Paper D
Learning and Teaching Committee 16th March 2009
Various changes to L&T Policies
This document proposes changes to the following policies:
1. UK Collaborative Academic Provision - University Policy Statement
2. International Collaborative Academic Provision - University Policy
Statement
3. Policy on Flexible and Distributed Learning (‘Distance Learning’)
Programmes
4. Policy on Modules and Semesters
5. Policy on Student Placements
In the latter case, there is also a change to policy references within the Quality
Assurance Website.
The proposed changes (noted in red text) arise from the recent mapping exercise to
the QAA Code of Practice Precepts and will ensure that our policy is in line with the
Code. Generally, the changes merely enshrine existing practice in policy. A brief
commentary is provided in each case (blue text).
Jonathan Weyers
Director of Quality Assurance
Proposed revisions to policies on external teaching collaborations 1
Changes proposed to this policy largely arise from detailed consideration of Section 2
of the QAA Code of Practice Collaborative Provision and Flexible and Distributed
Learning (including e-learning).
UK Collaborative Academic Provision - University Policy Statement
1.
Introduction, Definitions and Applicability
1.1 This policy statement deals with collaborative arrangements between the University and
other UK-based institutions and organisations (referred to as "collaborating organisations")
involving the provision of programmes of study (both taught and research and including
flexible and distance learning arrangements) and the granting of awards or qualifications or
academic credit towards a Dundee award.
1.2 It excludes individual arrangements for admission with advanced standing dealt with by
College and/or School Admissions Tutors under AP(E)L procedures.
1.3 For ease of reference this statement sets out a number of principles which apply to the
following types of collaborative arrangements:
 articulation arrangements
 validation
 franchising
 dual and joint awards
 preliminary agreements and memoranda of understanding
 other types of collaboration.
These adhere to the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Code of Practice for the
Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards, Section 2 Collaborative Provision and
Flexible and Distributed Learning (Including e-learning).
2.
General Principles
2.1 The University will undertake collaboration, which is congruent with its mission and
compatible with its particular strengths in teaching and research to the benefit of its students,
itself and its partners. Proposals for collaborative arrangements will normally include a
statement of the rationale for the proposal.
2.2 The University will only consider developing collaborative arrangements with educational
institutions and organisations of good reputation and standing.
2.3 The University will, before establishing any collaborative arrangement, where necessary,
familiarise itself, through appropriate investigations, with the proposed collaborating
organisation and the background to the proposed collaborative activities. Appropriate records
of such investigations will be maintained for reference and audit purposes.
2.4 Proposals for collaborative agreements must be endorsed by the relevant dean(s),
Heads of Learning & Teaching and college VPs prior to scrutiny by the Academic Affairs
Directorate which will make a recommendation to the Principal's Office.
2.5 Proposals for collaborative agreements associated with academic awards will be subject
to the approval of the relevant school and college boards and Senate, prior to signature by
the Principal or delegated nominee.
2.6 Collaborative arrangements will be defined in formal, written agreements which will
conform to specific criteria defined by the University. Only the Principal or his nominee will
sign agreements on behalf of the University.
2.6 Where a professional, statutory and regulatory body (PSRB) has approved or recognised
a programme that is the subject of a possible or actual collaborative arrangement, the school
must inform the PSRB of its proposals and of any final agreements which involve the
programme.
2.8 The Office of the Vice-Principal (Educational Development) will maintain a register of all
collaborative agreements on behalf of the University.
2.9 Any financial arrangements associated with proposed collaborative activities will be
clearly defined, and must be approved by the relevant dean(s), college VP(s) and the
University Secretary, advised by the Director of Finance. Any subsequent financial
transactions associated with collaborative activities will be accurately recorded to satisfy
internal and external audit requirements.
2.10 A Link Co-ordinator will be designated by the relevant dean(s) for each collaborative
agreement. This person will be the primary contact point for communication and management
of the collaborative activities.
2.11 Collaborative arrangements will be monitored and formally reviewed periodically.
2.12 The University will seek to identify and promote best practice in collaborative activities
and will aim to comply with all relevant parts of the QAA Code of Practice.
2.13 Assessment of students carried out by a partner institution as part of a collaborative
agreement should follow the principles and precepts embodied in the University’s
Assessment Policy and Section 6 (Assessment of Students) and Section 4 (External
Examining) of the QAA Code of Practice. In particular, the University of Dundee must retain
ultimate responsibility for the appointment and functions of external examiners.
2.14 Information provided to prospective students by either the University or its collaborating
partner must include the programme specification, information about the appropriate channels
for particular concerns, complaints and appeals (including contact details for the relevant
University units). Schools must monitor information provided to prospective students by
collaborating partner(s) and their agents (covered in clause 11 of the University’s standard
articulation agreement).
3.
Articulation Arrangements
3.1 An articulation arrangement is a particular form of formal credit-rating and transfer
agreement between two institutions, one of which agrees to recognise and grant specific
credit and advanced standing to applicants from a named programme of study pursued in the
other.
3.2 A more detailed policy on articulation with Scottish Colleges of Further Education along
with standard templates for articulation agreements and articulation pathways forms an
appendix to this policy statement.
3.3 Proposals for articulation arrangements with advanced standing will involve a formal
credit-rating process based on the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework, which will
allocate specific credit to attainment in the collaborating organisation in the context of the
equivalent programme at the University. This process aims to ensure that students admitted
to the University will:
 be appropriately prepared to commence studies;
 have achieved learning outcomes which are broadly equivalent to those of the
University modules for which credit is granted.
3.4 When an articulation arrangement includes provision for entry with advanced standing,
the formal agreement will specify the extent of advanced standing in terms of specific credits
to be granted to students on entry to the University.
3.5 Proposals for articulation arrangements will make clear the status of students admitted
under the articulation arrangement regarding any professional/statutory regulatory body
(PSRB) accreditation or exemption associated with the programme(s).
3.6 Proposals for articulation arrangements will include identification of any specific bridging,
academic and pastoral support requirements over and above that normally available.
3.7 A report on the progress and experience of each cohort of students admitted under each
articulation arrangement will be made by the Link Coordinator (referred to in paragraph 2.9
above) through the normal annual monitoring process.
3.8 Articulation arrangements will be formally reviewed at intervals to be determined by the
Academic Quality Sub-Committee.
4.
Validation
4.1 Validation is the process by which an awarding institution judges that a programme
developed and taught by another institution or organisation is of an appropriate quality and
standard to lead to its award. A validated programme will normally be in a subject which the
awarding institution itself offers. The awarding institution will determine the extent to which it
exercises direct control over the quality assurance aspects of the programme's management.
4.2 In considering proposals for validation of external programmes (i.e. named awards by
collaborating organisations) the University will take particular account of whether or not a
similar programme is offered within the University, and if so, the implications of the proposed
validation for existing internal provision.
4.3 The University will only validate external provision which is equivalent to the University's
own provision in terms of both standards of award and quality of provision (teaching, learning
and student experience).
4.4 The processes associated with the validation of external provision will be broadly similar
to those applicable to academic activities within the University e.g. module and programme
approval, review, monitoring, external examining etc.
4.5 The process of validation will be managed by the relevant University school in
accordance with its normal academic procedures which include reporting to Senate.
4.6 The University will only consider validation of external provision that is cognate with
existing academic provision and capability within the University.
4.7 The University will impose charges for undertaking validation of external provision which
reflect the University's full costs.
5.
Franchising
5.1 Franchising is the process by which an awarding institution agrees to authorise the
provision of the whole or part of one or more of its own approved programmes, by a partner
organisation. In doing so, the awarding institution retains overall responsibility for the
programme's content, delivery, assessment and quality assurance arrangements.
5.2 Franchising agreements will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and the
detailed procedures to be applied will be determined on an individual basis.
5.3 Proposals for franchising will require preliminary approval by the Principal prior to any
detailed investigation and/or negotiation with collaborating organisations.
5.4 Arrangements for franchises will comply with the University's general principles
applicable to all collaborative academic provision (see Section 2).
5.5 Programmes provided externally will be subject to comparable procedures for the
monitoring of academic standards and quality as programmes offered in the University
including the arrangements for external examining.
5.6 Programmes provided externally which lead to an award which can also be undertaken
in the University will follow the same curriculum and be subject to the same monitoring
procedures in both locations to ensure comparability of standards and quality.
6.
Dual Awards and Joint Awards
6.1 A joint award describe collaborative arrangements under which two or more awarding
institutions together provide programmes leading to a single award made jointly by both, or
all, participants. A dual award refers to a collaborative programme in which a candidate may
obtain a qualification from one or other participating institution but not from both or all.
6.2 Proposals for dual or joint award will only be considered in exceptional circumstances
where there is demonstrable benefit to the University and any such proposals will require
preliminary approval by the Principal prior to any detailed investigation or negotiation with
collaborating organisations.
6.3 Arrangements for dual or joint awards will comply with the general principles applicable
to collaborative provision (see Section 2 above).
6.4 The University's approach will depend on the demonstrated capability of the proposed
collaborating organisation(s) to maintain and assure standards and quality of academic
provision that are acceptable to the University and adhere to established good practice within
the UK, including specifically QAA's 'academic infrastructure' (i.e. the qualifications
frameworks, subject benchmark statements and the Code of Practice for the Assurance of
Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education).
6.5 A Programme Board will be established for each dual or joint award programme. This
will include staff representatives from each collaborating organisation along with an external
examiner. The membership, remit and modus operandi of such Boards shall be acceptable to
the relevant Dean(s).
6.6 To promote efficiency, the University may be prepared to allow the academic quality
policies and procedures of a collaborating organisation with regard to approval, monitoring
periodic review and external examining, that are equivalent to the University's, to be used in
place of the University's subject to:
a. the prior approval of the relevant Dean
b. the prior approval of a Vice-Principal
c. reports being submitted and considered via the normal routes.
7.
Preliminary Agreements (or Memoranda of Understanding)
7.1 A preliminary agreement (or memorandum of understanding) may be used to express an
intention to co-operate with another organisation with a view to considering the potential for a
future collaboration associated with academic provision.
7.2 Preliminary agreements (or memoranda of understanding) will be time-limited, normally
for a maximum period of three years.
7.3 A template for preliminary agreements is available from the Director of Quality
Assurance from whom advice is available on establishing specific agreements.
8.
Other Types of Collaboration
8.1 Other types of collaborative academic provision may be appropriate in specific
circumstances e.g. collaborations associated with a specific research degree programme.
Inquiries and proposals should be referred initially to the Director of Quality Assurance who
will provide advice on procedures and forms of agreement.
Proposed revisions to policies on external teaching collaborations 2
Changes proposed to this policy largely arise from detailed consideration of Section 2
of the QAA Code of Practice Collaborative Provision and Flexible and Distributed
Learning (including e-learning)
International Collaborative Academic Provision - University Policy
Statement
1. Introduction, Definitions and Applicability
1.1 This policy statement deals with collaborative arrangements between the University and
other international institutions and organisations (referred to as "collaborating organisations")
involving the provision of programmes of study (both taught and research and including
flexible and distance learning arrangements) and the granting of awards or qualifications or
academic credit towards a University award.
1.2 It excludes European Union Exchange Programmes and the University's Transatlantic
Exchange Programme with Universities in the USA and Canada. Exchange programmes with
Universities in the EU are managed by the ERASMUS Office, Admissions and Student
Recruitment, and individual programmes are approved by the relevant school and college
Board. For exchanges with the USA and Canada, the Transatlantic Exchange Committee
selects students and negotiates individual curricula for them with approval from the relevant
school and/or college at the University of Dundee.
1.3 For ease of reference this statement sets out a number of principles which apply to the
following types of international collaborative arrangements:
� articulation arrangements
� validation
� franchising
� dual and joint awards
� preliminary agreements and memoranda of understanding
� other types of collaboration.
These adhere to the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education Code of Practice for the
Assurance of Academic Quality and Standards, Section 2 Collaborative Provision and
Flexible and Distributed Learning (Including e-learning).
2. General Principles
2.1 The University will undertake collaboration, which is congruent with its mission and
compatible with its particular strengths in teaching and research to the benefit of its students,
itself and its partners. Proposals for collaborative arrangements will include a statement of the
rationale for the proposal.
2.2 The University will only consider developing collaborative arrangements with
organisations of good reputation and standing and will pay particular attention to the national
and legal context governing higher education in the relevant overseas countries.
2.3 The University will, before establishing any collaborative arrangement, familiarise itself,
through appropriate investigations, with the proposed collaborating organisation and the
background to the proposed collaborative activities. Appropriate records of such
investigations will be maintained for reference and audit purposes.
2.4 Proposals for collaborative agreements must be endorsed by the relevant dean(s),
head(s) of learning and teaching and/or college VP(s) (as appropriate) prior to scrutiny by the
Academic Affairs Directorate who will make a recommendation to the Principal's Office.
2.5 Proposals for collaborative agreements associated with academic awards will be subject
to the approval of the relevant school and college boards and Senate, prior to signature by
the Principal or delegated nominee.
2.6 Where a professional, statutory and regulatory body (PSRB) has approved or recognised
a programme that is the subject of a possible or actual collaborative arrangement, the school
must inform the PSRB of its proposals and of any final agreements which involve the
programme.
2.7 Collaborative arrangements will be defined in formal, written agreements which will
conform to specific criteria defined by the University. Only the Principal or his nominee will
sign agreements on behalf of the University.
2.8 The financial arrangements associated with proposed collaborative activities will be
clearly defined, and must be approved by the relevant dean(s), head(s) of learning and
teaching and/or college VP(s) and the University Secretary (as appropriate), advised by the
Director of Finance.
2.9 Financial transactions associated with collaborative activities will be accurately recorded
by the appropriate school to satisfy internal and external audit requirements.
2.10 A Link Co-ordinator will be designated by the relevant dean(s), head(s) of learning and
teaching and/or college VP(s) (as appropriate) for each collaborative agreement. This person
will be the primary contact point for communication and management of the collaborative
activities.
2.11 The office of the Vice-Principal (Educational Development) will maintain a register of all
collaborative agreements on behalf of the University. This should include a note of the Link
Coordinator for each arrangement.
2.12 Collaborative agreements and articulation arrangements will be formally reviewed by
colleges and schools at intervals to be determined by the Academic Quality Sub-Committee.
2.13 The University will seek to identify and promote best practice in collaborative activities
and will aim to comply with all relevant parts of the QAA Code of Practice.
2.14 Assessment of students carried out by a partner institution as part of a collaborative
agreement should follow the principles and precepts embodied in the University’s
Assessment Policy and Section 6 (Assessment of Students) and Section 4 (External
Examining) of the QAA Code of Practice. In particular, the University of Dundee must retain
ultimate responsibility for the appointment and functions of external examiners.
2.15 Information provided to prospective students by either the University or its collaborating
partner must include the programme specification, information about the appropriate channels
for particular concerns, complaints and appeals (including contact details for the relevant
University units). Schools must monitor information provided to prospective students by
collaborating partner(s) and their agents (covered in clause 11 of the University’s standard
articulation agreement).
3. Articulation Arrangements
3.1 An articulation arrangement is a particular form of formal credit-rating and transfer
agreement between two institutions, one of which agrees to recognise and grant specific
credit and advanced standing to applicants from a named programme of study pursued in the
other.
3.2 Proposals for articulation arrangements with advanced standing will involve a formal
credit-rating process based on the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework, which will
allocate specific credit to attainment in the collaborating organisation in the context of the
equivalent programme at the University. This process aims to ensure that students admitted
to the University will:
� be appropriately prepared to commence studies;
� have achieved learning outcomes which are broadly equivalent to those of the University
modules for which credit is granted.
3.3 When an articulation arrangement includes provision for entry with advanced standing,
the formal agreement will specify the extent of advanced standing in terms of specific credits
to be granted to students on entry to the University.
3.4 Proposals for articulation arrangements will make clear the status of students admitted
under the articulation arrangement regarding any professional/statutory regulatory body
(PSRB) accreditation or exemption associated with the programme(s).
3.5 Proposals for articulation arrangements will include identification of any specific bridging,
academic and pastoral support requirements over and above that normally available.
3.6 Students admitted under articulation arrangements will be required to have achieved the
University's normal English language entrance requirements.
3.7 A report on the progress and experience of each cohort of students admitted under each
articulation arrangement will be made by the Link Coordinator (referred to in paragraph 2.10
above) through the normal annual monitoring process.
3.8 An upper limit may be applied to the initial intake of students under any new articulation
arrangement, to permit confirmation of the appropriateness of the articulation linkage.
4. Validation
4.1 Validation is the process by which an awarding institution judges that a programme
developed and taught by another institution or organisation is of an appropriate quality and
standard to lead to its award. A validated programme will normally be in a subject which the
awarding institution itself offers. The awarding institution will determine the extent to which it
exercises direct control over the quality assurance aspects of the programme's management.
4.2 In considering proposals for validation of external programmes (i.e. named awards by
collaborating organisations) the University will take particular account of whether or not a
similar programme is offered within the University, and if so, the implications of the proposed
validation for existing internal provision.
4.3 The University will only validate external provision which is equivalent to the University's
own provision in terms of both standards of award and quality of provision (teaching, learning
and student experience).
4.4 The processes associated with the validation of external provision will be broadly similar
to those applicable to academic activities within the University e.g. module and programme
approval, review, monitoring, external examining etc.
4.5 The process of validation will be managed by the relevant University school in accordance
with its normal academic procedures which include reporting to Senate.
4.6 The University will only consider validation of external provision that is cognate with
existing academic provision and capability within the University.
4.7 The University will only consider validation and external credit rating of provision that is
wholly taught and assessed in the English language, unless expressly agreed by the
Academic Secretary and Director of Quality Assurance, following independent expert advice.
4.8 The University will impose charges for undertaking validation of external provision which
reflect the University's full costs.
4.9 The Link Co-ordinator's annual report (see 3.7) should include reference to any changes
that are planned or have occurred in the external provision and the ways in which these may
impact on validation for the Dundee award. In cases where teaching does not occur wholly in
English (see4.7), the Link Co-ordinator should ensure that relevant information is translated.
5. Franchising
5.1 Franchising is the process by which an awarding institution agrees to authorise the
provision of the whole or part of one or more of its own approved programmes, by a partner
organisation. In doing so, the awarding institution retains overall responsibility for the
programme's content, delivery, assessment and quality assurance arrangements.
5.2 The intention to enter into a franchising agreement should be discussed in the first
instance with the Academic Secretary and Director of Quality Assurance and will only be
considered in exceptional circumstances. The detailed procedures to be applied will be
determined on an individual basis.
5.3 Proposals for franchising will require preliminary approval by the Principal prior to any
detailed investigation and/or negotiation with collaborating organisations.
5.4 Arrangements for franchises will comply with the University's general principles applicable
to all collaborative academic provision (see Section 2).
5.5 Programmes provided externally will be subject to comparable procedures for the
monitoring of academic standards and quality as programmes offered in the University
including the arrangements for external examining.
5.6 Programmes provided externally which lead to an award which can also be undertaken in
the University will follow the same curriculum and be subject to the same monitoring
procedures in both locations to ensure comparability of standards and quality.
6. Dual Awards and Joint Awards
6.1 A joint award describe collaborative arrangements under which two or more awarding
institutions together provide programmes leading to a single award made jointly by both, or
all, participants. A dual award refers to a collaborative programme in which a candidate may
obtain a qualification from one or other participating institution but not from both or all.
6.2 Proposals for dual or joint award with international institutions or organisations should be
discussed in the first instance with the Academic Secretary and Director of Quality Assurance
and will only be considered in exceptional circumstances where there is demonstrable benefit
to the University. Any such proposals will require preliminary approval by the Principal or his
designate prior to any detailed investigation or negotiation with collaborating organisations.
6.3 Arrangements for dual or joint awards will comply with the general principles applicable to
international collaborative provision (see Section 2 above) and will be subject to procedures
analogous to those applicable to similar UK-based collaborations.
7. Preliminary Agreements (or Memoranda of Understanding)
7.1 A preliminary agreement (or memorandum of understanding) may be used to express an
intention to co-operate with another organisation with a view to considering the potential for a
future collaboration associated with academic provision.
7.2 Preliminary agreements (or memoranda of understanding) will be time-limited, normally
for a maximum period of three years.
7.3 A template for preliminary agreements is available from the Director of Quality Assurance
from whom advice is available on establishing specific agreements.
8. Other Types of Collaboration
8.1 Other types of collaborative academic provision may be appropriate in specific
circumstances e.g. collaborations associated with a specific research degree programme.
Inquiries and proposals should be referred initially to the Director of Quality Assurance who
will provide advice on procedures and forms of agreement.
Proposed revised policy replacing ‘Policy on criteria for distance learning
programmes’ on Senate Academic Policies & Regulations homepage as ‘Flexible and
Distributed Learning (‘Distance Learning’) Programmes’.
This is effectively the existing policy with two new paragraphs that clarify the
application of this policy, other university policies and the QAA Code of Practice to
distance learning programmes.
UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE
Policy on Flexible and Distributed Learning (‘Distance Learning’) Programmes
1. Relevant University policy on Learning and Teaching applies to all distance learning
programmes (including elearning) leading to the award of a University Qualification. This
includes the procedures inherent in the University’s Quality Assurance Framework, the
Admissions Policy, the Assessment Policy for Taught Provision and the Computer-Aided
Assessment Policy and Procedures. Where exceptions to normal practice are necessary
due to the nature of distance learning, these should be agreed with the Academic
Secretary or Director of Quality Assurance in advance.
2. Distance learning provision should adhere to the precepts in Part B of the QAA Code of
Practice, Section 2: Collaborative Provision and Flexible and Distributed Learning
(Including Elearning) [available
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/default.asp], especially
those relating to the quality of information supplied to students regarding the curriculum,
its delivery, study methods, support mechanisms, formative feedback, assessment,
plagiarism and impersonation.
3. Curriculum content, procedures for assessment and teaching arrangements should be
approved in detail by the relevant School Board.
4. Courses should be directly comparable with in-house courses at the same level in terms
of content and standard other than in those cases where exceptional variation is
specifically approved by the relevant School Board.
5. Assessment procedures may take a variety of forms but should be subject to the same
safeguards and scrutiny as that applicable to in-house courses.
6. Examinations, where required by the Regulations, should be sat in the University where
possible under the same conditions as those applicable to in-house courses. If this should
be impractical the examinations should be sat in other centres approved by the
appropriate School Board and normally supervised by a responsible member of the
University teaching staff.
7. All assessment material should be available as a matter of course to the external
examiner.
8. All students on distance learning courses should register in each year of study.
9. Particular care should be exercised if a credit accumulation model is adopted.
Certification of discrete modules which may eventually be counted towards a University
qualification should not be left to the discretion of a department. Such certification should
be a matter for School Board approval and should be subject to the same standards and
scrutiny in terms of content and assessment as that applicable to whole degree or
diploma programmes.
Proposed revised policy statement to replace ‘Semesterisation Webpage’ on Senate
Policy Statements, Regulations and Guidance linked from two separate headings: 1.
‘Modules’ and 2. ‘Semesters’.
UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE
Policy on Modules and Semesters
Introduction
The substantive elements of this policy were agreed at Senate on 6th March 2002 following a
report of a Working Party on Modularisation and Semesterisation (Working Party website
providing background and minutes available here). Further elements relating to the extension
of the academic year were agreed at Senate on 28th May 2008.
The policies outlined here should be considered alongside other Senate Policy Statements,
Regulations and Guidance regarding assessment, external examining, appeals, etc which are
available at http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/academic/Senate_policies.htm
Teaching in Semesters
1. The University will teach in two Semesters, the dates of which will be published by the
Academic Affairs Directorate following consultation and will be agreed by Senate in
advance of the relevant Academic Year (AY). The forward timetable is available at:
http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/academic/timetable09-15.rtf
2. Semester one will take place before the Christmas vacation and will last for 14 weeks,
with two weeks at the end allocated to examinations.
3. Semester two will commence after the Christmas vacation and will last for 12 weeks,
spanning the Easter Vacation. There will be a six-week examination period following this.
4. The vacation lengths will be four weeks for the vacation at Christmas and three weeks for
the vacation at Easter.
5. Schools may allocate time during the periods designated for teaching as a ‘reading’ week.
6. Schools should allow undergraduate students a period of two weeks to change modules
at the beginning of the second semester, in line with the policy adopted for the beginning
of the first semester but to note that those students seeking to change modules, at the
beginning of the second semester, should do so at the earliest opportunity to minimise
the loss of instruction.
Credit rating of modules
7. To promote flexibility of student choice, there will be a common currency of 20 credit
modules for all Level 1/2 modules but allowing multiples of 10 credits for short courses
e.g. Lifelong Learning type provision and, in exceptional circumstances, components of
normal undergraduate programmes.
8. To promote flexibility of student choice, there will be a common currency of 30 credit
modules (or multiples thereof) for all Levels 3/4 modules.
9. Level 3/4 modules are designated either semester length (examined summatively at
semester end ("S[Semester]-type")) or year long, and (examined at year end only
("Y[Year]-type")) for those modules requiring greater reflection and time for assimilation.
10. To provide the necessary degree of articulation with credit rating at Levels 3 and 4 and to
allow the development of modules tailored to the needs of the variety of client groups that
exist at the taught postgraduate level and subject to the exception of the requirements
of external professional and similar bodies, a standard rating of 10 credits (with
multiples of 10 up to a maximum of 40 credits) should be assigned to the taught element
of postgraduate modules.
11. University policy on maximum and minimum credits per academic session for
undergraduate students comprises:
o
a minimum of one module which might be as low as 10 credits
o
a maximum of 160 credits and
o
a normal undergraduate student load of 120 credits in full-time attendance.
Assessment in relation to modules and semesters
12. The examination of Level 1, semester 1 modules will be within class time only, and not by
traditional unseen examinations. For level 1, semester 1, those activities timetabled for
weeks 13 and 14 should be limited to two types of activity: student assessment and
feedback to students on the outcome of these assessments. These activities should be
timetabled through to the end of week 13 and must be scheduled at the times laid down
in School teaching timetables.
13. All Level 1/2 module summative examinations must be no longer than 2 hours and
Saturday mornings may be used for examinations.
14. Examination Boards must be held at the end of the second semester and following the
resit examinations and may be held at the end of the first semester. If an Examination
Board is not held at the end of the first semester, any notification of assessment results to
students must include the warning that ‘This result is provisional and may be changed
following moderation by the Board of Examiners in the second semester, after which final
results will be notified to students’. Such provisional results must however include the
normal process of internal moderation. Procedures should follow the University's
Guidance for External Examiners for Undergraduate and Taught Postgraduate Courses,
available: http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/academic/extlexamfeb07senateapr.htm).
15. There will be a single resit diet for both semesters beginning five weeks prior to the start
date for the first semester in the following AY.
16. Termination of Studies (Appeals) Committees at School, College and University level must
meet on dates specified in a Calendar provided by Academic Affairs Directorate (available
http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/academic/AcademicCalendar.html).
Proposed minor revisions to Policy on Student Placements and positioning within QAF.
The policy has been refreshed for use of term ‘Faculty’ etc and will be made visible under
in ‘Teaching Collaborations’ on the QAF with the following changes to text:
Additional text for External Teaching Collaborations – Overview
Retitle: External Teaching Collaborations and Placements – Overview
New paragraph 1
“The University enters formal teaching collaborations of a number of forms with
other institutions and it also permits student placements and exchanges with outside
organisations as part of a programme of study. The key features of these arrangements
are outlined below, with links to relevant policy and guidance.”
1. Teaching Collaborations with Other Institutions [level 2 heading]
[Then on to existing text]
[Change heading ‘Register of …Collaborations’ to level 3 heading]
Then add new text:
2. Student Placements and exchange arrangements [level 2 heading]
As part of a programme of study, students may take part in various forms of
placement or exchange, including work-based placements, exchange schemes and
individual exchange arrangements.
To maintain academic quality and ensure consistency, these placements and exchange
arrangements must follow the University Policy on Student Placements, which
includes relevant rules, guidelines and procedures laid down at University level.
These regulations adhere to Section 9 of the QAA Code of Practice for the Assurance
of Academic Quality and Standards in Higher Education.
[link to revised policy on Senate policy page as follows]
UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE
Policy on Student Placements
Introduction
1. The term ‘placement activity’ is intended to cover any component of a taught or research
programme involving a student matriculated on a programme of study (taught or research) of
the University working with, or within an outside organisation.
2. The University recognises firstly, that placement learning can be a valuable, and in some
cases essential component of a student's programme of study, and secondly, that there is a
wide range of types of placement activity across the University. These include:
 placements within other organisations associated with healthcare, education and social
work;
 exchange schemes - e.g. the Transatlantic Student Exchange programme, and EU
student mobility schemes, involving students studying in another university;
 research degree programmes that may involve a single student working in a laboratory
within another organisation.
3. General principles are set out below. These are applicable to all types of placement
activity related to both taught and research degree awards. School boards have responsibility
for placement activities within each School, and specifically to:
 ensure adherence to these general principles;
 oversee the development of more detailed procedures reflecting the nature of placement
activities within the School. Annex 1 ‘References’ provides guidance on good practice;
 oversee management of placement activities within the School.
4. These principles are applicable to all outgoing placement activities, i.e. situations in which
a student of this University is going out to another organisation. They may be used to guide
management of incoming placements also, see ‘Incoming placements’ below.
Establishing and approving placements
5. Schools should define procedures for approving proposed placement activities. These
should include explicit consideration of the following concerns.
6. The appropriateness of the placement setting, including consideration of:
 health, safety and welfare of students;
 opportunities for students to achieve and demonstrate the intended learning outcomes.
7. The capability of any other organisation / placement provider to fulfil the University's
expectations and legal responsibilities in relation to work placement activities under Part 4 of
the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). The capability of any other organisation / placement
provider to meet their legal responsibilities in relation to work placement activities under Part
2 of the DDA
8. The capability of the local unit (i.e. the department / programme team / research team) to
manage the placement.
9. The significance of placement learning in the student's programme of study.
10. The means of enabling and supporting participation by disabled students in any
placement requirements or opportunities associated with a programme of study. The
University’s Disability Services can provide guidance and support in this respect. Note that a
disabled student’s consent must be obtained before disclosing their disability to a placement
provider. The only exception to this is where a health and safety risk has been identified
following an individual risk assessment.
Appropriateness of placement - risk assessment
11. Planning of placement activities should include a risk assessment, which should:
 be carried out by a member of staff who is competent to do so;
 be guided by relevant, complete and up-to-date information;
 include consideration of health, safety and welfare of the student in the placement
situation.
The University's Safety Services can provide guidance and support in this respect. For risk
assessments involving disabled students, the University’s Disability Services should be
contacted for further advice.
Appropriateness of placement -intended learning outcomes and assessment
12. Placements should have clearly defined intended learning outcomes, and these should
reflect the intended learning outcomes of the relevant module(s) and programme of study.
13. The nature of the placement, the planned student learning activities, and the support
provided to students, should provide students with adequate opportunities to achieve the
intended learning outcomes and to demonstrate these through assessment.
14. There should be clarity about how achievement of the intended learning outcomes in the
placement will be assessed. This should include consideration of the consequences of failure
to secure a placement, or to complete the placement, or to achieve the intended learning
outcomes within the placement.
Management of placements by the local unit (department / programme team / research
team)
15. A member of University staff should be identified as being responsible for managing each
placement (the ‘placement manager’). This individual should be competent to do so and
should be provided with support and development opportunities to establish and further
develop their capability to manage placements.
Other organisations / placement providers
16. Where another organisation is involved, the following concerns should be addressed.
17. The responsibilities of both the University and the other organisation should be defined in
writing, including their respective responsibilities for any reasonable adjustments that need to
be made under the DDA.
18. There should be an evaluation of the capability of the other organisation to address these
responsibilities. If there is evidence that a work placement provider is unable/unwilling to meet
their responsibilities under Part 2 of the DDA, then serious consideration should be given to
severing the University’s links with the placement provider. Otherwise, the University may be
deemed to be aiding a discriminatory act if a disabled student is subsequently treated less
favourably by the placement provider, or the provider fails to make reasonable adjustments to
meet the student’s disability-related needs.
19. There should be clearly defined points of contact and lines of communication between
the University and the other organisation. This should include opportunities for the other
organisation to:
 raise concerns, or complaints about any aspect of the placement, including an individual
student's performance or conduct;
 make suggestions to the University about how the placement activity could be improved.
School / school register of placement activities
20. Schools should maintain a register of all placement activities. This should include the
following information for each placement:
 the local unit within the School associated with the placement activity (department /
programme / research team);
 the designated placement manager (see below);
 the nature of the placement e.g. location(s), types of activities;
 any other organisations involved;
 names and contact details;
 statement of responsibilities of the other organisation;
 copy of any formal agreements with the other organisation;
 list of names and ID numbers of students involved in the placement.
 statement of the reasonable adjustments agreed with the placement provider, where
applicable
 student’s written consent to disability disclosure, where applicable
Student information and briefing
21. All students should be provided with briefing information prior to commencing any
placement activity. This should include:
 discussion of planned learning activities, intended learning outcomes and how they will be
assessed;
 the risk assessment and recommendations regarding health, safety, welfare and personal
insurance cover for the student;
 the student's responsibilities, rights and entitlements in the placement setting;
 language and cultural considerations (for international placements);
 accommodation arrangements (where relevant);
 contact information - both with the University and also with relevant local organisation(s) in
the placement setting. This should include guidance on what do if they have a concern or
complaint during or following the placement;
 any specific or special needs of the individual student e.g. disability, health, dietary,
religious, and how these will be accommodated within the placement setting.
 any reasonable adjustments that need to be made to meet the student’s disability-related
needs.
22. Briefing processes should include an opportunity for individual students to discuss any
aspect of the placement.
23. The placement manager should maintain a record of all student briefings.
Monitoring of placement activities
24. Schools should monitor all placement activity on an annual basis. This should include:
opportunities for feedback from all participants and stakeholders i.e.:
 all students who undertook placements. They should be given an opportunity to comment
on the placement and to suggest any ways in which future placements might be improved;
 University staff associated with the placement;
 any relevant in other organisations associated with the placement.
25. Monitoring should be summarised in a report to be submitted annually to the School
board via School academic standards (or quality) committee or equivalent. This should
include information summarising:
 student numbers and achievements on placement activities;
 feedback from all stakeholders (ref. above);
 reflection on any changes introduced in placement management this year, plus comments
on any proposed changes to improve placement activity in future years;
 any other comments, including key points summarising any aspects of good practice in
placement activity that were considered to be particularly effective this year.
26. Senate Academic Quality Committee will maintain an oversight of monitoring at the
institutional level and will disseminate reported case studies of good practice.
Staff professional development
27. Staff involved in placement activity should be appropriately qualified and should have
opportunities to develop their own knowledge and practice. The Director of Human
Resources or nominee should be contacted in the first instance. Disability-related staff
development needs should be directed to the Head of Disability Services.
Incoming placements
28. The provisions noted above refer to outgoing placements. Similar general concerns
apply when the University accepts students from another organisation as placement /
exchange students. The University has a duty of care regarding the incoming student’s
health, welfare and general quality of learning and experience.
29. Schools should oversee incoming placement activities within the School. This should
include consideration of the following concerns:
 that proposed incoming placements are consistent with the School’s mission, strategy and
policies and within the academic capability of the School;
 that incoming placement activities are planned to provide an effective student experience;
 definition of expectations and intended learning outcomes for the student;
 definition of the University’s responsibilities;
 definition of effective points of contact and lines of communication with the incoming
student’s home organisation;
 language and cultural considerations (for international placements);
 accommodation arrangements (where relevant);
 personal insurance cover for incoming students;
 any specific or special needs of individual students e.g. disability, health, dietary, religious
and how these will be accommodated.
 any reasonable adjustments that need to be made to meet the student’s disability-related
needs.
30. Schools should maintain a register of incoming placement activities.
Attached -Annex 1 References and external guides to good practice
Approved by Senate 04 Jun 2005
University policy statement on student placements
Annex 1: References and external guides to good practice
Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) 2001 Code of practice for the assurance of academic
quality and standards in higher education:
Section 9: Placement learning
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/section9/default.asp
Section 3: Students with disability
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academicinfrastructure/codeOfPractice/section3/default.asp
Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) /USA Health and Safety Guidance
for the Placement of HE Students (a re-print of the former CVCP publication) –see
http://www.ucea.ac.uk/
UCEA/USA Guidelines on Health and Safety When Working Overseas –see
http://www.ucea.ac.uk/
University of Dundee Safety Services –policy statements, general safety information and
contacts –see http://www.dundee.ac.uk/safety/
University of Dundee Disability Services: See http://www.dundee.ac.uk/disability services
Government Foreign & Commonwealth Office’s (FCO) Travel Advice
http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&
cid=1007029390572
http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&
cid=1007029390590
University of Manchester’s guidance on ‘Managing off-campus learning for students with
disabilities’. Available from: http://www.disabilitytoolkits.ac.uk/
Department for Education and Skills (DfES) guidance on ‘Providing work placements for
disabled students: a good practice guide for further and higher education institutions’.
Available from: http://www.lifelonglearning.co.uk/placements/
Scottish Disability Team’s guidance on ‘Disability disclosure, confidentiality and evidence in a
higher education context’. Available from: http://www.sdt.ac.uk/resources.asp
Teachability Project’s guidance on ‘Creating accessible placements, study abroad and field
trips for disabled students’. Available from: http://www.teachability.strath.ac.uk/
University of Hull’s guidance on ‘Disabled Social Work students and placements’. Available
from:
http://www.hull.ac.uk/pedds/documents/FINALBestPracticeGuideMasterdocJune2005_000.pd
f
Disability Rights Commission (DRC) Codes of Practice on the DDA Part 2 (Employment) and
Part 4 (Education). Available from: http://www.drc.org.uk/thelaw/practice.asp