AGENDA ITEM 11
AB/06/25
THE MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY
LEARNING AND TEACHING COMMITTEE
REPORT TO ACADEMIC BOARD – JUNE 2006
At its meeting on 12 June the Learning and Teaching Committee received reports from the
following sub-committees:
Pre-entry Sub-committee
Student Experience Sub-committee
Teaching and Curriculum Sub-committee
The following is a summary of the main items of business considered:
01
Institutional Code of Practice, Policy and Regulations for Recruitment and
Admissions [Appendix A]
A draft document incorporating proposed ICP, Policy and Regulations for
Recruitment and Admissions was appended to the Pre-entry Sub-committee report
and presented by the Academic Registrar. The document had been amended in
the light of discussions at the previous two Sub-committee meetings. The Subcommittee had endorsed the draft and recommended its adoption.
The Committee resolved to recommend the draft ICP, Policy and Regulations for
Recruitment and Admissions for approval and adoption by Academic Board.
02
Student Compact/Student Partnership Agreement
The Chair informed members that the draft student compact/partnership
agreement had been submitted to the Secretary’s Department for scrutiny. The
Secretary’s Department had identified a number of areas of concern. Regrettably,
addressing these issues would delay presentation of the agreement to Academic
Board and consequent action intended to respond to some of the main areas of
student dissatisfaction identified repeatedly in recent survey outcomes.
03
MMU Survey Report [Appendix B]
A report on the outcomes of the 2006 MMU Student Experience Survey, prepared
by Dr Rachel Forsyth of the Learning and Teaching Unit, was appended to the
Student Experience Sub-committee report.
Noting the low response rate, the Sub-committee had agreed that, whilst the
results yielded some useful information, the experience of this survey, and that of
the 2005 survey, served to illustrate the need for a clearer strategic approach to
resourcing, organising and evaluating student feedback activities.
1
04
PDP Evaluation Report [Appendix C]
Members considered a PDP Evaluation Report which was appended to the
Student Experience Sub-committee report. Following the wide circulation of a PDP
monitoring template across the University, the report had been compiled from
analysis of 29 responses returned in the latter part of the spring term.
The findings of the report indicated considerable variations in approach to
delivering PDP and a number of shared problems relating to student engagement,
resourcing and staff support.
The report concluded by identifying a number of recommendations which had
been discussed and endorsed by sub-committee members. Members had agreed
that, whilst providing welcome examples of an appropriately diverse approach, the
report findings gave rise to some concerns about the consistency of PDP
application and engagement. The planned introduction of a University-wide eportfolio system was welcomed as a helpful development and a useful opportunity
to provide central guidance on PDP.
As a matter of principle, Sub-committee members had agreed that responsibility
for embedding PDP, staff support and the dissemination of good practice should
be separated from the process of PDP monitoring and evaluation. It had resolved
to ask the Learning and Teaching Committee to consider the institutional policy
implications of the report findings and make appropriate recommendations to the
Academic Board to ensure that the concerns raised within the report were
appropriately addressed.
In discussion, Committee members endorsed the Sub-committee’s conclusion that
PDP should be fully embedded within curriculum development, programme
evaluation and staff development provision. It resolved to endorse the
recommendations of the PDP Evaluation Report and the conclusions drawn by the
Student Experience Sub-committee.
Specifically:
05
i
That future PDP monitoring and evaluation be undertaken through existing
quality review processes.
ii
That, in relation to PDP, staff development and support and the dissemination
of good practice should be undertaken by the Centre for Learning and
Teaching and the CPD office.
Anonymous Marking and Moderation of Coursework
Considering the results of its survey of existing anonymous marking practices, the
Teaching and Curriculum Sub-committee had concluded that it appeared that,
where practicable, anonymous coursework marking was already being
undertaken. There were, however, numerous instances where it was felt to be
impossible or undesirable to separate assessment from the identity of the student.
2
Having identified some examples of good practice of anonymous second marking
and moderation, the Sub-committee had resolved to commend these and to
recommend to the Learning and Teaching Committee that anonymous moderation
of coursework be adopted wherever feasible.
Committee members discussed the proposal in detail and resolved:
06
i)
To recommend, as a matter of principle, the anonymous marking of all
summative assessment.
ii)
To recommend that, in practice, each programme should be required to
implement a policy of anonymous marking of summative assessment at its next
periodic review unless a valid case could be made for exception.
iii)
That where exception from this principle applied, programmes concerned
would be required to demonstrate a commitment to the principle of anonymity
through other appropriate measures, including anonymous second marking
and moderation.
e-Learning Good Practice Guidelines [Appendix D]
Draft e-Learning Good Practice Guidelines, prepared by the e-Learning Working
Group and endorsed by the Teaching and Curriculum Sub-committee were
presented for approval.
The Committee resolved to recommend approval of the e-Learning Good Practice
Guidelines for inclusion in the Quality Assurance Manual.
07
Employability
A report providing information on MMU graduate careers categorised by subject
discipline was presented to the Committee by the Head of the Careers Service.
Also circulated at the meeting were classifications of occupations entered by MMU
graduates 2004-2005 and an analysis of outcomes of the Careers Service Survey
(2005 Cohort).
Members discussed the information presented, noting that it provided particularly
valuable information on employability and student attitude towards work and
placement experience which would inform work currently being undertaken by the
Learning and Teaching Strategy Group.
08
Draft Student Evaluation Policy
A proposed outline Student Evaluation Strategy prepared by Dr Rachel Forsyth and
the Head of Academic Partnership was presented to the meeting. It was suggested
that, whilst a diverse range of evaluation work was currently undertaken across the
University, there was no effective overview taken of this work. A strategy was
required to ensure an effective, consistent and appropriately resourced, monitored
and evaluated approach that avoided duplication and overload. The proposal was
for mandatory unit level evaluation, combined with a range of approaches for
3
gathering feedback on wider student experience issues. This would feed into
annual monitoring processes and would be overseen and monitored by the Learning
and Teaching Committee. Key to the effectiveness of the strategy, and a test of
MMU’s commitment to student evaluation, would be a suitable level of resourcing.
The Committee discussed the proposals extensively and resolved to approve the
outline proposals for a Student Evaluation Strategy and commission the
development of a detailed strategy for presentation to a future Committee meeting
and to Academic Board.
09
Regulations, Guidelines and Procedures for the Assessment of Students with
Disabilities [Appendix E]
Proposed Regulations, Guidelines and Procedures for the Assessment of Students
with Disabilities were submitted for the Committee’s approval. Introducing the
proposals, the Academic Registrar outlined their purpose and aims. He explained
that existing guidance was out of compliance with current legislation, lacked the
force of regulation and had been inconsistently, and in some cases inappropriately
applied. The proposals aimed to support disabled students whilst stipulating that
they should be assessed on equal terms with other students. Any special provisions
required by a disabled student to enable equivalent assessment would have to be
formally recorded in a Personal Learning Plan agreed with the student’s Head of
Department. The proposals intended to bring about improvement by providing
clarity, consistency, formality of process and by assuring academic integrity of
programmes through the explicit requirement for all disabled students to be able to
demonstrate achievement of programme learning outcomes.
Committee members welcomed the clarity of the proposals and endorsed the
principles that underpinned them. They resolved to recommend approval and
adoption of the Regulations, Guidelines and Procedures for the Assessment of
Students with Disabilities.
Professor J Beer
Chair of Learning and Teaching Committee
Academic Board is requested to receive the report and consider the Learning and
Teaching Committee’s recommendations relating to:
1
The approval of the ICP, Policy and Regulations for Recruitment and
Admissions [Appendix A].
2
Proposals in response to the findings of the PDP Evaluation Report [Appendix
C]
3
Anonymous Marking and Moderation of Coursework
4
The approval of e-Learning Good Practice Guidelines [Appendix D]
5
The approval of Regulations, Guidelines and Procedures for the Assessment of
Students with Disabilities [Appendix E]
4
5