QA48Form1 UG SSLC Annual Report
STAFF / STUDENT LIAISON COMMITTEE
ANNUAL REPORT FOR UNDERGRADUATE SSLCs in 2012/13
It is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that a SSLC Annual Report is completed, in consultation with
student and staff members of the Committee (QA48 Section 7.1), by Friday 2 August 2013.
Please type this Annual Report and return electronically via email:
To: Advice and Representation Centre, Students’ Union, academicreps@bath.ac.uk
CC: Learning and Teaching Enhancement Office, learningandteaching@bath.ac.uk
1. Which degree programmes are covered by this Staff / Student Liaison Committee?
Natural Sciences
(Delete as applicable)
Yes
No
Is this SSLC for:
Undergraduate programmes only?
Undergraduate and postgraduate programmes?
2. Membership
Name
Chair
Lauren Agnew
Secretary
Hannah Brittain
Online Election Process Contact
Dr Paul J Mitchell
Student?
Staff?
(Delete as applicable)
Yes
(Delete as applicable)
No
Yes
(N/A; should be a
member of staff)
No
Yes
(i.e. the member of staff within the
academic department responsible for
liaising with the SU over the annual
online election process)
Number of staff members:
4
Number of UG student members:
10
Number of PG student members:
0
Invited to attend?
Receives Minutes?
(Delete as applicable)
Yes
(Delete as applicable)
Yes
Faculty Reps, Students’ Union, on the Board of Studies
No
Yes
Education Officer, Students’ Union
No
Yes*
(Not routinely invited to
attend)
(Not routinely invited to
attend)
(Not routinely invited to
attend)
Yes*
Subject Librarian
(SUeducation@bath.ac.uk)
Secretary to the Board of Studies
Secretary to the Faculty / School Learning, Teaching and
Quality Committee
Representation and Research Manager, Students’ Union
(academicreps@bath.ac.uk)
* Should routinely receive minutes of SSLC meetings
3. Meetings
How many times has the SSLC met during this academic year?
If there were fewer than 4 meetings this year, please indicate why
Page 1 of 14
4
Yes*
Yes*
4. Items, Issues and Good Practice
This table is to record key issues and topics. These will be used to inform an institutional-wide report from the
Students’ Union detailing items that both the University and Students’ Union should consider in 2013/14.
Example areas (this is not a
comprehensive list of topics
covered; feel free to add
details of others issues
covered by your SSLC)
Last year’s SSLC Annual
Report
Programme content and
delivery (but not individual
lecturers), changes to existing
units / programmes and
proposals for new units /
programmes
Record key items
discussed
The report was looked at
during the first SSLC, no
issues were raised.
Some students majoring in
Physics had become
confused about whether or
not they were required to
produce a placement
poster, as students taking
a Physics degree were not
required to do so.
Some 2nd years taking the
Maths for Scientists 3
module had complained
that applied examples had
all been Physics based,
and that they were difficult
to follow for those who had
no background in Physics.
Any example(s) of Good
Practice
Any action taken
The DoS made it clear that
all Natural Scientists
undertaking placement
were required to produce a
poster, regardless of major
subject, which should have
been made clear on
Moodle and in placement
information packs.
It was, however, noted that
the module is run by the
Physics department and
taught by a Physics
lecturer, and that the
details of the examples
would not be part of the
examination material, but
just to show a possible
application of the methods
used in lectures to aid
understanding.
Some 2nd years without a
Physics tutor had
complained that they were
not receiving as much
support and help with their
physics project as those
who did have a Physics
tutor.
A solution to this was for
students to ask their
lecturer for help instead.
Some 1st year students
complained that the
material in the PA10237
tutorials preceded the
taught material, which
made them difficult to
follow.
The DoS followed up the
matter with the course
convenor.
Some students were
enrolled on up to 11
previous modules on
Moodle, for which they no
longer required access.
For some reason, they
could not un-enrol
themselves from these
modules through Samis,
which was leading to
unwanted emails.
The DoS followed up this
issue.
Page 2 of 14
The problem was put down
to glitches in SamisMoodle communications.
Students taking Chemistry
major had complained that
they had spent a lot more
time on their project, on
average, than students
taking Physics major.
Physics had scheduled lab
time, where Chemistry had
not, the result of this being
that Chemistry major
students had spent a lot
more time in the lab. It was
also noted that Chemistry
major NS students would
only receive 12 credits for
completing a similar
workload to Biology
students, who would
receive 18 credits.
The DoS noted that there
will always be differences
between departments, and
that any issues might be
better to be mentioned at
the relevant SSLCs (i.e.
Chemistry in this case).
The problem is that all
Natural Science students
should be doing the same
amount of credits (12
credits) so it is uncertain
what changes should be
made. Dr Paul Snow noted
that it is important to set
proper expectations of
Natural Science students
at the start; i.e., what is the
genuine difference going to
be compared to other
programmes.
Natural Scientists taking
Biology final year projects
were unhappy with the
limited feedback they
received compared to
home Biology students.
They were also unsure
which marks were theirs on
the document they
received, which caused
some frustration.
This information was
passed on to the Biology
department.
Students taking the
Pharmacology unit
PA30266 (Pharmacology
of Infection and Immunity)
experienced major issues
with communication in 2nd
semester. The unit had 39
lecturers on Moodle, and
not all of these were
involved in the unit at the
time. The main problem
with the unit is that
students enrolled on it
were not being told what
was happening, and felt
ignored.
The DoS has since
followed this up with Dr
Phillip Rogers (DoT,
Pharmacy and
Pharmacology).
BB30156 was formally
reintroduced into the NS
programme for 2nd
semester of 2012/13, after
it was reintroduced into the
Biology programme only,
and several Natural
Scientists showed interest
in taking the module.
Page 3 of 14
New streams for 2013/14:
1. Biochemistry (BSc/MSci)
This must be started in 1st
year. Forbidden
combination with
Pharmacology, but DOS
hopes to change this in the
next few years.
2. Social Sciences (BSc)
Under the same category
as Languages,
Psychology, Education and
Management, so
incompatible with these,
but this may change in
future years.
A number of Biology units
are changing (retirement
reasons, etc.): e.g. Mike
Mogie is retiring, so
removal of BB30072
(Biology as a World View)
will leave a gap in 1st
semester of 3rd year,
which will be replaced by
next year with another unit.
For the MSci Biology
Stream, lecturers for 2nd
semester units BB40117
(Microbial Evolution) and
BB40141 Molecular
biology of microbial
adaptation are leaving. It is
most likely that
replacement lecturers will
be found in time for 2nd
semester next year. A few
more changes have been
proposed and are under
discussion.
Compulsory lab units for
students majoring in
Physics and a new 3rd
year unit will be added in
2013/14 (Fluid Dynamics
and Laser Physics).
It was decided that
PH10007 (Mathematics for
Scientists 1) and PH10008
(Mathematics for Scientists
2) work well, but year 2
maths is harder/ less
relevant to the NS course
in general.
Dr Paul Snow said that
perhaps the Physics
department should work to
find a solution to help
people struggling with the
general concepts of these
units. It was also
suggested that a 6 credit
statistics module be put in
the place of Mathematics
for Scientists 3 in semester
1 of 2nd year, leading onto
Modelling the Dynamics of
life, for students taking
biology and/or
pharmacology. The aim of
this would be to give
students a better
grounding in the
Page 4 of 14
knowledge and use of
statistical techniques than
un-assessed Key Skills
workshops and MASH
would do, as they are more
than likely to require using
statistics at some stage in
their programme, and also
to allow for other 2nd year
options in Mathematics
which are less Physicsbased, which would help
with this issue.
Some environmental units
will be changing around for
2013/14. Currently, for 2nd
Year Environmental
Stream, Semester 1 is
XX20085 (Earth as an
Ecosystem: 100% exam)
and Semester 2 is
XX20001 (Renewable
Energy: 25% coursework,
75% exam). Next year,
Semester 1 will be
XX20001 (Renewable
Energy: 25% coursework,
75% exam) and Semester
2 will be XX30191 (Energy
and Environment: 20%
coursework, 80% exam).
Year 3 units will also be
slightly different to previous
years.
Information to support
students in making
informed Unit choices
Students studying
MA20220 (ODEs and
Control), MA30047
(Mathematical Biology 1)
and/ or MA30063
(Mathematical Biology 2)
had complained that the
prerequisites to these
modules were not available
to Natural Scientists.
The DoS discussed these
issues with the unit
convenors and arranged
for this year’s students to
enrol onto alternative
modules.
It was noted that students
taking CH30086 (Inorganic
Chemistry in Biological
Systems) may not have
any pre-requisite
knowledge of Biological
Systems post GSCE level,
and so may struggle with
certain aspects of the unit.
Students having this issue
were advised to speak with
their lecturer.
Page 5 of 14
Timetabling
In 2nd year, Maths for
Scientists 3 and Cognitive
Psychology clashed in
semester 1.
Some final year and 2nd
year students complained
about clashing deadlines
towards the end of 2nd
semester.
Group work
No discussion.
Assessment and
Feedback, including
examinations (if applicable)
Installation of a
suggestions box and SSLC
information outside the 3S
office was suggested by a
student who had noticed
that this had been
implemented by the
departments of Chemical
Engineering and Electrical
Engineering. It was thought
that it might make it easier
to contact the SSLC with
any queries or complaints
about the NS programme.
Panopto was suggested as
a solution, but as not all
lecturers would be happy
to record lectures in such a
way, the best suggestion
was for students taking
both of these modules to
attend lectures bi-weekly
and catch up on the ones
they missed by asking a
friend to lend them their
notes, and/or speaking to
the lecturer to discuss any
issues they may be having.
The DoS highlighted that
the flexible nature of the
course makes it difficult to
avoid clashes completely.
The DoS said that the
deadlines are made clear
at the beginning of the
semester to give students
time to foresee possible
problems with clashes and
react accordingly by
informing their tutor and/or
lecturers.
The DoS suggested that
this might result in more
non-constructive than
constructive feedback from
students due to its
anonymous nature.
There was a suggestion to
publish SSLC discussions
from the quarterly
meetings online; on a blog
page, Twitter, Facebook,
or similar; with the aim of
helping communication
between the SSLC and the
rest of the student body.
The Genetics MCQ was
sat in March, and results
were still not back at end of
April, which was past the 5
week deadline. This is one
example of the issue of
formative feedback which
surpasses the deadlines
put in place.
Page 6 of 14
It was instead suggested
that the notice board
outside 3S would be used
to provide the contact
information of the
academic reps and to post
the bi-semesterly minutes
so students could see what
had been discussed
previously.
The generic degree
classification criteria list
was discussed in the last
SSLC meeting. The
general consensus was
that whilst this could be
used as guideline for
marking work, there were
some formats of
assessment which it might
not be compatible with, i.e.
the first class criteria
‘extensive evidence of
wide research and reading
beyond the material
presented by the lecturers’
cannot be applied to
subjects such as maths
which rely on practice of
technique rather than
reading beyond the lecture
material. This is similar
with MCQs in any subject,
as these do not present
students with an
opportunity to present their
knowledge gained through
further reading.
The DoS asked the SSLC
if they thought that the use
of TurnItIn at the University
was acceptable. The
general consensus was
that it was used well, and
that whilst accidental
plagiarism was always a
worry when writing pieces
of work, incidences of it
actually happening were
very low.
Feedback Policy
A section of the QA16
(Quality Assurance Code
of Practice: Assessment,
Marking and Feedback)
document, regarding the
requirement of units to
provide at least one
formative assessment and
feedback opportunity, was
mentioned in an academic
council meeting:
“Formative feedback – 5.5
Accordingly, there is a
requirement that every unit
should include at least one
formative assessment and
feedback opportunity,
subject to a waiver for
individual units where
approved by the relevant
Associate Dean/ Assistant
Dean/ Head of Learning
Partnerships on the advice
of the relevant School/
Department Learning,
Teaching and Quality
Committee, and after
Page 7 of 14
This issue was further
discussed as part of the
feedback campaign run by
the SU, as it was not only a
departmental issue, but
across every faculty within
the University.
consultation with students.
In units where the
summative assessment
regime comprises more
than one item of
assessment, the earlier
piece(s) of summative
assessment may fulfil this
expectation.”
Survey results (e.g. NSS,
Unit & Programme
Evaluations)
External Examiners
Reports and University
response
Skills development and
training
It was agreed that the units
run by the NS department
were good at doing this;
however, other
departments did not do this
so well, if at all. Overall, it
was felt that there was a
lack of parity across the
units available in the NS
department, mostly
because the majority of
units are run by different
departments, and there is
a lack of parity between
how they do things.
Two main points were
raised from the online unit
evaluation discussion, held
in April. Firstly, that it
would be useful to be able
to see the comments from
the units which are part of
the NS programme, as
these are meant to be
discussed in SSLC
meetings. Secondly, the
timing of the release of
feedback forms should be
altered to optimise the
number of people who fill
them out; currently they
are sent too early (up to 4
weeks before lectures are
over).
No discussion.
Some students
accidentally attended the
Endnote and Web of
Knowledge key skills
session after being
enrolled onto Chemistry
Workshops on Moodle,
which included this
session, and they found it
to be useful.
Page 8 of 14
Another session was
scheduled later in
semester 1 for final year
students.
In 2nd semester, a range
of key skills sessions were
scheduled, which
contributed to the Bath
Award as well as aiming to
increase employability.
These included interview
techniques, how to write a
professional CV, an
introduction to
psychometric testing and
making successful
applications.
It was suggested that
some students may have
benefitted from
employability skills
sessions earlier on in the
academic year than 2nd
semester, particularly as
graduate schemes tend to
ask for applications early
on in 1st semester.
The DoS reminded the
SSLC that there are
university wide lectures on
writing skills. The English
Department helps students
with things like
dissertation, essay and
report writing.
Student support (including
progress monitoring and the
Personal Tutor system)
Some students had
informed their academic
rep that they did not know
who their tutor was.
The DoS said that any
student finding themselves
in this position should
speak to him.
Students majoring in
Physics had their tutorials
changed to fortnightly. It
was also noted that
students majoring in
Chemistry who were also
taking double Physics
streams had a Physics
tutor.
This year, the NS
department worked to try
and change tutorials from a
pastoral format to a more
academic format to help
students with their
academic studies.
Library provision (Was the
Subject Librarian invited to
attend to discuss relevant
issues? - Yes)
Changes to the library
catalogue: addition of
books to the search
function, ability to filter by
year, organise search
results through the use of
‘my collection’ and use the
catalogue without logging
in.
Karina Bradshaw (subject
librarian) reported that
library staff had received
positive feedback about
these changes from the
student body.
Referencing guides
provided by the library
were discussed.
It was concluded that the
best way to get referencing
‘right’ is through
consistency in each
individual piece of work,
and also by asking your
lecturer/course convenor
what they expect from you
in terms of style.
Page 9 of 14
This was taken into
account for future years.
Some students had
complained about not
being able to locate and/or
gain access to certain
journals through the library
catalogue and other
catalogues, including
Scorpus and Web of
Knowledge.
These were reported to the
library staff with the aim of
improving the search
function on the library
catalogue.
Library questionnaire
Karina asked the SSLC
members to promote the
library questionnaire to
fellow students so that the
library staff could improve
the services further from
any feedback received.
If students were still having
difficulties, Karina
suggested that they ask a
member of the library staff
to find and/or gain access
to any journals they were
finding it hard to access
The introduction on online
methods of payment for
paying fines was
discussed, and the general
consensus was that this
was a great idea.
IT and / or e-Learning
provision (Was a member of
Online top up of library
card balances.
Introducing a method of
topping up library card
balances online for printing
was also discussed as a
future possibility.
Karina followed up this
issue and found some
complications with the
printing services provider,
Canon. However, it is still
under discussion for future
years, providing that these
issues can be solved.
Students complained about
access to Eduroam and
poor signals in certain
places within the library
and around campus.
Some suggestions to the
cause behind the problem
were that people had been
using the space for
watching Youtube videos
which slowed down the
Eduroam connection, and
also that people had been
using their mobile phone
Wifi hotspots to connect to
the internet, which had
interrupted the Eduroam
connection.
With multiple issues
affecting the connection,
this is an issue which is still
under discussion, and
possible solutions are
being looked into.
It was highlighted that
there are many
broken/partly broken
computers within the
library and around campus,
and that many students
might not be aware of how
and/or where to report
such an issue.
Karina said that the BUCS
desk should be notified of
the problem, and that each
individual computer could
be identified by a number
on the side so that they
can locate it easily.
No discussion.
the relevant team invited to
attend to discuss relevant
issues? - No)
Other academic
resources (teaching
accommodation, research
facilities and electronic
resources)
3S student study area
development.
Cath Haines requested
student input for the
development of this
project.
Page 10 of 14
Careers provision (Was a
No discussion.
representative of the Careers
Service invited to attend to
discuss relevant issues? - No)
Other issues or SSLC
initiatives (if the SSLC
covers both UG and PG
students, include, for example,
supervisory arrangements [but
not individual supervisors] and
research training)
This year, Lauren Agnew
(Chair) volunteered to
represent placement
students via email. Later
on in the year, it was
directed by the SU
Education Officer (Alex
Pool) that in future years
each department should
have a placements rep
who is on placement.
This was discussed in the
last SSLC meeting of the
academic year and it was
unanimously agreed that it
would cause more issues
than it would provide
benefits, explained below;
1. Physical attendance at
SSLCs would be difficult.
2. If placement reps took
part in SSLCs and
academic and faculty
councils through the media
of Skype, employers might
not be willing to give them
time off for this.
It was suggested that the
ideal placements rep
should be a 4th or 5th year
student who had been on
placement before, and so
could relate to issues
experienced by those on
placement. However, it
was also noted that there
would not be an exclusion
of placement issues if
there was not a
placements rep; i.e. these
would still be discussed at
SSLC meetings.
3. Placements are run by
different departments, so
any issues with placement
should probably be taken
up by those departments
as each placement is
unique to individual
students, unlike most units
within the Natural Sciences
programme.
4. Many issues students
face on placement are
personal and are not to do
with their programme, so
these are perhaps better
discussed with personal
tutors.
The general consensus
was that while the SSLC
could benefit from having a
placements rep to be in
regular contact with
students on placement,
there was no particular
benefit from this person
being on placement
themselves.
Attendance at other SSLC
meetings.
Due to the interdepartmental nature of the
NS programme and the
obvious issues in
communication between
departments, it was
decided that a
representative should
attend other SSLCs of their
major subject to further
represent Natural
Scientists.
Page 11 of 14
This year’s reps were as
follows:
Caroline Allison: Physics
Victoria Swann: Pharmacy
and Pharmacology
Lauren Agnew: Chemistry
Josie Carmichael: Biology
Currently, the only
consistency in the SSLC
between different
academic years is staff
members; the student body
is usually completely new
every year. New reps have
to learn how SSLC
procedures work and will
be less aware of previous
issues dealt with at SSLC
meetings. This affects the
consistency and
smoothness of how the
SSLC is run. It was
suggested instead that
students could sign up to
be an academic rep in 1st
year and carry on in this
post until their final year.
This would produce less
voting effort, more
efficiency, and more
familiarity. At the final
SSLC meeting students
would be asked if they are
happy to stay on for the
next year; students could
choose to step down at the
end of any given academic
year if they want to.
Elections would then only
be held when a vacant
position appears due to a
student deciding to step
down or reaching their final
year.
Natural Sciences SSLC
terms of reference and
membership
It was agreed that this
would be a good idea for
future academic years and
would be followed up by
the DoS.
These were discussed in
great detail, with the aim of
altering the membership to
the benefit of future
academic years’ students.
Page 12 of 14
The proposed changes to
the document for the next
academic year are
highlighted below this
table.
Proposed changes to the Natural Sciences SSLC terms of reference and membership:
Terms of reference

The last section of the first paragraph (‘the Chair of the Programmes Committee... passed onto the
Students’ Union) needs to be checked by the Head of the Science Faculty as it may be outdated.
DoS will follow this up.

The final paragraph should be changed to read ‘The SSLC is responsible for selecting up to four
students from the Natural Sciences programmes to sit on the Natural Sciences Programmes
Committee, to include a final year representative who will normally be the Chair of the SSLC.’

Addition to terms of reference: ‘Natural Sciences representatives should have the opportunity to
attend core subject meetings (Biology and Biochemistry, Chemistry, Pharmacy and Pharmacology,
and Physics SSLCs) to better represent the cross-faculty division of students.
Membership
This was highlighted as a problem in previous SSLCs, and so a table of all the possible titles students might come
under for each year of taught material in order to make a better selection for membership of the SSLC was produced
(the 4th column was a result of the discussion, with points made during the decision making process described below
the table).
Year of taught material
1
2
3
4
Course
BSc
BSc with placement
MSci
MSci with placement
BSc
BSc with placement
MSci
MSci with placement
BSc
BSc with placement
MSci
MSci with placement
MSci
MSci with placement
Year of study
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
4
3
4
4
5
SSLC members
Up to 2 members
Up to 2 members
Up to 2 members
Up to 2 members
Up to 2 members
It was agreed that:

Students will represent fellow students in the same year of taught material, as opposed to the same
year of study.

There is no need to differentiate between BSc and MSci students, or between placement and nonplacement students, in the 1st and 2nd years of taught material, as these do little to affect module
choices and students have the option to change these aspects of their course up to 2nd year anyway.

Students on placement will be represented by the Chair of the SSLC.

The position of secretary will be added to ‘Student representatives’, beneath the section about the
Chair: ‘Secretary: Chosen from all SSLC members during the first meeting of the academic year –
Staff and students (any year) are eligible but normally the Secretary is chosen from the Final Year
representatives.’

The ‘Student experience officer’ will be added to the ‘in attendance’ section.
5. Unresolved issues
Which of the issues discussed during this year remain unresolved and what steps are being taken to resolve them?
Online library card top-ups: Karina Bradshaw is in discussion with Canon to see if this is a
possibility.
3S student study area development: this was discussed at an SSLC meeting and all feedback
was taken into account to the project’s development. Funding was granted and the project was
hoped to be finished in time for revision for 2nd semester exams, but was unfortunately delayed.
It is hoped that the study area should be available for use at the start of the 2013/14 academic
year, and will provide a good space for group or single study.
Page 13 of 14
6. Online election process contact for 2013/14
Who will be the Online Election Process Contact for the academic department? (i.e. the member of staff within the academic
department responsible for liaising with the Students’ Union over the annual online election process to promote and to market the
online election process for student representatives)
Name:
Dr Paul J Mitchell
Email: P.J.Mitchell@bath.ac.uk
Ext.: 6917
7. Authorisation
It is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that a SSLC Annual Report is completed, in consultation with student and
staff members of the Committee (QA48: Section 7.1).
Chair of the SSLC
Signature:
Print Name:
Date:
In the absence of the Chair, the Annual Report may be signed-off by the Director of Studies or Secretary of the SSLC
Signature:
Print Name:
P.J. Mitchell
Date:
10/9/2013
When you have completed this form, please return via email by Friday 2 August 2013:
To: Advice and Representation Centre, Students’ Union, academicreps@bath.ac.uk
CC: Learning and Teaching Enhancement Office, learningandteaching@bath.ac.uk
The form should be returned by this deadline even if you have further meetings scheduled in the current
academic year; the draft form should, where possible, be circulated to members of the SSLC for comment by
email.
The Secretary should keep a copy for departmental records AND place on the agenda for the first meeting of
the SSLC in the new academic year.
Page 14 of 14