THE SENATE
PATHWAY APPROVAL REPORT
(Core and/or Franchised Provision)
A Confirmed report of the event held on 11th May 2009 to consider
the approval of the following pathways:
BEng Civil Engineering
MEng Civil Engineering
MSc Structural Engineering
Faculty of Science and Technology
Delivery of Pathways at Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford
Quality Assurance Division
SECTION A – OUTCOME SUMMARY
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The purpose of the event was to consider the approval and/or franchise of the BEng
Civil Engineering, MEng Civil Engineering and MSc Structural Engineering
1.2
The pathways will be located in the Department of the Built Environment. The pathways
have been designed to develop a Chartered Engineering Provision to compliment the
existing BSc Civil Engineering Incorporated Engineering provision. The proposal includes
31 new modules for consideration. If approved, the pathway will be located in the
Department of Built Environment, Faculty of Science & Technology.
2.
CONCLUSIONS
2.1
The Panel recommends to the Senate the approval and/or franchise of the following
pathways:



BEng Civil Engineering;
MEng Civil Engineering;
MSc Structural Engineering.
Approval, once confirmed, will be for an indefinite period, subject to Anglia Ruskin’s
continuing quality assurance procedures. Deliver will be by full or part time study.
2.2
The Panel recommends to the Senate the approval of 31new modules for delivery. The full
titles of all new modules are provided in section D of this report.
2.3
The pathways will be seeking accreditation from the Joint Board of Moderators (JBM) on
behalf of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Institution of Structural Engineers, the
Institution of Highways and Transportation and the Institute of Highway Incorporated
Engineers.
2.4
Conditions
Approval is subject to the following conditions which were set by the Panel. A copy of the
response must be lodged with the Executive Officer by the date(s) detailed below:
2.4.1
2.4.2
Details of Condition
Deadline
Response to
be considered
by
The team will Comply with the outcome of the
Academic Standards, Quality and Regulations
Committee (ASQRC) meeting of 24th May for the
transfer of students who achieve low grades at
level 2 from the MEng to the BEng
The team will revise the mapping of learning
outcome 6 in the MSc pathway to ensure
coverage is transparent within the
documentations.
8th June 2009
Chair and
Executive
Officer
8th June 2009
Chair and
Executive
Officer
Quality Assurance Division
2
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.5
The team shall revise the PSF’s by amending
the entry requirements to include the English
Language requirement, and the MDF’s in
accordance with the Technical report and
resubmit electronically.
The team shall review the student handbook in
relation to the University Guidelines
8th June 2009
Chair and
Executive
Officer
8th June 2009
Chair and
Executive
Officer
Recommendations
The following recommendations for quality enhancement were made by the Panel. A copy
of the responses to the recommendations listed below must be lodged with the Executive
Officer. The Faculty Board for the Faculty of Science and Technology will consider the
responses at its meeting of5th October 2009:
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.6
Details of Recommendation
The panel recommends the Team reviews the Hydraulic
Structures module regarding its content and place within the
Masters Pathway
Deadline
7th September
2009
The Panel recommends the team complies with the University’s
qualifying mark of 30%
The Panel recommends the team considers the reflective aspect
of students learning in the group work.
7th September
2009
7th September
2009
Issues Referred to the Senate (or appropriate standing committee)
The Panel did not identify any institution-wide issues as requiring the attention of the
Senate or the appropriate standing committee of the Senate:
Quality Assurance Division
3
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
SECTION B – DETAIL OF DISCUSSION AND PANEL CONCLUSIONS
3
RATIONALE
3.1
The pathways have been designed to develop a Chartered Engineering provision within the
Department of the Built Environment. This has been brought about as a direct result of the
move to output standards as a measure of competence of engineering graduates by
professional accrediting bodies and to satisfy the demand from industry to provide flexible
educational entry and exit points to cover the academic content of the complete range of
professional qualifications.
3.2
The three new pathways will provide the flexibility for the Department to provide and market
a complete suite of Civil Engineering courses with in house articulation routes between
each of the degrees.
4
CURRICULUM DESIGN, CONTENT AND DELIVERY
4.1
The proposal team gave and explanation of the structure diagram provided within the
documentation which demonstrates the articulation routes between each of the pathways.
The panel raised concern over the transfer from Level 2 from the MEng of students who
obtained low marks to Level 3 of the BEng. The panel felt this “demotion” was inequitable.
The panel were advised this issue was going before the Academic Standards and
Regulatory Committee on 24th May 2009, and the Team agreed to review this transfer and
comply with the recommendations of this committee.
4.2
In terms of the design of the curriculum the Panel was interested to learn why the qualifying
mark had been set at 35% when the University regulations have a qualifying mark of 30%.
The Team explained that as the Professional Body requirement was for 35% the
department has taken the decision to set the qualifying mark at 35% for all pathways. The
panel queried whether this was appropriate given there was currently no Professional Body
requirement for these pathways.
4.3
A discussion took place regarding the nature of and input from the Industrial Advisory
Board. The Team explained the board meet every 3 months and the curriculum design has
been put before two advisory boards. MDF’s and the structure diagram have been
presented to the board and feedback given to the team which has been fed into the
pathway design. The External Panel members were interested to hear of the mixed
qualifying status of the Board.
4.4
External Panel members asked the team to clarify why the Mathematics for Civil Engineers
Module 1 and Mathematics for Civil Engineers Module 2 were considered necessary when
students entering the course must have an A ‘level in Mathematics. The team explained
these modules underpin the Hydraulic Structures Module undertaken at level 4. The panel
accepted the Teams explanation.
4.5
The panel was interested to learn how “Design” was included in the curriculum within level
1. The team explained how this is incorporated across various modules including
Engineering Mechanics which includes model making and some design, and Civil
Engineering construction which looks specifically at other people’s designs. The panel were
satisfied with the Teams explanation but felt more explanation within the documentation
would have been helpful.
Quality Assurance Division
4
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
4.6
A lengthy discussion took place regarding the group design project at level 1. The external
panel members were interested to learn about the philosophy for its inclusion. Team
members explained the module gave students the opportunity to acquire skills in
communication, design and report writing. They further explained that they had received
good feedback from external examiners for this module. The panel were satisfied with the
team’s explanation but felt it would be beneficial to see a thread on the learning outcomes
and how this develops through the levels.
4.7
The team was asked whether site visits take place and confirmed that whilst these had
been a very active in the past the economic downturn in the construction industry has had
a negative impact on the number of site visits currently available.
5
ASSESSMENT STRATEGY
5.1
Some concern was raised over the high emphasis on examination as a method of
assessment. The Team explained this is a PSRB requirement and external panel
members were able to reassure the remainder of the panel that the methods of
assessment are appropriate.
6
STAFFING, LEARNING RESOURCES AND STUDENT SUPPORT
6.1
The Panel undertook a tour of learning resources to support the delivery of the pathway.
The team explained that the laboratories are to be provided with additional equipment, and
some redeployment of existing equipment is scheduled. The panel were reassured to
learn that the department has an additional funding allocation of £250K from the Faculty.
6.2
The panel noted the number of proposed new modules may create problems with delivery
for the current team. The team explained the department’s proposal to employ 4 additional
members of staff together with an additional technician. The team confirmed they also use
industry based part time lecturers, and if full time posts are not filled the part time lecturers
hours will be increased.
6.3
The concerns which were raised by the panel relating to the student’s relationship with
lecturers, student learning advisors and student services were allayed during the tour of the
department. Panel members were satisfied that adequate provision for private meetings
with students is available, and that the department has a good structure in place for student
contact. The team were able to give a detailed explanation of how the personal tutorial
system worked within the department but the panel felt it would be useful to provide more
detail within the student handbook.
6.4
The panel was interested to learn how the Team intended to deal with the Research
strategy. The team gave a presentation of how research is embedded into the curriculum
and confirmed that the appointment of new staff would seek to ensure there is enough
research to underpin the MSc in Structural Engineering. The panel were satisfied with the
Team’s explanation.
6.5
In addition to the discussions above relating to the theoretical content of the pathway the
Panel enquired how students are grouped for work. The Team explained grouping had
been tried in various ways in order to ensure the student experience is comparable for both
part time and full time students.
Quality Assurance Division
5
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
7
QUALITY ASSURANCE AND ENHANCEMENT
7.1
The Panel was satisfied with the information provided within the proposal document with
regard to quality assurance and enhancement and as such no further discussions took
place on this area.
8
NATIONAL, PROFESSIONAL AND STATUTORY BODY REQUIREMENTS
8.1
The Team explained the undergraduate pathways have been designed in keeping with
Professional Body requirements and that they would be seeking accreditation with the Joint
Board of Moderators on behalf of the Institution of Civil Engineers, the Institution of
Structural Engineers, the Institution of Highways and Transportation and the Institute of
Highway Incorporated Engineers.
9
DOCUMENTATION
9.1
The Panel requested that more information on the role of the Student Advisor and the
working of the Personal Tutorial System be included within the final version of the Student
Handbook.
10
CONFIRMATION OF STANDARDS OF AWARDS
10.1
The Panel confirmed that the proposed BEng Civil Engineering, MEng Civil Engineering
and MSc Structural Engineering pathways satisfied the University’s Academic Regulations
with regard to the definitions and academic standards of Anglia Ruskin awards and, hence,
the QAA’s Framework for Higher Education Qualifications.
DRAFT
UNCONFIRMED
CONFIRMED
FILE REF
OFFICE FILE REF
Quality Assurance Division
6
1st June 2009
12th June 2009
30th June 2009
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
SECTION C – DETAILS OF PANEL MEMBERSHIP AND PROPOSAL TEAM
Internal Panel Members:
Steve Wood
Head of Department Mental Health and Learning Disabilities,
Faculty of Health and Social Care
Pat Brown
Programme Leader, Acute care Department (CPD)
Faculty of Health and Social Care
External Panel Members:
Dr Robert Otter, PhD, BSc, MICE
Director of Studies, Department of Civil Engineering
University of Portsmouth
Leighton McDonald
Lecturer School of Engineering & the Built Environment
Edinburgh Napier University
Executive Officer:
Vicky McCormick
Faculty Quality Assurance Officer
Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences.
Members of Proposal Team:
Peter Crabtree
Programme Leader, Construction and Built Environment,
Faculty of Science & Technology
David Reid
Title, Faculty/Department, Institution and Role
Faculty of Science & Technology
Sunny Nwaubani
Senior Lecturer, Pathway Leader Civil Engineering
Faculty of Science & Technology
Phil Mellow
Lecturer, Built Environment
Faculty of Science & Technology
Quality Assurance Division
7
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
SECTION D – OUTCOME DATA
Programme
Department
Faculty
Collaborative Partner
New/amended Awards
Approved (nb intended awards
Engineering
Department of the Built Environment
Faculty of Science and Technology
Title(s) of Named Pathway(s)
Attendance mode
and duration
only, not intermediate awards)
BEng
MEng
MSc
Civil Engineering
Civil Engineering
Structural Engineering
Validating body (if not Anglia Ruskin University)
Professional body accreditation
Proposal Team Leader
Month and Year of the first intake
Standard intake points
Maximum and minimum student numbers
Date of first Conferment of Award(s)
Any additional/specialised wording to appear on
transcript and/or award certificate
Date of next scheduled Periodic Review
Awards and Titles to be deleted (with month/year of last
regular conferment)
Full & Part Time
Full & Part Time
Full & Part Time
N/A
N/A
Peter Crabtree
September 2009
BEng 225 UCAS, MEng 300UCAS
MSc Structural Engineering 2.1Hons Civil
Engineering or Cognate area
15 Minimum No Maximum
September 2010
N/A
In line with Department Review
N/A
NEW MODULES APPROVED
EB130010DEngineering Mechanics
EB115020S IT, Comms and Research Skills
EB115021S Civil Engineering Construction
EB115022S Geotechnics and Engineering Geology
EB115023S Mathematics for Civil Engineers I
EB230015DStructural Mechanics and Dynamics
EB215047S Mathematics for Civil Engineers II
EB215048S Design for Structures I
EB215049S Fluid Mechanics
EB215050S Group Design Project
EB330997D Research Methods and Major Project
EB3315045SDesign of Structures II
EB315046S Sustainable Design Methods
EB315047S Geotechnic Engineering
EB315048S Structural Analysis and Design
EB315049S Construction Law and Contracts
EB315050S Mathematics for Civil Engineers III
EB315051SGeotechnic Analysis and Design
EB430999D MEng Dissertation
EB415040S Analytical Techniques
EB415041S Foundation Design Engineering
Quality Assurance Division
8
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed
EB415060S Management Theory and Practice for Civil Engineers
EB415042S Structural Design to Eurocodes
EB415043S Forensic Engineering
EB415044S Hydraulic Structures
EB415045S Engineering Futures and Structural Form
EB415061S Coastal Engineering
EB415046S Structural Dynamics
EB460998D Major Project for MSc Built Environment
EB415034S Sustainability and Environmental Management
FOR FRANCHISE APPROVALS ONLY: LIST OF MODULE TUTORS AND MODULE CODES & TITLES
(FOR INCLUSION IN THE REGISTER OF TEACHING STAFF)
Name of Teaching Staff
Module Code & Title
NB Copies of CVs of Module Leaders at partner institutions to be provided to Sharon Simpson with a copy
of the full report
Quality Assurance Division
9
Draft/Unconfirmed/Confirmed