THE SENATE
PATHWAY APPROVAL REPORT
(Franchised Provision)
A confirmed full report of the event held on Monday 10th August
2009 to consider the approval of the following pathways:
BA (Hons) International Business Strategy
MSc Management
MBA
Ashcroft International Business School
Delivery of Pathways at Amity Global Business School, Singapore
Quality Assurance Division
SECTION A – OUTCOME SUMMARY
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1
The purpose of the event was to consider the franchise to the Amity Global Business
School (AGBS) Singapore of the following Anglia Ruskin pathways:
BA (Hons) International Business Strategy
MSc Management
MBA
1.2
For curriculum management purposes the pathways are located in the Undergraduate
Programme (BA (Hons) International Business Strategy) and Postgraduate Programme
(MBA and MSc Management) within the Ashcroft International Business School.
2.
CONCLUSIONS
2.1
The Panel recommends to the Senate the franchised delivery of the following pathways
from September 2009:



2.2
BA (Hons) International Business Strategy (3+0 basis)
MSc Management (full franchise)
MBA (full franchise)
It was agreed that there would be a maximum of two student intakes per year (in
September and February).
Approval, once confirmed, will be for a period of five years, subject to Anglia Ruskin’s
continuing quality assurance procedures and the process of curriculum review in the
Ashcroft International Business School (AIBS).
The mode of attendance for each pathway will be full-time. Minimum and maximum student
numbers will be as follows:


2.3
Undergraduate - Minimum 30 , Maximum 90
Postgraduate (each pathway) - Minimum 20, Maximum 100
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:
2.3.1
Details of Condition
Deadline
Response to
be considered
by
The Proposal Team shall provide a definitive
statement of the delivery pattern for each
pathway (ie standard delivery over 14 weeks or
block delivery) for the September 2009 and each
subsequent student intake. (NB The Panel
recognised that, although a standard delivery
pattern was the medium term aim, in the short
term block delivery may be required for the first
intake to one or more of the pathways. A mixed
delivery pattern for a particular intake to an
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
Quality Assurance Division
2
Draft
individual pathway was not permitted. The actual
delivery pattern for each pathway was
dependent on the successful recruitment of
locally-based, appropriately qualified academic
staff, interviews for which were due to be held in
the coming weeks) (see para 6.2)
2.3.2
The Proposal Team shall submit definitive
versions of the Pathway Specification Forms
which shall include accurate structure diagrams
clearly showing the semester in which
compulsory and designated modules are
delivered and demonstrating synchronicity with
the timing of module delivery at Anglia Ruskin
(see para 5.2).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.3
The Proposal Team (with input from staff in the
Ashcroft International Business School) shall
submit a mapping of the learning outcomes for
each of the three pathways, demonstrating that
these have been met through delivery of the
restricted range of constituent modules for each
pathway. The mapping should also demonstrate
that an appropriate range of assessment
methods are used to test students’ learning. (NB
This mapping is particularly significant for the
postgraduate pathways where the range of
modules compared with the Anglia Ruskin-based
delivery is much reduced. See also condition
2.3.8) (see para 4.5).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.4
The Proposal Team shall provide, with input from
Ashcroft International Business School
colleagues, the definitive version of the Student
Handbooks for each pathway, taking full account
of the issues raised and corrections identified by
the Panel during the event (see para 7).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.5
The Proposal Team shall submit electronic final
versions of all staff CVs for the first semester of
delivery at least, using the agreed Anglia Ruskin
CV format, and tables showing the final
allocation of teaching staff to modules within
each pathway for inclusion in Anglia Ruskin’s
Register of Teaching Staff. For each member of
teaching staff the tables should include the basis
of their employment (ie full time or part time with
the fte given for the latter) (see para 6.3).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.6
The Proposal Team shall confirm that the
minimum English language entry requirements
shall be IELTS 6.0 (or equivalent) for the
undergraduate pathway and IELTS 6.5 (or
equivalent) for the postgraduate pathways (see
para 4.3).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
Quality Assurance Division
3
Draft
2.4
2.3.7
The Proposal Team shall formally agree the
entry requirements for the Anglia Ruskin MBA, in
order to clarify the precise requirements in
relation to the length and nature of relevant work
experience prior to entry to the MBA and to
ensure that the requirements are consistent with
the QAA Benchmark Statement for MBA
programmes (see para 4.1). [NB This issue was
also raised in April 2009 by the Approval Panel
for franchised delivery of the MBA to another
partner institution and with the Amity Global
Business School, London in July 2009 and
requires urgent attention.]
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.8
The Proposal Team (with input from staff in the
Ashcroft International Business School) shall
review the module offering at all levels within
each pathway with the intention of including
additional optional module(s) to ensure students
have access to alternative modules in the case
of academic failure, as permitted in certain
circumstances by the Academic Regulations.
This review is to ensure that Amity students are
not disadvantaged in relation to students
registered on these pathways at other delivery
locations (see para 4.6).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
2.3.9
The Proposal Team shall confirm that they will
adopt Anglia Ruskin’s formal processes for
managing the assessment of students, as set out
in the Anglia Ruskin Senate Code of Practice on
the Assessment of Students, and provide details
of the staff development on assessment issues
to be provided for teaching staff involved in
delivery of the Anglia Ruskin pathways prior to
the first delivery of pathways. Additionally the
Proposal Team shall confirm that they will adopt
Anglia Ruskin’s formal procedures for
considering extensions to assignment deadlines,
mitigation, and intermission requests from
students registered on Anglia Ruskin’s
pathways. These procedures are set out in the
Academic Regulations and a common approach
to such matters shall be adopted for all Anglia
Ruskin pathways delivered by Amity Global
Business School Singapore (see para 5.1).
31 August
2009
Chair and
Executive
Secretary
Issues referred to the Accreditation Subcommittee
The Panel wishes to draw the attention of the Accreditation Subcommittee to significant
differences in the higher education regulatory framework between Singapore and Malaysia,
particularly in terms of an awards framework and use of the term “Diploma” as an award
title.
Quality Assurance Division
4
Draft
In Malaysia a Malaysian Qualifications Framework (MQF) has been established by the
Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) - the body reporting to the Malaysian Ministry of
Higher Education with responsibility for the quality assurance of HE in both the public and
private sector. The MQF is “an instrument that develops and classifies qualifications based
on a set of criteria that is agreed nationally and benchmarked with international practices
[including those in the UK, Australia, and Europe], and which clarifies the academic levels,
learning outcomes and credit system based on student academic load”. The MQF includes
descriptors at Certificate, Diploma, Advanced Diploma and Bachelors level. Under the MQF
a Diploma has a minimum credit value and a subject-based Diploma is broadly similar in
terms of student learning and achievement irrespective of the delivery location.
In Singapore the Ministry of Education is responsible for the regulation of public and
private sector higher education. There is currently a relatively light touch approach in
comparison with Malaysia. Specifically in the current absence of an HE qualifications
framework for Singapore there is no consistency in use of the term “Diploma”. Holders of a
Diploma awarded by one of the five polytechnics in Singapore can be considered for entry
to Level 1, or exceptionally Level 2, of a three year UK Honours degree, whether delivered
in Singapore or the UK. Holders of an Advanced Diploma from one of the five polytechnics
can be considered for direct entry to Level 2, or exceptionally Level 3, of a three year UK
Honours degree, again whether delivered in Singapore or the UK. However private sector
colleges in Singapore also offer Diplomas and in the absence of a qualifications framework
for Singapore there is no consistency in the title or period of study for such awards. These
can vary from 10 months to three years of full time study. It is therefore very difficult for UK
HEIs to determine the level of advanced standing to be given to applicants holding a
Diploma, Advanced Diploma or Higher Diploma awarded by such colleges. In any detailed
mapping for the purpose of direct entry to a specific UK degree, an award from a private
sector college requires close scrutiny in terms of the student’s qualifications and age on
entry, the period of full time study and the stated level of student achievement expressed
as learning outcomes. These aspects will not necessarily be reflected in the title of the
award itself.
Quality Assurance Division
5
Draft
SECTION B – DETAIL OF DISCUSSION AND PANEL CONCLUSIONS
3
RATIONALE
Amity University, part of the Ritnand Balved Education Foundation, was established in
India over twenty years ago. It is one of Asia’s largest private educational groups and
provides a wide range of academic courses, regularly updated, particularly with reference
to information gained from valuable industry and enterprise contacts. In recent months,
Amity University has commenced implementation of an exciting and ambitious strategy to
establish campuses at a number of overseas locations, including the Amity Global
Business School (AGBS), Singapore, and the Amity Global Business School, London.
Amity University anticipates attracting a mix of local and international students at each of
these delivery locations and will be targeting high academic achievers with a clear and
expressed interest in a global perspective in their studies.
4
CURRICULUM DESIGN, CONTENT AND DELIVERY
4.1
The Panel sought clarification of the rationale for seeking approval to deliver both the MBA
and the MSc Management pathways. It was confirmed that AGBS Singapore anticipated
attracting two differing types of applicant to these awards. The Head of the Chelmsford
Department of the Ashcroft International Business School (AIBS) stated that applicants with
an appropriate amount and level of work experience would be eligible to join the MBA and
those without would be offered the MSc Management. As there appeared to be some
differing views as to what would constitute ‘appropriate work experience’, it was agreed that
AIBS must formally review and restate the entry requirements for the Anglia Ruskin MBA,
in order to clarify the precise requirements in relation to the length and nature of relevant
work experience prior to entry to the MBA and to ensure that the requirements are
consistent with the QAA Benchmark Statement for MBA programmes (see condition 2.3.7).
4.2
The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) confirmed that the admissions requirements to be
applied to franchised pathways were the same as those which applied to students studying
at Anglia Ruskin’s core campuses in the UK. Attention was drawn to the website of Anglia
Ruskin’s International Office which set out in detail on a country specific basis a wide range
of international qualifications and their UK equivalences for admission to Anglia Ruskin
pathways. This may be found at: www.anglia.ac.uk/io
4.3
The language requirement for students on admission, whose first language is not English,
was also discussed and it was confirmed that both AGBS Singapore and AIBS colleagues
were aware that the minimum English language entry requirements are IELTS 6.0 (or
equivalent) for the BA (Hons) International Business Strategy and IELTS 6.5 (or equivalent)
for the postgraduate pathways (see condition 2.3.6).
4.4
It was noted that provision was made within the MSc Management and MBA pathways for
a student to complete a 30, 45 or 60 credit dissertation. The Director of AGBS Singapore
advised that these varying options would not be available to AGBS students; instead
AGBS Singapore would determine which one of the three dissertation modules would be
offered. AIBS colleagues confirmed that they would be involved in supporting AGBS
Singapore tutors in the delivery of the Research Methods and Major Project modules and
that in the first instance they would also review the proposed Major Project topic for all
students to ensure that they were set at Masters level, were not over ambitious in scope,
and could be adequately supervised locally with input from AIBS staff where appropriate.
4.5
Both postgraduate pathways comprise numerous designate modules and the Panel sought
confirmation of the strategy to be adopted by AGBS Singapore in relation to the availability
of these designates to their cohorts of students. The Director of AGBS Singapore
confirmed that a limited number of designate options would be available to the first student
cohort in September 2009 but that the School would be seeking to expand this in the
Quality Assurance Division
6
Draft
future. The Panel agreed that if a limited range of designate modules was available, the
students would still be able to demonstrate their achievement of the pathway learning
outcomes. It was therefore agreed that the Proposal Team (with input from staff in the
Ashcroft International Business School) should be asked to submit a mapping of the
learning outcomes for each of the three pathways, demonstrating that these have been met
through delivery of the restricted range of constituent modules for each pathway. The
mapping should also demonstrate that an appropriate range of assessment methods is
used to test students’ learning (see condition 2.3.3). (NB This mapping is particularly
significant for the postgraduate pathways where the range of modules compared with the
Anglia Ruskin-based delivery is much reduced. See also condition 2.3.8).
4.6
Whilst the cautious approach to the selection of modules for delivery from September 2009
was welcomed by the Panel, it was acknowledged that an overly restricted range of
designate options would not provide AGBS Singapore students with the same opportunities
to redeem failure as are available to other Anglia Ruskin students on the same pathways.
It was therefore agreed that AGBS Singapore (with input from staff in the Ashcroft
International Business School) shall review the module offering at all levels within each
pathway with the intention of including additional optional module(s) to ensure students
have access to alternative modules in the case of academic failure, as permitted in certain
circumstances by the Academic Regulations. This review is to ensure that Amity students
are not disadvantaged in relation to students registered on these pathways at other delivery
locations (see condition 2.3.8).
5
ASSESSMENT STRATEGY
5.1
Various issues related to the assessment of students were discussed. It was agreed that
the Proposal Team shall confirm that they will adopt Anglia Ruskin’s formal processes for
managing the assessment of students, as set out in the Anglia Ruskin Senate Code of
Practice on the Assessment of Students, and provide details of the staff development on
assessment issues to be provided for teaching staff involved in delivery of the Anglia
Ruskin pathways prior to the first delivery of pathways. Additionally the Proposal Team
shall confirm that they will adopt Anglia Ruskin’s formal procedures for considering
extensions to assignment deadlines, mitigation, and intermission requests from students
registered on Anglia Ruskin’s pathways. These procedures are set out in the Academic
Regulations and a common approach to such matters shall be adopted for all Anglia
Ruskin pathways delivered by AGBS School Singapore (see condition 2.3.9).
5.2
The importance of module delivery being managed so that submission deadlines for
assignments align with appropriate assessment periods at Anglia Ruskin core campuses
was also discussed. It was noted that this was critical to ensure that students did not
experience lengthy delays between submission of assessment items and confirmation of
their module results. The Director of AGBS Singapore confirmed that the delivery of the
franchised modules would be scheduled to correspond to the assessment periods used at
the core campuses of Anglia Ruskin. It was agreed that definitive versions of the Pathway
Specification Forms shall be provided which include accurate structure diagrams clearly
showing the semester in which compulsory and designated modules are delivered and
demonstrating synchronicity with the timing of module delivery at Anglia Ruskin (see
condition 2.3.2).
6.
STAFFING, LEARNING RESOURCES AND STUDENT SUPPORT
6.1
The Chancellor of Amity University confirmed that a small team of core staff, both
academic and administrative, who would be permanently based at the Singapore campus,
had already been appointed. However it was anticipated that, in the first semester of
delivery, a significant proportion of the teaching would most likely be provided by “Flying
Faculty” from India and London. The Director of AGBS Singapore outlined his proposals
for the development of this Singapore team and how, over time, reliance on “Flying Faculty”
Quality Assurance Division
7
Draft
would be reduced and used only to supplement lecture, seminar and tutorial delivery by
Singapore-based staff in order to provide an international context. It was confirmed that an
AGBS Singapore Pathway Leader would be appointed for each of the proposed three
pathways to be delivered from September 2009 and that review meetings would be held
every 15 days with senior staff to assess implementation of the franchised delivery of all
Anglia Ruskin pathways in Singapore. AIBS colleagues advised that the Head of the
Cambridge Department of AIBS would have lead responsibility for the management of this
collaborative arrangement and that this responsibility would include the role of Link Tutor
for AGBS Singapore.
6.2
The Panel recognised that, although a standard delivery pattern was the medium term aim,
in the short term block delivery may be required for the first student intake to one or more
of the pathways to accommodate module delivery by ‘Flying Faculty’. The Panel agreed
that a mixed delivery pattern for a particular intake to an individual pathway would not be
permitted. The actual delivery pattern for each pathway was dependent on the successful
recruitment of locally-based, appropriately qualified academic staff, interviews for which
were due to be held in the coming weeks. Accordingly, it was agreed that the Proposal
Team shall provide a definitive statement of the confirmed delivery pattern for each
pathway (ie standard delivery over 14 weeks or block delivery) for the September 2009 and
each subsequent student intake. For the September 2009 intake this information must be
provided by 31 August 2009 (see condition 2.3.1).
6.3
In preparing contingency plans for curriculum delivery in Semester 1 the Director of AGBS
Singapore had identified the need for a maximum of three ‘Flying Faculty’ for the franchised
delivery of the requisite modules for all three pathways. It was therefore agreed that the
Proposal Team shall submit electronic final versions of all staff CVs for, as a minimum, the
delivery of all Semester 1 modules for all pathways, using the agreed Anglia Ruskin CV
format with tables showing the final allocation of teaching staff to modules within each
pathway for inclusion in Anglia Ruskin’s Register of Teaching Staff. For each member of
teaching staff the tables should include the basis of their employment (ie full time or part
time with the full time equivalence value given for the latter) (see condition 2.3.5)
6
DOCUMENTATION
During the course of the discussions with AIBS and AGBS Singapore colleagues, a number
of errors and omissions had been identified in relation to the draft Student Handbooks
provided. It was therefore agreed that definitive versions of the Student Handbooks for
each pathway must be produced by the end of August 2009 in order to ensure their
availability for students commencing in September 2009 (see condition 2.3.4).
7
CONFIRMATION OF STANDARDS OF AWARDS
The Panel confirmed that the proposed franchised delivery of the BA (Hons) International
Business Strategy, MBA and MSc Management 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
OFFICE FILE REF
Quality Assurance Division
8
21/9/09
28/9/09
date report agreed as confirmed
Draft
SECTION C – DETAILS OF PANEL MEMBERSHIP, COLLABORATIVE PARTNER AND
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY PARTICIPANTS
Internal Panel Members:
Professor Lesley Dobree (Chair)
Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic)
Anglia Ruskin University
Jacqui McCary
Learning and Teaching Adviser, Faculty of Science and
Technology, Anglia Ruskin University
Malcolm Morrison
Director of the Academic Office
Anglia Ruskin University
External Panel member:
Geoff Black
Associate Head of Department, MBA Course Manager
Harper Adams University College
Executive Officer:
Caroline Watts
Head of Quality Assurance Division, Academic Office
Anglia Ruskin University
Proposal Team (Anglia Ruskin):
Dr Sonal Minocha
Head of Department, Chelmsford
Ashcroft International Business School
Proposal Team (Amity Global Business School [AGBS], Singapore):
Aseem Chauhan
Chancellor
Professor Gurinder Singh
Pro Vice Chancellor
Dr Craig Ewan
Director, AGBS, Singapore
Easwaramoorthy Rangaswamy
Head of International Office
Dr Lim Cheng Hwa, AGBS, Singapore
Dr Roger Low Kit Fai, AGBS, Singapore
Sri Vidhya, Faculty colleague, AGBS, India
Brenda Eade
Consultant
Graham Parry
Consultant
Quality Assurance Division
9
Draft