to inaccuracy, late availability, inaccurate registrations and access from sites
other than the main campuses at Chelmsford and Cambridge, East Road. In order to provide a meaningful
analysis of the whole year a number of pathways with multiple annual cohorts, e.g. pre-registration nursing,
had to obtain their statistical information from other sources. The increasing number of associate students on
stand-alone modules rather than pathways also skewed the data for some of the Programmes.
27
The new standard presentation / grid for statistical information, developed within our Faculty and used by all
authors, enabled comparisons between Programmes and standardised the data used within the AMRs.
The major issue being evidenced by the statistical information was the high attrition rate within the Faculty
and a detailed Faculty action plan exists, collating strategies aimed at reducing this. Modules achieving a
mean mark of below 50%, and low recruiting modules and pathways with action plans were addressed in
most reports. Fewer reports commented upon achievement, progression and completion.
All reports will be required to comment on all of the above with action plans/evaluation of this year’s action
plans as standard within the AMRs for 2009/10.
3. Key Issues and Themes
The issues raised by the reports included a number of themes that were not general to all Programmes.
Under curriculum delivery, five reports commented on the shortage of placements, poorly evaluated
placements and lack of information on placements. It was reported in the AMRs that action has been taken
to address these issues through the Champions and Link Teams. This system is better established than it
was last year with a key aim for the coming academic year being the strategic use of student and mentor
evaluation from practice. It is intended to theme and action plan around recurring issues. The appointment
of a Director of Professional Practice Learning in November 2009 should enable efficient coordination of
these actions.
Positive features within the reports included: good student support, currency of the curriculum (5 reports),
good evidence base of the curriculum (3 reports), and evidence of good employment figures. UK stats
identify 97% employability for nursing within our Faculty.
Only one report highlighted plagiarism, a key AMR theme from last year. This would indicate that recent
work, led within our Faculty by the Director of Teaching and Learning, appears to be having the desired
effect of raising student awareness proactively about good academic practice.
Work load allocation and concerns about some administrative support were discussed in some reports and
our Faculty WLBM, which is currently being implemented, should provide useful metrics for a detailed
analysis of this.
Problems for students on the Peterborough site were noted in 2 reports and plans for relocation of these
students are now moving forward quickly.
Students failing to submit assignments and inconsistent student engagement through poor attendance and
lack of communication were also seen as possible compromises to academic standards. The former is an
issue we have agreed with NHS and other stakeholders will not continue to be permitted. Various plans
have been implemented to address communication with students:- see the Faculty NSS Action Plan.
Problems with timetabling and organisational issues were also raised and the implementation of ‘Syllabus
Plus’ for all timetabling from September 2010 should improve this situation.
The Sub-Committee noted that it was important to find other ways to engage with students and stakeholder
representatives as their attendance at Programme Sub-Committees was often poor. This particularly related
to CPD students in full employment with difficulties in getting time off from work or to clinical/practice partners
needing to travel long distances for Programme Sub Committee meetings.
Action:
Programme Leaders to look at different ways of engaging students/stakeholders in this
process – to feedback to Deputy Dean: Teaching, Learning & Quality following next
programme sub committee round June 2010.
3a Curriculum Efficiencies
The AMRs have responded appropriately to this, confirming that efficiencies were being sought through
extensive archiving or merging of modules to reduce the overall number of modules in the Faculty and
increase the student numbers attached to each module.
The Faculty is identified as one of the leaders in our University in terms of curriculum efficiencies via the
archiving of low recruiting modules and pathways.
28
3b Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards
Both the generic assessment criteria used within most programmes and the new ‘user friendly’ tool that had
been piloted within the RN Programme have received positive support from staff, including the External
Examiners. The modified assessment tool was also positively evaluated by Externals.
3c External Examiners’ Reports
Feedback from External Examiners was generally positive and acknowledged that issues raised by them
during the year have been satisfactorily resolved.
Points on which they required a response included the need to standardise the use of moderation within
some programmes. Some External Examiners commented that there is a minimum amount of information
provided to them regarding the moderation process. There was also some concern expressed by some
External Examiners regarding their workload and the timeliness of information provided for them regarding
the scripts they would receive, deadlines etc.
Action:
Deputy Dean for Teaching, Learning & Quality to lead a review of External Examiner
workloads and a review of moderation within the Faculty. HoDs implementing mechanism
to ensure External Examiners informed of their annual schedules and receive all
programme/pathway material and AMRs. Deadline April 2010.
External Examiners commented upon attendance and the operationalisation of some DAPs.
Action:
Deputy Dean, Business Manager and HoDs - Pre DAPs meeting to be established within the
Faculty for Semester 2, 2010.
3d Future Action Plans
It was observed by the Sub-Committee that the action plans were generally well prepared and improving
year on year. Some of the action plans were excellent, effectively linking the issues raised in the report with
the action plan itself, while others were less well developed.
To make it explicit within our Faculty how annual monitoring is enhancing programme delivery, the Deputy
Dean: Teaching, Learning & Quality should receive an updated action plan after each Programme Subcommittee meeting throughout the year, identifying progress on the actions and enhancements identified as
part of this process.
Action:
Programme Leaders to forward update to Brenda Hobart following Programme SubCommittee, cc to Libby Martin.
Deputy Dean to lead staff development for Programme and Pathway Leaders re developing
quality enhancement via AMR process - September 2010
3e Examples of Good and Innovative Practice
Acute Care Pre-Registration
Development has taken place in conjunction with the SHA to identify areas within clinical placements where
support and adjustments can be made for students with learning difficulties.
Allied Health
The introduction of ODP ‘taster days’ which have enhanced the information and insights for potential
applicants and so have aided and increased applications and meeting recruitment targets.
Interprofessional Learning
The PG Cert Disability Equality Practitioner Team has published a paper on using positive discrimination to
develop a new knowledge base.
Radiography and Healthcare Scientists
29
The Team has developed and delivered an on-line virtual Freshers’ Week
The Team has delivered a national virtual poster presentation.
Child and Family Health
The Midwifery team has introduced fine grading of practice supported by their own specifically developed
assessment tool that has been successfully evaluated. Anglia Ruskin is the first HEI to do so.
Mental Health and Learning Disabilities
A major bid was submitted to Essex County Council with our partner: ARW Mental Health Training &
Consultancy. The Department has been awarded a 3-year contract to deliver a service user and carer
involvement service to Health and Social Care Mental Health Commissioners across Essex. This project,
which commenced on 1st April 2009, has been designed to promote involvement in the important
commissioning process, will stimulate a variety of discreet projects and an increase in the numbers of trained
user and carer researchers throughout Essex.
3f Issues for Special Consideration during 2009/10
See section 2. Statistical data:
That all Pathway and Programme Leaders report to Heads of Department on retention data, including high
failing and low recruiting modules. That action plans to address these issues are presented, and evaluation
of their efficacy is reported on also.
Action: Interim Report April 2010
That the AM Sub-Committee members were aware that some programmes frequently report on good and
innovative practice but this was not being highlighted in all AMR reports. It was recommended that in the
future this is included as an agenda item at all Programme Sub-Committee meetings to ensure this
information is captured and disseminated across the Faculty and the wider University more consistently
Action:
Programme Leaders to include good / innovative practice as agenda item on future
Programme Sub-Committee agendas.
3g Outstanding Actions
No formal responses to the Readers’ Reports are required as confirmed by all Readers.
Action has now been taken by a Programme Leader in respect of one late External Examiner report and an
addendum to the Programme AMR provided and approved by the Reader.
4. Effectiveness and Operation of Annual Monitoring Process
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 quality of the AMRs was on the whole good with some excellent examples submitted, however most
would benefit from a greater depth of analysis and less description. It was acknowledged that staff
development was still required, particularly for those who will be new to the process next year. This is
required for Pathway Leaders also to ensure the correct information is submitted in a timely manner to the
Programme Leaders.
The statistical information would benefit from early scrutiny by the Pathway/Programme Leaders to ensure
anomalies are dealt with and amended prior to the process recommencing in September 2010. It is still not
possible to entirely rely on the statistical information provided centrally.
Action:
Programme Leaders continue training to use Qlickview (complete by March 2010).
All staff to feedback data anomalies to Faculty Business Team (ongoing)
30
The Faculty currently uses its own ‘Pathway Report’ template to obtain feedback from pathways delivered
internally and at partner institutions. Revisions to this template will be considered for next year.
Action:
Anne Devlin (June 2010)
Adjusting the deadlines and e-submission of the AMRs had enabled readers to analyse and respond to the
reports in a more timely way and the Readers’ Reports were proving to be very helpful to the process. The
quality of these has noticeably improved.
The smart action plans still need to be more overt in cross referencing issues raised in the reports with the
action plan. However there was a general improvement with the actions being more explicit and
measurable.
Action:
Programme Leaders to forward interim reporting of quality enhancement of programmes
following Programme Sub Committee meetings to HoDs /Deputy Dean: Teaching Learning
and Quality
5. Submission of AMRs to External Examiners
All Programme Leaders have now been reminded that the final version of the AMRs, including the additional
addenda as submitted, should now be forwarded to the relevant external examiners.
Action:
Programme Leaders / Secretary
31
APPENDIX A
Action List following Meeting held on 21 January 2010
Section
Action
Lead(s)
Deadline for
Completion
June 2010
3
Programme Leaders to look at different ways
of engaging students/stakeholders in this
process-to feedback to Faculty following next
Programme Sub- Committee.
All Programme
Leaders
3c
Deputy Dean for Teaching, Learning & Quality to lead
review of EE workload and implementation of
moderation within the faculty.
Deputy Dean
April 2010
HoDs
April 2010
Pre DAPs meeting to be established within the Faculty
for Semester 2, 2010.
DD/Business
Manager/
HoDs
By Semester
2, 2010
DD to receive an updated action plan after each
Programme Sub-Committee meeting, identifying
progress on actions and enhancements identified as
part of the annual monitoring process.
PLs to forward to
Brenda Hobart
following sub
committee, cc L
Martin
After each
Programme
SubCommittee
meeting
Deputy Dean to lead staff development for Programme
and Pathway Leaders re developing quality
enhancement via AMR process.
Deputy Dean
September
2010
All Pathway and Programme Leaders report to HoDs
on retention data, including high failing and low
recruiting modules, and present action plans to address
issues and evaluate efficacy.
Pathway Leaders
Interim report
Programme Leaders April 2010
HoDs implementing mechanism to ensure External
Examiners informed of their annual schedule and
receive programme/pathway material and AMRs.
3d
3f
Programme Leaders include good/innovative practice
as agenda item on future programme sub committee
agendas
4
Programme Leaders continue training to use Qlikview
All Programme Leaders to feed back data anomalies to
Faculty Business Team
Programme Leaders For AMR
2009/10
Ongoing
Programme Leaders Complete by
March 2010
All
Ongoing
Deputy Dean
June 2010
Consider revisions to pathway report template
5
Programme Leaders to forward interim reporting of
quality enhancement of programmes following
programme sub committee meetings to HoDs/DD
Programme Leaders to forward copy of final and
approved AMR to relevant External Examiner.
Programme Leaders Following
Programme
sub committee
meetings
Programme
When report
Leaders/ Secretary complete
32
The Senate
Committee Summary Report
Faculty of Science and Technology
Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Overview Report for 2008 2009
Committee Title:
Faculty Board Annual Monitoring Subcommittee
(Faculty of Science and Technology)
Parent Committee:
Faculty Board/Senate
Date of Meeting
17th December 2009
CONTENTS:
1. Essential requirements
2. Previous year’s action plans and reader’s reports
3. Statistical data
4. Key issues, themes and trends
5. Curriculum efficiencies
6. Generic Assessments and Marking Standards
7. External examiners’ reports
8. Future action plans
9. Examples of good and innovative practice
10. Issues for special consideration during 2009/10
11. Outstanding actions
12. Concluding remarks
33
1.
Essential requirements
The key documents informing this report are the Reader’s Reports for the 2008/9 annual monitoring round.
The Annual Monitoring Reports (AMRs) were received from all the Programmes in the Faculty. These were:
Animal & Environmental Biology
Architecture and Planning
Biomedical, Molecular Science
Computing
Computer Science
Construction
Design & Technology
Forensic Science & Chemistry
Ophthalmic Dispensing
Psychology
Sports Science
Surveying
Technology
**Optometry & Optical Management (received late and considered after the Meeting)
At the Faculty Annual Monitoring Subcommittee Meeting the individual reports were first checked to
determine that all essential requirements had been met. This was the case except for the following.
Biomedical Molecular Science

External Examiner Reports were not attached

Areas of concern raised in Readers report from 2007/08 required clarifying and including in SMART
plan.
Surveying

External Examiner Reports were not attached
Design & Technology

Action plan needed to be revised to include reference to monitoring the effectiveness of the revised
marking scheme
The required actions have subsequently been completed.
2.
Previous year’s action plans and reader’s reports
With the exception of Construction, the committee was satisfied that there were no outstanding issues to be
raised from the previous year’s action plans.
Construction
Outstanding actions relating to COWA and CRC required to be completed
3.
Statistical data
All reports included, and used as their main point of reference, centrally produced statistical data. The
majority of programmes had no problems with accessing or analysing the statistics. The following general
points were raised by individual Report Readers:
Surveying

The Reader commented that there was no explicit presentation of historical data to support comments
on the maintenance of retention rates. The Subcommittee felt it would be helpful to have more than one
years’ statistics availableand Nicky Dibb undertook to pass this suggestion on to the Academic Office.
Construction

The completion rates for BSc Construction Management and HND Construction Management need
further expansion.
34
Forensic Science & Chemistry

Statistics continued to show a “rogue student”. The department need to resolve this matter with
ISMS/SITS.
Biomedical Molecular Science

Clarification was required with regard to registered students on pathways which should have been
discontinued as a condition of accreditation.
Sports Science

The report highlighted several inaccuracies and inconsistencies with the data and the committee
requested this be fed back to Faculty Board and the Academic Office.

The Reader identified issues arising from the statistics which could have been included in the Action
Plan and the Author was requested to address these.
4.
Key issues, themes and trends
No common concerns emerged from the 14 AMR’s this year. Several issues were discussed by the
subcommittee and it was noted that most of these have already been dealt with at Departmental or Faculty
level. Where further actions or reflections are required at Faculty or Institutional level these were noted and
reported below.




5.
Additional learning and teaching support is required in light of new incoming VLE ( Surveying)
Recruitment and level one performance at HRC needs to be improved (Computer science)
The issue of poor written English (Forensic Science, Animal and Environmental Biology).
The student registration issue in Biomedical Molecular & Sports Science needs to be resolved. This was
a condition set at a Validation event.
Curriculum efficiencies
It was noted that modifications have been carried out to several pathways to improve curriculum efficiencies
including sharing modules between pathways, splitting 30 credit modules and articulating links between
modules at different levels. It was noted that cohorts at some partner colleges are very small. Where further
actions are required these are noted below;
Forensic Science & Chemistry

Amend Action plan to include “improve efficiency of delivery” as indicated in report.
6.
Generic assessments and marking standards
The mixed views on assessments and marking standards across departments are noted. Some
departments make use of the generic marking criteria particularly in their module guides and there is some
evidence that students find this helpful Several departments use the PSRB marking requirements. The
committee noted the comment in the Animal & Environmental Biology report that they are “too unwieldy and
wordy to be really useful”
7.
External examiners’ reports
The subcommittee were pleased to note the positive comments from the Faculty’s External Examiners. The
subcommittee was generally satisfied that points raised in the External Examiners reports had received an
appropriate response in the SMART action plans.
35
8.
Future action plans
Almost all issues raised in AMR’s or External Examiners’ reports for 2008/09 were carried forward into the
SMART action plans. Where this was not the case programme action plans were referred back to the author
for further consideration. Those affected were :

Surveying

Construction

Forensic Science & Chemistry

Biomedical, Molecular & Sports Science

Sports Science
9.
Examples of good and innovative practice
A number of areas of good practice and achievement were highlighted and the subcommittee felt the
following are worthy of particular note;

Surveying – Excellent use of mid semester review

Architecture and Planning –International Study Visits

Forensic Science and Chemistry – Novel weekly feedback method designed to identify recurring themes
and to address them before the next lecture

Ophthalmic Dispensing – The use of WebCT as a discussion area
10.
Issues for special consideration during 2009/10
No specific areas were discussed.
11.
Outstanding actions
Outstanding actions arising from the 2008-09 AMR’s have been identified and are to be addressed.
12.
Concluding remarks
The subcommittee are pleased to report that the overall quality of the AMRs was to a high standard as
evidenced by the engagement of the authors and the level of detail in the responses given to the set
questions. In the vast majority of cases the reports were completed and available to the subcommittee
readers in good time.
A marked improvement over previous years in the statistical data provided and the comments made on the
emerging issues was noted. Also particularly worthy of mention is the appropriate and helpful use that is
being made of the SMART action plans by the AMR authors.
This year’s readers reports were comprehensive and provided the subcommittee with a full account of the
contents and any deficiencies in the individual AMRs making the process of constructing a “matters arising
grid” and following the issues through, relatively straight forward.
36
Matters Arising Grid
Programme
Surveying
Construction
Biomedical
Molecular &
Sports Science
Sports Science
Design &
Technology
Forensic
Science &
Chemistry
Optometry &
Optical
Management
Action Required by 31st March (unless otherwise stated)
Programme leader to send copies of External Examiner
reports to Reader
Outstanding actions relating to COWA and CRC require to be
completed
Completion rates for BSc Construction Management and HND
construction Management need further expansion
External Examiner Reports not attached and copies to be sent
to the Reader.
Action by
Stephen Fenton
Areas of concern raised in Readers report from 2007/08
require clarifying and including in SMART plan.
Nicky Milner
The Reader commented that no explicit presentation of
historical data available to support maintenance of retention
rates. The Subcommittee felt it would be helpful to have more
than one years stats available. Nicky Dibb would pass this on
to the Academic Office.
Nikki Dibb
Clarification of the situation with regard to registered students
on pathways which should have been discontinued as a
condition of accreditation.
The report highlights several inaccuracies and inconsistencies
with the data and the committee request this be fed back to
Faculty Board and the Academic Office.
Nicky Milner
The Subcommittee notes the Reader identified issues arising
from the stats which could have been included in the Action
Plan and the Author is requested to address these
Action plan to be revised to include reference to monitoring
the effectiveness of the revised marking scheme
Don Keiller
Stats continue to show a “rogue student” . The department are
requested to take up the matter with ISMS/SITS to resolve.
Sarah Hall
Amend Action plan to include “improve efficiency of delivery”
as indicated in report
This report was submitted after the meeting. The reader’s
report to be sent to the Academic Office
Sarah Hall
Phil Mellow
Phil Mellow
Nicky Milner
David Reid/Vicky
McCormick
Rob Walker
David Reid
37
2008/9 Annual Institutional Review Report of Edexcel Licensed Centre BTEC programmes
This annual Institutional Review Report (IRR) should relate to all BTEC programmes run as institutional awards under the Licence Agreement
(in most cases this will mean Higher National programmes, but may also include BTEC level 4-7 Short Courses).
Please submit your IRR to Professor G N Roberts, the Edexcel University Chief Examiner (geoff.roberts01@btinternet.com), to arrive
before the end of March 2010
Note that any of the following tables may be scrolled if necessary.
ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROGRAMME DETAILS
Centre:
Centre number:
Anglia Ruskin University
16311
Review sent by:
Sharon Simpson
Position in institution: Institutional Quality Assurance Officer
Date of submitting IRR: 3rd march 2010
E mail address: sharon.simpson@anglia.ac.uk
Name of Committee/Board approving submission of the IRR: Academic Standards Quality & Regulations Committee (ASQRC)
FOR EACH BTEC PROGRAMME RUN AT YOUR CENTRE, PLEASE GIVE:
Title of programme:
Notes:
1. Indicate with a * programmes that are also run at partner
institutions. Please do not include awards data in this section for
programmes run at partner institutions
2. For integrated HNC/D programmes please indicate HNC and HND
awards separately eg. 12/21 for 12 HNC and 21 HND awards).
Number
of
students
receiving
award in
IRR period
HNC Applied Biology
HND Architectural Technology
HND Audio and Music Technology
HND Building Surveying
HND Business Information Technology
HNC Business Management*
HND Business Management*
HNC Civil Engineering*
HND Civil Engineering
HNC Computing
HND Computing*
HNC Construction*
HND Construction and Design
HND Construction Management
HNC Electronics
HND Electronics
HNC Engineering*
HND Engineering*
HND Internet Management & Web Design
HND Multimedia
HND Property Surveying
HND Quantity Surveying
HND Real Estate Management
1
16
3
13
5
4
5
10
14
1
4
18
1
16
4
3
8
27
4
4
7
32
3
Comments:
Please add comments as necessary. In particular:
 If no awards are made for any programmes
 This is the first cohort of a new programme
 The number of awards this session is
significantly different from previous years.
Licensed Institution Institutional Review Report proforma Version 5. Issued September 2009
38
FOR EACH BTEC PROGRAMME DELIVERED BY A COLLABORATIVE PARTNER CENTRE, PLEASE GIVE:
Partner institution
Title(s) of programme(s) run at institution
Number
of
students
receiving
award in
IRR period
Cambridge Regional College
HNC Construction
18
Chelmsford College
HNC Civil Engineering
HNC Construction
1
5
College of West Anglia (COWA), (University Centre King’s Lynn)
HNC Business Management
HND Computing
HNC Engineering
15
2
5
Huntingdonshire Regional College
HNC Engineering
HND Engineering
2
5
Peterborough Regional College (University Centre, Peterborough)
HNC Business Management
HND Business Management
HNC Engineering
1
1
18
Thurrock and Basildon College
HND Engineering
0
Comments:
ANNUAL REVIEW OF BTEC PROGRAMMES
1 ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT
Do the External Examiners for each programme covered by the Licence Agreement confirm that the standards set are appropriate for the
level of the qualifications?
yes
If this is not the case for any programme give details here and refer to Section 5 if appropriate.
N/A
2 ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND STUDENT PERFORMANCE
Do the External Examiners for each programme covered by the Licence Agreement confirm that the standard of student performance is at a
level appropriate for the programme they have studied?
YES
If this is not the case for any programme give details here and refer to Section 5 if appropriate.
N/A
Licensed Institution Institutional Review Report proforma Version 5. Issued September 2009
39
3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESS FOR BTEC PROGRAMMES
Describe briefly how the institutional quality assurance processes used for producing this report provide an effective focus on the
programmes covered by this review and ensure consistency of practice across all programmes. (Include the procedures in place for
franchise programmes, where relevant). If this focus is apparent from your published quality assurance review and monitoring procedures,
simply attach these procedures to the Review (or provide an electronic link to them).
The procedure in place follows the well-established process as outlined in preceding Annual Institutional Review
Reports. Please see the attached extract (pages 27 to 30) from the Anglia Ruskin University Senate Code of
Practice on the Approval, Annual Monitoring and Periodic Review of Taught Pathways, Procedural Document for
2009/10.
The standard template for the Annual Monitoring Report, which is completed at ‘Programme’ (Anglia Ruskin
definition relating to our University’s curriculum management structure) level, lists the pathways covered within
the report and contains a section where report authors are asked to comment on any issues relating specifically
to Edexcel awards.
4 SIGNIFICANT CHANGES AND ENHANCEMENTS
Provide information on any significant changes in provision this session, such as newly validated Higher National programmes, BTEC level 47 Short Courses, changes in franchise position, cessation of programmes, etc. Also, any enhancements to individual programmes you wish
to report.
As reported in the previous Annual Institutional Review Report, Anglia Ruskin re-aligned its HND provision from
180 to 240 credits during 2007/08 following the revision of the Licence Agreement, for delivery from 2008/09.
Transitional arrangements for completion by September 2011 were put in place for those students who had yet
to complete the 180-credit awards on which they were already registered.
5 TRENDS, FUTURE PLANS AND LOCAL INITIATIVES
Outline any trends (what’s increasing, what’s declining), future plans (short-term/long-term) and local initiatives for HIgher National
programmes and BTEC level 4-7 Short Courses
In accordance with our Corporate Plan (2009-2011) objective: ‘We are champions of employer and community
engagement’, Anglia Ruskin continues to develop new Foundation degrees to contribute to the achievement of
its target recruitment of an additional 1000 students studying in the workplace by 2011. Anglia Ruskin views the
provision of Foundation degrees, which will replace existing HN awards, as being more attractive to employers
and capable of delivering the flexibility required to meet their needs.
6 MAJOR ISSUES
Summarise the situation over any major issues with regard to the BTEC programmes, including issues that have arisen from External
Examiners’ reports and with respect to student experience (including teaching and learning resources and issues from programme
committees):

unresolved issues raised in previous session(s): action taken

new issues and action planned to resolve them: where possible, state where the responsibility lies for action and give a time scale.
Note: Only major issues which result in significant action(s) need to be included here
There were no issues identified to be resolved in previous session(s).
There are no major issues to be reported for 2008/09 delivery.
7 GOOD PRACTICE
Give any examples of good practice at institutional level in relation to BTEC programmes that you wish to draw to the attention of Edexcel,
including examples of good practice raised by External Examiners, and Internal and External Reviews of BTEC programmes.
As outlined in previous IRRs, the Anglia Ruskin Annual Monitoring process provides an opportunity for examples
of good practice and commendable and/or significant achievement to be identified for dissemination
throughout Anglia Ruskin and its UK and international collaborative partners. Due to the modular scheme, good
practice may be a feature of a module relating to more than one pathway and examples highlighted do not
therefore identify individual pathways. As referred to at ‘3. Quality Assurance Processes for BTEC Programmes’
above, the Annual Monitoring report template contains a section for comments relating specifically to Edexcel
awards.
Examples and issues identified have not been attributed to Edexcel awards specifically, but it is worthy of note
that students who perhaps do not have the required entry qualifications for direct entry to a degree have used
Edexcel awards as a stepping stone to completing a degree which results in widening participation.
Licensed Institution Institutional Review Report proforma Version 5. Issued September 2009
40
8 OTHER COMMENTS
Mention any points you may wish to make that would not otherwise be covered in the report. If you have received any relevant (nonconfidential) reports during the year from bodies external to your institution (eg. QAA Academic Review, IQER (English Licensed
Institutions), Development Review (Welsh Licensed Institutions) or Professional Accreditation reports, etc.). Use this Section to make any
comments, or to provide a reference to such reports.
The 2007/08 IRR referred to IQER engagements for which the confirmed reports had not been published. The
College of West Anglia (COWA, University Centre King’s Lynn), Cambridge Regional College and Huntingdonshire
Regional College were all the subject of IQER engagements in 2007/08. The confirmed reports were received
during 2008/09 and there were no issues relating to Edexcel provision.
During 2008/09 Chelmsford College was subject to an IQER engagement. The public report was published on 1 st
March 2010 and it can be confirmed that no issues were raised relating to Edexcel provision.
Licensed Institution Institutional Review Report proforma Version 5. Issued September 2009
41